quick curious q

[rm]

Pro authors are all over LJ, often in very participatory fashion. Does this effect how or to what degree you critique their books?

I'm being relentless on the subject of Melusine and was just sort of taken up short by "Monette is on my friends list" in another comment on it. Of course, it doesn't really change my tonal quality, which is what it is, but it interested me.

Conversely, for those of you published or working on publishing, how do you want that sort of thing handled and how do you intend to handle it on your end.

Personally, I think I'd have to do a lot of constant reminding my myself not to engage, because I can explain my work all day long, but ultimately a book must speak for itself, no matter how engaging I seem to think I am on the subject.

Comments

[raaven.livejournal.com]

Perhaps it's just me, but in my mind there is a very clear distinction between critique and review.

When I critique anyone's work these days, I try very hard to keep in mind that critique is (to my mind, anyway) something that should help the author make the work better. I try to keep it very impersonal, and write of specific things in the particular piece of writing (pacing, plot, characters, tone, etc), not the author's character, intelligence, etc.

When I critique, I try to speak to those factors very clearly, and give specific reasons that I did or didn't like them (ie: "the plot was crappy" vs "the plot didn't hold my interest"), and offer thoughts about how it could be changed (ie:"the plot didn't hold my interest because it seemed repetitve. If different sorts of things had happened throughout (example), I might have been more drawn into it).

Reviews, however, are a whole 'nother critter. Reviews are not created (again, to my mind) to help the writer, but to help readers determine whether or not to read the work. Cleverness, snark, casting aspersions...all of those things seem appropriate to me in a review, where they don't in a critique.

If I were sensitive about that, and a publishing writer (aside from AC, I mean), and I had friends who were particularly sharp about reviewing, I'd probably ask them to lj-cut or filter it so that I don't run across it randomly in a vulnerable moment - because seeing something mean from a friend is different than seeing something mean from a stranger.

If I ask someone to critique (or beta, to use the fanfic term) my work, I expect them to do so in a way that doesn't attack me, and does point up ways to make it better. Put simply, I want them to be honest and helpful, not mean.

I would certainly not engage with strangers who reviewed my work, unless to thank them for their opinion - which I consider a social politeness, and need not be heartfelt. ;)