My internal debate on having my entries critiqued continues. I do, to
some extent, consider myself a proto-writer; I read a wide range of
things to increase my understanding of plot construction. I still
can't plot to save my life, but I'm getting better at understanding how
other people do it. Hopefully this is transferrable knowledge.
Anyway. I proposed the question 'Do I want someone whose writing I hate
critiquing my writing?' It's not a very hard question. though. Of
_course_ I don't. The real question is 'will I get anything out of
this, other than annoyance?' I still haven't answered that one.
Also, how can I objectively and helpfully critique someone's work if I
think it sucks? If I look at the page and say 'You don't capitalise,
you don't spell, your grammar resembles that of an overfed
armadillo...' and they, in turn, say 'But that's my style!' my innate
response is going to be 'Too bad. It sucks.'
I _do_ believe people should write in whatever style they want, of
course. Really. I know my mostly-British spelling (I can't help it, I
grew up on Agatha Christie) annoys some people. But they're free not
to read my stuff, just like I'm free to blithely ignore people who
don't spell -- but if I'm critiquing someone's page I'm not supposed to
be ignoring it. I'm supposed to be making helpful comments.
It's a puzzlement.
|