And the theme of the week is...


...critiques.

My fellow Dragon's Den writers know that I have slacked off seriously in the critique department as of late. I'm so busy correcting my own work that I haven't had much time to get to other people's. Still, I try to eke out some time every once in a while to get it done. On another writers' forum I participate in, there have been no fewer than five or six threads started on critiquing.

Some of them complain. Some of them are about writers who can't handle the criticism. Some of them are writers telling other people to stop whining. And yet others display a sense of entitlement that's really quite disturbing. The thing that really gets me? MOST OF THEM DON'T CRITIQUE.

So here's my definitive take on it: if you post work to be critiqued, you must critique in return. It is your responsibility as a critic to respect the other writer's work, while still pointing out problem areas in the plot and technique as a service to him or her. If you get critiqued, suck it up, say thank you, and take a good, hard look at the points the critic brought up.

How hard is that?

Yes, I whine about my edits. That doesn't mean I don't DO them. I'm just horrified that that I still have so many errors. That's natural. But to take it to an extreme? Ridiculous.

What of published authors who receive unfavorable reviews? I've seen several posts this week bitching about reviews Uh, excuse me....you're published. It's kind of stupid to generate bad will with someone who is paid to read and evaluate your work. Are all reviewers infallible?

*snort!*

Of course not, but for god's sake at least you were reviewed!

Moving on again: reading an agent's blog this week, I saw three or four people that were complaining on the blog about rejections they had received. Isn't that just a wee bit stupid? Isn't that a lot likesuing the company you're trying to get to hire you?

*hmmph*

The internet has many uses. It is a tool I use and enjoy every day. Unfortunately, one of the greatest uses of the online community as of late is the ability for any asshole to bitch about something. There is a difference between a professional and an amateur author. The biggest difference?

The ability to keep your mouth shut. Get over it and channel that energy into writing--and critiquing--something. Then it will have been spent in a useful fashion.

Celina rant, over and out.

Comments

B. A. Barnett said…
With the complaints about bad reviews, I think it depends on the context. In a blog or an open internet forum you're very likely shooting yourself in the foot, but I don't see harm in venting to a small, closed group of online peers whom you know well when you think a review is off base.

And I don't think one should be happy just to be reviewed. Bad reviews can turn away potential readers who otherwise would have read the work, especially if the review doesn't give said readers an idea of what the story is about so that can they can decide for themselves whether it's the type of story they might want to read.
mscelina said…
I'm not talking about complaining in private. I'm talking about blabbing in public--ranting, really, ad nauseum to whomever will (be forced to) listen.

I've received my fair share of not-so-favorable reviews--as you know. Although I may rant to you via pm, I tend not to show up at said reviewer's blog and blow my top.

Of course, there are always exceptions.....*grin*
B. A. Barnett said…
Lmao. But yeah, review ranting in public bad. Ranting on reviewer's blog...even worse.

Popular posts from this blog

The Happy Warrior

A&E's Cursed: The Bell Witch Episode 1--Thoughts on the Premiere,Fact Checks and BS Meter From Someone Who Knows

Baylor Rape Scandal for Blogcritics--Part Four