This is a subject I wrote about last year (using almost the exact same title, actually), but it is one I am compelled to revisit. Right now, I am on both sides of the reviewing table. I am having my two editors reading my latest work, which I will be sending out soon. I also am reading two different people's works.
The most important thing that needs to be done before anybody reads anything for anybody else is to find out what the author wants from it. For example, one friend is mostly just sharing her work. She welcomes any comments, but is not particularly looking for any specific feedback. My other friend is in a similar spot, but is looking for specific feedback. How are things working? How are the dynamics between characters? What questions are raised as you read this?
The story I sent out is certainly my style, but it is not my subject (I'm being a good writer and experimenting outside my comfort zone). Because of that, I am asking for feedback that is somewhere between specific and general. I do want to know how the overall feel of the piece works, but I have an idea of what my editors will think (mostly that it's good, but a little hokey). So what I need more than the general is specific feedback on what is working well and what is not. I need to be told what is dragging the story down and given thoughts on how to change it. I am not worrying about proofing whatsoever. I'm largely not concerned with sentence-level problems because I am not far enough along for that to be a worthwhile concern.
Three different authors are having their writing looked at and want three different things done in their reviews. However, even if you are reading something from somebody who wants you to be super picky, the advice remains the same: don't look for problems. Read the story naturally. Real problems will be readily seen. If you want to go through it slowly, with a fine-toothed comb, go ahead. But if you jump in specifically looking for problems, you will end up with a bunch of false positives. You will make a lot of changes that don't make the piece better, just different. And that is bad editing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment