Review or not to review?

[Harold]

Originally posted by vanillaslave
this is roseanne rosanna dana saying "oh. um. nevermind."

Wasn't that Emily Litella?

[woodsman'sgame]

I can review and respond now. Jinn fixed my problem.

[Curtis]

Back to Phoenix's idea of only allowing authors to review; I was reading reviews and replies to a story by Sir Nathan last night, and his idea was that authors should be BARRED from reviewing, the reason being that authors pick apart other authors work and insist that stories be written as the reviewer would have them written, rather than reviewing them for what they are.

Hee, hee, hee!

[slave ruthie]

i'm afraid i don't post reviews like soem ppl expect from contributors to this wonderful library but i DO write directly to one or two authors whose work has really touched me...i don't feel sort of qualified to rate others' work which is a cheat as i've been encouraged and hopefully learned from comments about my own efforts

so i guess i'm confused about what to do about reviewing and i read this forum with great interest for what is the best policy...

love & respect

ruthie

XXXXXX

[BruceBoxer]

ruthie honey, you do whatever you feel like doing. There's enough tough things that matter in the universe to use brain cells on--reviewing stories here is not one of 'em--and since I never heard from you directly, that's a good way to review my stuff--not of your liking and that's certainly cool.

Be safe,
Boxer

Originally posted by slave ruthie
i'm afraid i don't post reviews like soem ppl expect from contributors to this wonderful library but i DO write directly to one or two authors whose work has really touched me...i don't feel sort of qualified to rate others' work which is a cheat as i've been encouraged and hopefully learned from comments about my own efforts

so i guess i'm confused about what to do about reviewing and i read this forum with great interest for what is the best policy...

love & respect

ruthie

XXXXXX

[lex ludite]

The majority of authors, myself included, depend on reviews to guide us away from the reefs of self indulgence and to give us some idea of who our audience is. We also need more than "I really liked or really hated your story". If it's good, why do you think so? On the other hand why, in your opinion, was it bad? Most authors if they are to survive develop thick skin or perhaps armor plating in certain cases. Constructive criticism, no matter how painful, is the gold standard for any reviewer worth his or her salt, and is highly prized by all authors genuinely interested in improving their craft. Naturally writing criticism is an art form too, and the only way you develop this talent is to write reviews, lots and lots of reviews. Don't worry, if you are off base either your fellow reviewers or the author (of course) will tip you to this fact and hopefully you can then regroup and write more reviews. I've worked both sides of the street and let me tell you, it's hard work, but when you do something good, be it a cogent review or a well written story it's worth all the trouble.

[Moggy]

and his idea was that authors should be BARRED from reviewing, the reason being that authors pick apart other authors work and insist that stories be written as the reviewer would have them written, rather than reviewing them for what they are.

How peculiar!
I'm often struck by
1) how generous many writers are in their reviews. (Witness the recent Tom Justin story, 5 reviews, 9.5 rating, all from writers)
2) how little tit-for-tat reviewing there is between writers.
3) How few malicious reviews there are, even though there are some truly awful stories posted. It's no good beating about the bush. Some stories deserve a good kicking from reviewers. If someone has the vanity required to post their efforts for the world to see, they'll soon get a reality check.
And in any case, they're just stories right? Your self-esteem shouldn't be based on your stories' reviews. If it does, you've got problems!

[slave ruthie]

dear Boxer Sir

i never meant to imply that i didn't like Your or O/others' stories because i hadn't written to T/them! its just that, well many of the stories in the Library seem to appeal more to a male or Dominant perspective and i find it difficult to relate to them. i suppose i'm biased towards a "submissive-feminist" perspective which rather narrows what umm hits the spot lol

so i'm sorry if A/anybody took offense at my posting but i didn't mean it that way - honest!

love & respect & best wishes for the festive season from Phil and His slave, ruthie

XXXXXX

www.slaveregister.com/763339

[boccaccio2000g]

Originally posted by Moggy
How peculiar!
I'm often struck by
1) how generous many writers are in their reviews. (Witness the recent Tom Justin story, 5 reviews, 9.5 rating, all from writers)

During the recent story contest, Fox, the chief justice as it were of our panel of judges, told me that the scores of the judges for the three prize-winners were almost identical. Which is a good sign, I think -- that most reviewers are trying to evaluate a story based on its merits rather than solely on its erotic appeal to them personally.

2) how little tit-for-tat reviewing there is between writers.

Do you mean tit-for-tat as far as exchanging favorable reviews? Or regarding responding to unfavorable reviews? The latter practice is not unheard of. The only negative review I have ever received here was submitted by a very well-known writer on this site (under another nom de plume) just a few days after I had given one of his/her stories a tepid review. It is of course possible that the author genuinely didn't like my story, but the timing of his/her review, coupled with the great disparity between his/her rating and that of all of the other reviewers of that story) gave me about a 98% certainty that it was a retaliatory review rather than an honest one. (Later on that author inadvertently used that same "reviewing" nom de plume on the site in another context which made his/her identity clear to me)

3) How few malicious reviews there are, even though there are some truly awful stories posted.

I think there's a world of difference between 'harsh' and "malicious". I've awarded lots of '1's and '2's to authors who didn't bother to proofread their stories, but never out of malice. Someone commented to me recently that my reviews have been, on the whole, more generous in the last six months than they were formerly. I don't think that's really true. What I think happens is that after a time one doesn't even bother to open the stories of authors that have disappointed one in the past -- thus weeding out a lot of the lower scores one might otherwise award.

Happy holidays to all!

Boccaccio

[lex ludite]

For the record, the best and most constructive review I ever received came from Boccacio, coupled with an average grade that was well deserved. I do believe that I acknowledged it at the time.

As for tit-for-tat, tell me about it! It's just something that comes with the territory, another one of life's little annoyances.

[simon]

When I read on line a story providing I completely read it and it hasn't any / many reviews I will normally review it. I will normally review it also if I violently disagree with the rating.
However mostly I read off line alrthough I have a broadBand connection and then the story has to be outstanding (LY GOOD) for me to log into the site and review it
I find it difficult to mix writing skills, and content even if content is pre chosen by my reading choice.
Maybe all reviewers should be asked to review a selection of stories which were chosen for them but then would there be any reviews?

[e.e. norcod]

To be honest I find that writers are the best reviewer's. Realizing that I may precipitate a flame war I have found that Bocca and Lex are among the best reviewers that I have read (I always read the other reviews when writing mine) and they are also reasonably active writers. Woodsman's game is an excellent writer (sometimes even better than Lex or Bocca) and her reviews are preceptive but she just doesn't review enough. Ah Hah! That should keep things going for a while.

In academia writing and reviewing go hand and hand because whether or not you get published depends on the results of screening by anonymous reviewers. If the two or three reviewers your paper is sent off to don't like your work, it doesn't get published! And there are usually at least four categories: Accept without revision; Accept with revision (editorial review only); Revise and resubmitt for re-review; and DON'T EVER DARKEN MY DOOR WITH THIS DOG AGAIN. In my whole career I have only had about half a dozen manuscripts get the accept as is. Most get the middle two grades.

In my fiction I love a cogent review with a mediocre rating more than a high rating with an illiterate review.


Well, that should spark some controversy

[lex ludite]

In general my experience has mirrored the comments made by e.e. I have also published a number of articles in refereed journals in my other life as a member of the scientific community. However I have noticed that once one has established him or herself in the community, be it scientists, physicians or writers, reviewers are inclined to cut one more slack than is given to those unknown or just begining to build a reputation. This is the down side to the observations set forth by my fellow writer and reviewer. By the way I have to confess that I began posting after reviewing quite a few examples of poor writing, figuring that my stuff was just as good as a lot of the junk that I was reviewing.

[boccaccio2000g]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by e.e. norcod
[B]To be honest I find that writers are the best reviewer's. Realizing that I may precipitate a flame war I have found that Bocca and Lex are among the best reviewers that I have read

Yay!


(I always read the other reviews when writing mine) and they are also reasonably active writers. Woodsman's game is an excellent writer (sometimes even better than Lex or Bocca)

Boo! (just kidding, Woodsie) ;-)


It's probably time that I came forward and revealed my true identity. I am actually Leonard Pinth-Garnell, whom you may remember as the oh-so-discriminating "Bad Ballet" critic on SNL some years ago.

'Reasonably' active writers, e.e.? Ouch! I may not write a lot of stories, but I sure put a ridiculous amount of time into the ones I do write. And write. And write.

It may not show, but I'll bet I've put nearly 1,000 hours into Book II of the Jade Pavilion series.

And me and my ornery sidekick Big Jake has wrote us a coupla long Westerns, too, in our spare time, about a pair of low-life cowpokes, when things in Shanghai got a little too peaceful.

If me 'n Jake was any more active, we'd erupt. ;-)



Lex is my favorite reviewer, too, aside from the nice (and for the most part admirably astute ;-) ) folks who have taken the time to review my stories. Thanks to all who have done so.

Boccaccio

[Garmonbozia]

As a new forum member and new (to the genre) writer, I would like to give a newbie's point of view to reviewing writing and writing reviews.

I have been reading and lurking around this site for quite a while before I found the time and nerve to start writing my own story, which then spurred me to join the forums and start taking more of an interest in others' writing and their attendant reviews.

First of all I would like to say that boy does your ego take a knock when you get a less than glowing review. Yes the average review I got was not scathing, or particularly aimed at my skill (it was indeed quite hopeful when looked at a second time) but that initial stab of "someone doesn't like me" took a while to get over. I have had a few short stories published in another genre entirely and I worked on those for years before submitting and they were accepted right off the bat, so I guess I had no experience of a response that was less than "all praise the talented god writer", which some editors tend to do once your writing has been accepted - or have I been extremely (un)lucky in this regard.

Secondly I would like to agree with many of the comments here in that I NEED feedback for my writing, especially in erotic fiction. This is my first attempt and I am finding it truly difficult to recognise whether I have achieved my goal, to excite and arouse, with my writing. I find I am too close to the story structure itself and have relied on feedback from friends, none of whom are writers, all of whom are subs or doms. Even when I reread something I find myself thinking more on sentence structure and word choice (things I do naturally with my other writing) than on the more important question - Is this tittilating? I am finding erotic fiction a very intriguing genre in which to test my skill. So I for one hope to get hundreds of reviews and would hope they would provide some useful critiques for me, not just the "I loved it" (though they are appreciated) or the "not my cup of tea" style reviews.

Which leads me to my next point. I have not made many reviews but I am going to devote some time in the future to expand my participation of this site by joining the circle of dedicated reviewers. I have found though that I am not interested in reviewing a story I have read, and subsequently deleted from my computer, because it "was not my cup of tea". If it isn't subject matter I am interested in I won't review it. I will leave that to the people who do enjoy that particular theme. My opinion would be terribly biased towards what I think should be happening, rather than critiquing the story itself. I also find myself disinterested in reviewing a story that is utter crap. I wish for it to simply slip slowly out of sight.

Which quite neatly brings me to my last point (geez I'm hitting the segues tonight). I have passed on reading a number of stories here because their rating was low. I have come to trust the ratings system here and with the volume of stories and the limited time I have available, now less since I have started writing myself, I find the ratings system invaluable in seperating the chaff. Anything under a five I will dismiss out of hand, unless of course the synopsis looks too delicious. So I guess I really should spend some time reviewing the crappy stories, if only to help others like me who rely on the ratings system.

I guess I had better shut up now as this is getting as long as some of the stories.

Hope I haven't ranted too much.

Jason

[e.e. norcod]

Dear Jason

Congrats on making the leap from lurker to writer.

Remember, the primary pleasure you get from writing is the act of creation. Having another read it only adds to the pleasure.

I have found that the stuff that I write professionally gets ripped to pieces by the editors and reviewers about half the time. Writing in the non-fiction market is tough.

Keep going at it.

[Laila]

Back to Phoenix's idea of only allowing authors to review; I was reading reviews and replies to a story by Sir Nathan last night, and his idea was that authors should be BARRED from reviewing, the reason being that authors pick apart other authors work and insist that stories be written as the reviewer would have them written, rather than reviewing them for what they are.
Hee, hee, hee!

*lol* well yeah, that is kind of the reason why I seldom review. I hate flattery, feeling all cheezy and stupid if I did write such stuff. But most stories I have read so far just missed one basic idea of fiction: A plot!
I don't say mine would be any better - they probably lack realism (out of a lack of experience) and graphic fetish. Things I try to work on...

Or with female characters - when do or say thing I find just utterly phony I can't even praise dialogs...

But I can't say mean things. And seriously maybe the stuff I miss are not that importaint in an erotic story and that is just my own personal opinion.
*lol* you can see it's dificult.

I personally would rather like to receive constructive critism then flattery or nothing - but I always feel very apprehensive to give it myself...

I'll try in futur

Laila

[shadeofnight]

Hello,

Lurked off and on in these forms, but only joined of late. I have been reading the stories here way longer.

I write for 3 reasons :
1. Cause I think people will enjoy reading the story.
2. Sometimes a story is too show a part of myself, I am can describe in spoken words very well.
3. Too see if I can get the complex (or even sometimes simple) consept out of my mind and onto paper and ink, in a way that works.

Since these are the reasons I write, I want anyone to be able to review or comment on a story. I find just as much value/enjoyment in the "WOW" reviews/comments as I do in the "Good start/but needs more passion in part 2".

For the most part most of the people here will never review for a number of reasons, so I see no reason to try to stop anyone from reviewing.

Just a fast 2 silver,
-Shadeofnight