-
Before writing a review do you read previous reviews first?
I don't because I feel I may be influenced by what others have had to say about a particular work. I prefer to make my own judgement, review as I see it and then I read other reviews to see if I'm in a minority of one.
Anyone got a view on this? -
Sometimes I do so I can see how others viewed the story... most times I really don't agree with what they've said, and I can add that section they slammed/praised to my comment
-
I don't like to repeat what others say, so I write what I see and then before submitting my review I scroll down to see what other have said. Then I delete the parts I've repeated.
Did that makes sense
-
Aye I do that as well...make sure I am not going to repeat what another says. I might say "I agree with..." or "I also..." in order to acknowledge that another writer said it before me.
-
Looks like I'm in a minority of one
but everyone reviews the way it suits them best, and that's how it should be
-
good thread. bump.
-
I read and then review and sometimes, find that my comments are quite at the other end of the spectrum. I am almost never influenced by what other people say or write.
-
If I find a bunch of mistakes in a story I'll see if anyone else suggested fixes, if so, I won't be so picky. I generally read the story all the way through, write my review and depending on the story and such I may read other reviews before submitting as sometimes I might think up other things to add based on what they say.
-
Review or critique that is the question.
• Hi Gang--- If we are talking about a review, I suppose it matters not. A review, to this old puppy, is a vague list of the pro and cons of a given story, with little or no assistance in correcting it. Literary reviews as with movie reviews are nothing more than a person’s personal appraisal of the story or movie in question.
A critique is different in that it examines the piece in detail, giving both objective opinions and recommendations of how it may be corrected. It also boils down to a person’s opinion, but one that’s supported by logic. The writer can not only see the suggestions, but should be given the rational behind them.
In the example of the review I don’t think it makes a difference, perhaps because I don’t attach much value to them.
In the example of the critique I never look at those that preceded mine, because I want my comments to be my gut reactions to that story, uninfluenced by the opinions of others.
Talk to you soon---ablelaz.
-
I generally read the story, write my review, then scroll down just to see if my suggestions for corrections have already been made.
If they have, then I'll just say 'so-and-so' has already commented on the typos I saw. I don't look at the rest of their overall comments. I just don't want to harp on mistakes that have already been mentioned. At the same time, I don't want to seem like I wasn't bothering to look for errors. -
I have to agree with a few of the other critiques--er, comments
--here.
If I find some noteworthy errors, I'll usually check to see if anyone else mentioned them recently. If it's been a month or more and they haven't been fixed, though, I do not scruple to mention them again.
If you're not going to take the time to fix what people suggest (at least if it's a black and white issue), then you can expect more of the same, says I.
Sometimes I'll scan to see if others have commented deeply or if they're all froo-froo responses. If someone else made a salient point that I also noticed, especially if it's a good thing, I like to mention that I agree with them. I think it makes the good more reinforced to the writer.

Lawrie
Jan 4 2:32 PM
Reply