HOME | DD | Gallery | Favourites | RSS
| Fallen-Dawn
Fallen-Dawn
♂️
[7419605]
[2008-05-25 04:38:41 +0000 UTC]
"Fallen"
(United States)
# Statistics
Favourites: 52; Deviations: 135; Watchers: 13
Watching: 37; Pageviews: 8591; Comments Made: 672; Friends: 37
# Interests
Favorite writers: Danielewski, Orson Scott CardTools of the Trade: Photoshop, and the Mighty Pen
Other Interests: Writing, Photoshop, Photography
# About me
A dark writer looking to find the way.Current Residence: In My Head
Favourite style of art: Favorite?? I don't have one, but I HATE Modern Abstract sculpture.
Operating System: XP
MP3 player of choice: Creative Zen MicroPhoto
Wallpaper of choice: Dark
Favorite cartoon character: Roadrunner
Personal Quote: Life is a continuous learning experience. The more you learn today, the better you will be tomorrow.
# Comments
Comments: 28
Thank you. Is there a particular favorite?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for the fav on The Girl Who Knows Books. [link]
How is Writing.com? Is it good, cool? Lots of writers?
lovespoon
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No problem.
At writing.com I've found it is easier to get reviews that are substantive, I don't have much uploaded there, but what I do have there has been critiqued pretty well. Its a good way to find the weaknesses in style. There aren't as many writers there as here, but the material is pretty good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Critique is so tricky. I don't offer much critiques. People will discover how to critique their own writings soon enough.
Can you imagine ee.cummings being critiqued on here or writing.com? lol
lovespoon
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see your point. I find the critiques to be helpful, mainly because I don't trust my own views on my writing. I can either be too naive or hyper-critical, so I find that a third party lends an outside voice and another set of eyes to catch errors. The difference between a good critique and a bad critique in my opinion is this: A bad critique will tell you only what you are doing wrong, while a good critique will tell you what was wrong, what was right, and where to go from there. When I write to critique a piece, I try to give all three of those elements.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Good points.
You know a good critique when you see one.
Hyper-critical seems like a only what your doing wrong.
Too naive self-critic seems only what your doing right.
Sometimes a person/group can critique, critique, critique until they've beaten all the juice, meaning, power out of a poem. Ablemuse.com tends to do that. They do good critiques, then it continues and continues.
In the end, only the poem writer knows if their original poem still exists or not.
lovespoon
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've seen that too. Generally when I critique, I start with the impression I have on the whole. Then I'll touch on basic things worth fixing, like grammar/punctuation, etc. Then on the rare occasions when the piece needs some real work, I highlight areas where the issue is most visible, along with a couple of suggestions on what they could do to address it. I close with telling them the things I think they have done well, also highlighting places where it worked best, so the whole critique starts well and ends with them feeling positive about the whole thing.
My problem is that I seem to be about the only person out there who makes a point of reading pieces and offering this sort of constructive criticism. The writing I have put here hardly gets commented on, let alone taken apart and suggestions offered. Writing.com at least has gotten me some.
Have you found the same thing?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Generally when I critique,
I agree, good start.
1. I start with the impression I have on the whole.
I never touch on this;I consider it nitpicking. They know these.
2. Then I'll touch on basic things worth fixing, like grammar/punctuation, etc.
I separate "real work" from "issue most visible."
"Real work" is for the poet, not me. I will keep reading them and if they keep having "real work" problems I won't comment on that piece. If I have to think more about it, I won't comment. I find people can have a mixture of poems. Maybe one subject is difficult to express in an artistic way; another subject is not. "Issue most visible" is easy. The "issue most visible" adds to the poem or takes away from it.
I also agree if you point out a problem try to suggests how to fix it. If you can't fix it, then admit it. Example. "This word ____ is a problem for the piece. But I can't provide a better one to replace it."
3. Then on the rare occasions when the piece needs some real work, I highlight areas where the issue is most visible, along with a couple of suggestions on what they could do to address it.
I try to tell them something similar, what worked, what didn't. I don't tell them things they know they do well sometimes. I may go off topic and talk about how they've really wrote good content. Content is very important to me. A trivial poem is a trivial poem. Which is not to say, someone can't do something nontrivial to a trivial subject. I think of the Doors song, "People are Strange."
4. I close with telling them the things I think they have done well, also highlighting places where it worked best, so the whole critique starts well and ends with them feeling positive about the whole thing.
5. I look for progression. If I'm going to read someone's poems over and over for more than say eight, unless I look for improvements. If I see this I might mention it. I might. Some writers need to surprise themselves they've improved.
6. I might not even comment on a person first or second piece I read. I believe people should write because they want to write, not because they have an audience. That audience might not always be there. Emily Dickerson for example. Poets/writers have to learn to write because writing their views drives them.
You're a rare bird. I take it you always complete your cycle "look for" list. I don't always complete my cycle "look for" list. I might do 6 or 4, 1, 5 and 1 and 3, if they are using no punctuation at all, I do 2 because so much structure is missing without punctuation. I consider 1 through 7 structure.
7. My problem is that I seem to be about the only person out there who makes a point of reading pieces and offering this sort of constructive criticism.
This is an art site. I try not to take a piece apart. I try to suggests a few things, preferably the most important thing.
8. The writing I have put here hardly gets commented on, let alone taken apart and suggestions offered. Writing.com at least has gotten me some.
I've not had too many comments. Problem is when people comment and don't know what they are talking about. They don't know the history or tradition of a villanelle or free verse's spiral nature or why poems may not be best when in perfect meter. Perfect iambic can be so singsongish, a person forgets what the poet is saying. You have to read Shakespeare twice to catch anything for example in his stories. The words are soooo beautiful and lovely and of course they didn't have tv, radio, movies, so those people concentrated on the music of his words and content. We're spoiled today. People may hate the content in the poem and confuse that with the poetic devices used. On and on. I try not to get in these debates. Which is why people don't comment on poems, prose in general. Which brings me back to why I don't go through my whole "look for list" and tell the poet/writer. I tell myself, "ah this could have been better" and they missed an opportunity to develop their character or tension with time.
In the end, the poet/writer is responsible for doing their own work. I like that the responsibility remains with the writer or poet and not me. I'm passing through. They have to live with their works of fiction.
And I say all this after going through good, poor and bad critiques and beat-the-life-out-of-everything critiques. In critique classes, there is always something to say. If you take something published and already hugely successful privately to an unknowning readers critique class, they will pick it apart. Even Shakespeare has things wrong I've noticed. A piece should do it's main function as well as it should, not perfect as it can! When is a piece done? The young poet and writers have to find that place, when they've done the best they can critiquing their work and keeping the life inside their work!
So people have done you a favor, perhaps. You'll have to stand on your own two feet and say. I think I've done enough on my cycle "Look for list".
Yes, but I'm comfortable looking at my own work. Keeping the juice, life in my own work.
Have you found the same thing?
lol you probably feel like your back in literature or writing class.
lovespoon
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think you will find this funny, but I actually got a great deal of enjoyment reading the w-h-o-l-e thing. 
Generally I read something and my "list" is in the back of my mind. Maybe it never really turns off. Most times, I'm not reading for mistakes, merely enjoyment. If I see something glaring, then I might go back and look it over again.
I agree that a writer must make what they will make, and that as a reader I can only see what the writer creates for me. Sometimes I do keep my thoughts to myself. Other times I give comment when I really think it could be used.
The best example I can offer is a piece I reviewed on writing.com a couple of months back. The story was of two young girls who go on an adventure only to be stalked by a sinister but unseen antagonist. When I started reading this, I was looking forward to an interesting short story. What I found was the writer's first attempt at real writing, with exceptionally poor results. You strike me as someone who knows the magic that the carefully crafted word can create, so you can appreciate my statement when I say that it was a disaster. The dialogue was agonizing and without point. The action made little or no sense. There was poor descriptions of the scenes, and it had an altogether very lackluster ending. I wrote my critique carefully, because I didn't want to discourage the writer. Her response was one of the nicest notes I've read. Here was someone who knew their faults, but didn't have the slightest notion as to how to improve. Far from being a stinging rebuke, the critique gave direction and even some hope that she did have the ability to improve. And she has improved considerably.
When I say "Issue Most Visible" I mean that there is something the writer has done that takes away from the whole work. Case in point, I sometimes have to be careful not to fall into past-tense in my writing when I've started the piece using something else. Others might do other things (I'm sure you can think of a few). Sometimes it might be a sense of style (which I do take into account) but when it reaches a point where it becomes distracting, then I might make mention of it.
I sometimes get a feeling of progression when I read several pieces, and sometimes I will make mention of it, but its a rare thing. I'm especially guilty of this in multiple chapters of a story, where my main concern is seeing what the writer will reveal.
I'm not exactly sure if I have been done a favor or not. My problem has been that I can't look at my stuff too hard or I get the urge to trash it and start again. I've had to re-write the first chapter of one of my projects 4 times because I read through it and end up saying "It's garbage"! I write it, check for glaring mistakes, and put it where others can decide if what I made is worth reading. I like the comments because it tells me that someone read it, thought about it, and chose to take a moment the share some of those thoughts.
Tag, you're it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Those were good examples.
And if a person shows up to writing.com, we can assume they are serious about writing.
Having said that, I want to caution you on some writers, poets here.
Deviantart.com, the name alone says it all, is about art. So maybe a writer/poet strayed in and enjoyed the art. Then decided to write poems or fiction.
Some poets here are writing for uhmm personal reasons. They are, for example, trying to express painful emotions through words instead of cutting themselves. I rather they write about painful stuff than cut themselves. Maybe they write to have someone talk about their situation? Who knows? These poets/writers should be treated with a certain caution. Let them express themselves. When they want to really write you'll know it. It will show. Some may be talented writers because their in a angst mood. Pure energy leading to pure talent. Raw talent can become seasoned talent when the writer/poets decides to get serious about their work. You'll see the progress. I seen poets/writers like that. I've been here 7 years. When you read someone's work that long, you're totally surprised when they've become writers/poets of talent not just angst. They just take flight to use a bird analogy.
Some of these type of angst poets may never become serious poets. I don't reveal my mind by critiquing them. I may do 1, 5, but for the most part, I am critiquing to improve my own skill. And who knows they may become serious poets and writers.
When I see they've become serious from a poet's viewpoint, I might try to help in a more serious way.
Yeah, you probably have higher level of writers, poets on writing.com and they should respond better to critiques.
In the end though, each writer and poet must find their own diamonds in the rough and polish them.
I do by process think one should write the entire thing out first, keeping the editor and writer separate.
The editor will never let you finish anything.
The writer doesn't care about punctuation and some dialogue. Writer self want to get the story told fast as possible. Then she/he tosses it to the editor and says "have at it."
You have a strong editor.
But each of us has to find that balance between the two. Our own balance. Some do this better than others. This is life.
lovespoon
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for the return watch. I look froward to hopefully working with you in the future.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for all the support! It means a bunch =3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No problem. Keep up the good work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I was very impressed with your photography. You have a really good eye. I hope you don't mind, but I'd like to keep an eye for some of your future shots.
FD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Wow, thank you =]
That would be lovely. Thanks so much!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hey! Thanks for watching me!
You like redheads, huh?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
