Questions for Those Who Regularly Read the Work of Others

[queenoftheskies]

I've been reading through some submissions posted to the various groups I belong to...OWW, Critters, QnI...and thinking.

I wanted to get opinions of others who read and critique/review.

What writing errors do you most commonly see in the work you read and critique/review? If you wouldn't mind, you could further break that down between beginning writers and those who have been writing a while.

What do you most balk at when you read to review/critique?

Do you often find errors that you have in your own work? Do you find errors you didn't realize you had until you see them in someone else's work and said, "Ah-oh, I do that too"? And, along the same lines, what do you think you learn the most from critiquing/reviewing?

Just curious.

Thanks. :)

Comments

[deannahoak.livejournal.com]

I don't know if this is what you mean, but the most common grammatical error I see in good, grammatically competent writers is the misuse of subjunctive when conditional is called for: Many writers seem to think that any sentence with "if" in it requires subjunctive, when that isn't the case. Thus you should have, "If I were a king, I would..." but "If that fire was caused by the stove malfunction, I will sue the manufacturer."

[cathellisen.livejournal.com]

I don't critique much, because I find I get too irritated to be helpful.

The things that bug me (besides spelling mistakes - which I have no right to mention, seeing as how I'm one of the worst) is when people use the wrong words, eg; heroin for heroine, or reek for wreak.

Also, for some reason, seeing loose, when the writer means lose. This one makes me want to scream.

What I have learned from doing crits with regards to my own work - long scene setting intros bore me to tears, and I shouldn't inflict them on other readers either, made up names that I have no idea how to pronounce irritate me, Dialogue tags that involve the characters doing something (fiddling with their hair, eating an apple) every single time, and when the writer suddenly goes off-tangent during a scene, to start giving me the character's entire life history for the next twelve paragraphs.

There are others, but my brain's not working.

[(Anonymous)]

Geez, but you can come up with hard questions.

For newish writers:
Info dump
Cliched plots
Unimaginative narrative
Said bookisms
Non-standard formatting
Adverb love
Grammar palaver

For more experienced writers the most common problems are issues of plot and characterisation in various configurations.

What I balk at most? A long work with a cliched plot and wonky grammar. You can tell from the first few paragraphs what kind of writing you're about to experience and the word count gives you an idea how much torture you have to endure.

Do I find the same errors in my own work? To be sure, but that I make the same mistakes doesn't make them excusable or me less qualified to pick them up.

What do I learn from criticizing? I learn every aspect of writing. Because I always check things before saying they're right or wrong I spend a lot of time covering familiar ground and consolidating my craft. If a plot seems similar I'll often check where I thought I saw it before commenting.

It also helps in rewriting. I criticize in the same way I rewrite, applying the same brush to myself and others.

I hope this is marginally helpful :P

Tade

[wistling.livejournal.com]

Hm, there's a lot, but I'll point out the most important.

The most common beginning writer error I've come across in critique groups:

PLOT HOLES. Often the idea is intriguing, but the writer hasn't thought through the implications of the idea well enough. I'll include among these all insufficiently researched details (or insufficiently described details). Writing a fantasy doesn't mean you can just ignore plausibility anywhere in the story "because of magic". Also falling into this category are stories without plot.

Most common experienced writer error:

EXPOSITION. I include in this category where background information is shown, how well it's integrated with the action, whether enough is described to place a picture of the current scene (and the backstory) in my mind. Usually the plot is solid with advanced writers, but sometimes the information just needs to be put in the right place.

I balk at apo'stro'phe's in fantasy names. And because I'm a linguist, I get nitpicky about made-up languages.

Of course, I am probably guilty of making many of the same flaws in my own work. I think what I've learned most from critiquing is how to trim irrelevant stuff from stories. You start getting a sense of what could be cut or reworded to keep the reader's attention better.

[copperwise.livejournal.com]

I balk at apo'stro'phe's in fantasy names.

Oh, and how about replacing every vowel with a 'y' to make it all romantical-like?

"Lady Alyxandra rode her steed Wyndefyre towards the palace, where she would meet her lover Myrrdyn for tea and crumpyts."

[wistling.livejournal.com]

You mean, Dayme Alyxandra? :)

[copperwise.livejournal.com]

Yes, she of the flowing locks the color of sunset's fiery blaze, with eyes the deep green of ancient forests and skin as pure as milk.

Pardon me, I seem to be yacking up a hairball, I shall return anon...

[mabfan.livejournal.com]

You've probably seen this already, but in case you haven't:

The Turkey City Lexicon (http://www.sfwa.org/writing/turkeycity.html)

[copperwise.livejournal.com]

Infodumps and major plot holes, stilted dialogue and Mary Sue plot devices. Particularly magic swords with mysterious inscriptions that glow when there is danger lurking. Heh.

Spelling and grammar are important. If I find errors in those in the published work, I blame both the writer *and* the copyeditor.

[sartorias.livejournal.com]

Like the others, I find more elementary mistakes in the work of newer writers who are still trying to find structure, pacing, and not forget characterization. Cliches and bad grammar as well--and I don't mean just the obvious cliches, like the emerald glowing eyes, the A'p'pstyphy names, the magic swords that solve all problems, but phrases--shivers running up and down spines, tables that groan under food, storms that always rage, screams that always pierce (along with eyes), beauty that haunts.

More experienced writers sometimes lapse into the phrase things, but usually need commentary on pacing, flow, incluing, and so forth.

Though I have found that both experienced and non experienced writers have some curious grammar lacunae, like not knowing the difference between lie and lay (the first intransitive, the second transitive) alright and all right, each other and one another, glitches in the perfect verb tenses (not knowing had had really is the past perfect, and trying to force it into the subjunctive because it 'sounds better'), etc.

[arkiewriter.livejournal.com]

Spelling/Grammar
* Homonym confusion is one of the errors that makes me want to start throwing dictionaries. You BEAR a burden, but you BARE your soul, not the other way around. There/their/they're. Where/wear.
* Pluralization does not just mean sticking "s" on the end of everything.
* If you use a cutesy spelling for your character/place names, remember it!

Goofy or Flat Characterization
* Mary Sues, especially who just happen to look just like the writer, but without any of the writer's human flaws.
* Superhero powers in a story that isn't meant to be a Superhero style story such as Superman, Spiderman, or The Incredibles.
* Two-dimensional villains with little or no redeeming or humanizing qualities.
* Characters who change personality traits more often than their underwear.

Infodumps
* The Flashback. If a writer can't set up the character history without resorting to a huge infodump, then they need to strongly revise their story setup.
* The Setting. Every single detail, down to the fleas on the dog's butt, must be described in excrutiating detail.
* The Technology. This one is otherwise known as "I have a Science/Math degree and must show it off!"

Floral Prose
* Phrases such as "azure eyes", "raven locks", etc are quick turnoffs.


Beginning writers tend towards the Mary Sues, the 2-D villains, the spelling/grammar, and the floral prose. Experienced writers still stumble with characterization and add in the huge infodumps that drive me batty.

[cricketshay.livejournal.com]

As if. It drives me nuts.

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

These I see also in published work: 1) "That's obvious, so I don't need to look it up." Hal Clement's Mission of Gravity had a carefully-worked-out scientific background. But Clement took for granted that a ship moves fastest with the wind right behind it. This turns out not to be true. (Note: I've had it explained to me, but never managed to absorb the explanations.) If he'd done the math, or asked someone familiar with sailing, or checked a book on sailing, he would have known better. But it was so obvious....

2) Dialog in dialects other than the writer's own. I can think of three Brits who've mostly gotten US dialog right: Rudyard Kipling, Neil Gaiman, and Clive Barker. The number of Americans who get British dialog correct is probably about the same. Get it checked by native speakers! (I lived in NYC for about ten years, and my mother grew up there -- but if I had a New Yorker as a character, I would run their dialog past a native New Yorker.)

[jsgbits.livejournal.com]

Common beginner weaknesses
passive voice
info dumps
stalled action
grammar

Common not-beginner weakneses
unconvincing characters and world
love of their own voice
grammar

Things I find in my own writing from reviewing others
all of the above and then some

[horace-hamster.livejournal.com]

Beginning writers: Gross misuse of the language; cliched and improbable storylines, characters, and worlds; wandering infodumps.

Less-green writers: acceptable prose but not much story; lack of rising tension; fairly static characters; excessive focus on setting or cool-gizmo.

Experienced writers: Lack of research resulting in factual errors; characters that don't leap off the page, for no really definable reason; annoying voice/prose style (generally due to author being in love with their own voice and letting it intrude on the story); overuse of backflashes.

Personally, I hate reading something that's riddled with basic Engish errors, and I hate reading pseudo-science fiction by an author who is patently clueless about the science in question.