Should age affect critiques?

[Polly]

Sorry I think this is in the right place, I don't know.
We all know we have plenty of young writers, and I mean under 14 and 13 maybe some under 12. For some strange reason I got a silly thought that the younger you are, the less harsh your critiques should be (I mean if you post a story people should lay off you a bit) but then I thought why? The harsher the critique the better, as long as it's constructive. I'm sure the younger writers will appreciate it when they see how much their writing improved because of the critiques. Now I do think that there should be a limit on how harsh critiques are, I'm not just meaning for younger people but for everyone. I'd just like to add that crits are meant to help, not for you to go on and on about how bad the story/novel/poem/play/lyrics are. Post your thoughts, I think that critiques should be harsher but more constructive.

[Phyx]

Of course not, age is just a number (as said repeatedly by many, but never followed). I've met a girl who wrote some of the most amazing pieces, correct grammar, spelling, punctuation; understanding of all necessary information. But, she was only eleven, so the only replies that she received were 'I think for your age this is good.' which, whatever your perspective, is absolutely pathetic - and perhaps one of the worse replies possible to a thread.

In fact, I think the younger - the harsher. If you leave them to 'A+' and 'Its really great!' for a while, they start to develop a scar that feeds on their own ego. And, accepting criticism becomes much harder, possibly resulting in retortions of epic stupidity and ignorance. The earlier they're exposed to brutality, the better the writer, and overall, a much better co-operator. It's often those who are willing to change that make the better person, while arrogance and stubbornness open neither opportunities, nor good expectations.

I'll admit some critiques are hard to swallow, and the first is always the hardest. But, it depends upon how it's worded, if 'Your first paragraph is just a massive info-dump' is written (which, I shall admit to saying) then it's going to sting a lot more than 'I think your first paragraph is okay, but you need to add more than just information to captivate the reader, don't you think?'. Correct wording can alternate upon how a critique is received and given, and 'This story sucks' is about as much use as 'This story's great'.

Constructive criticism is harsh, that's the point. Rants and rambles are most effective in proving a point, unless you're ranting on about nothing. Emo, for example, needs to be beaten out, as it's one of the worst clichés imaginable, and without crushing a dream or two, it can't be achieved and you'll never help the writer. Sometimes, people have no understanding of how to accept critiques and just have a tantrum of some sort, and those are often the ones who aren't worth the time.

Without cruelty, a critique is nothing. And there is no extent of how far a crit can be cutting, but after a thorough looking over, the points are still valid - even if expressed incorrectly. There's no need to get worked up about this, the younger you are, the better it should be, it's just common sense. If it's not delivered when necessary, then when they receive a bad reception they're not going to be too accepting.

Now, I'm not saying that we need to beat this into children, but I think A's and so forth should be much more difficult to reach than they are now, as it's just giving praise where not wanted. I think around the ages of eight/nine/ten that writing should be treated with much more respect, instead of mindless ticks covering the page. Expect the obvious for a child, but give them notes that will help them improve next time.

[Alex]

I agree with Phyx. I mean I think the fact that Nyx was 12 when she joined in site in late 2007 is more than enough proof that harsh and constructive criticism can develop extraordinary writers. Youth and age should not be a factor at all.

[winniethepooh4102]

You know Alex, this Phyx is not 14 years old, cannot you understand.
And she is giving such critiques from the first day with other purposes.
I think she is invader from one too friendly site.

And I know who is this person if she is really Japanese. Winnie has
adventures and observations from one forum to write a whole
another book.

[Phyx]

Bravo, bravotissima.

The fact that you managed to turn a debate, into a front about age/gender/origin and so forth is amazing. Absolutely amazing.

Can we get back on topic now?

[winniethepooh4102]

Bing, Bong, Bang, Bing, Bong, Bang...
Can I see something written of you
not as this bulshit about the universe
to see you my critique. How great are
you to discuss the destiny of the universe?
Or this is a product of your writer’s sterility.

[Phyx]

Bravo, bravotissima.

The fact that you managed to turn a debate, into a front about age/gender/origin and so forth is amazing. Absolutely amazing.

Can we get back on topic now?
I can just say the same thing.

[winniethepooh4102]

The topic are you forever from now on.
Such universe and a fluid of paradox in
combination with procrastination are very
funny theme for this forum.

[Phyx]

Ah, ignorance. How blissful.

[winniethepooh4102]

I can’t see your book anywhere in the universe.
What a paradox, maybe your book is a fluid only,
which never will be seen.

[Phyx]

Let me enlighten you.

Every moment is an aesthetic sum and principle within it's own right. The moment stretches toward infinity using the finitely compressed sights, smells, sounds, and thoughts of the now. This moment "is" as a pool of water running off from the larger "lake" of reality.

If we were to imagine the isness of the moment as a temporary dew drop in a four dimensional lake of our comprehensive wholeness, we would very quickly realize the surfacing proponents and emotions of the moment act as a one dimensional braise across a surface with deeper impacts and intonations.

These moments, these drops of dew upon our four dimensional lake, ripple in out and through all manner and effect larger currents in ways perceived as "nonlocal" from a boats perspective. If you were to imagine yourself as seated on this boat, staring into a situation as an observer and nothing but you might notice that from any one vantage you can see strains of all currents.

The ripples support the overall currents in the lake as the currents themselves support the ripple. This interdependency may create at first the illusion of a lake changing form, but the water's mass itself stays the same, only the surface changes with the temporary form the water mass manifests. It is in this way that appearance only manifests within nothing, if we were to imagine the accumulated lake as a "no-form", though having the ability to "form" through isolated ripples.

Although imagining ourselves as the captain of an invisible and un-solidifed ghost ship may appear appealing to the current form of our egos continuum, this simply is not true. Our perception itself is a causation as well as an end. Our momentary dew drops ripple to and are formed by other such ripples. The current is of the ripples, the ripples are of the current.

This is communication.

This give and take creates a tide known as "duality". Reaction itself is birthed from a dual perception of a ripple as both a push and pull factor. Our individual ripple may cause and be caused simultaneously by the surrounding current, allowing for a momentary lapse in historilaticism, a surface level 2nd dimension perception of a currents three dimensional movement and being.

Here it should be clarified that movements themselves are beings. All is ripple, and movement is only ebb and flow. You do not own "your" ripple, you do not possess nor interact as independent from any other. Your being is composed of currents and as such any thought is both independently creator and created. This is known as the causality nonduality.

[winniethepooh4102]

I saw your thoughtless jabber and I can you tell
right now the genius things are always simple not
as yours. With such writings you can only make
the little children’s heads dizzy.
But I saw something else, you draged here and
began instantly to kick around the children to make
a place for you yourself.
I haven’t anymore what to talk about with you.
When you post your writing I will flip through your
jabbers. Let me God I will not be alone.

[Phyx]

Haha.

Lawl.

Wiggles.

This is entertainment at it's finest.

[winniethepooh4102]

Bang!

[jordanisonfire]

...ah, I think we should get back on topic, here. Not this pointless arguing that has nothing at all to do with the topic.

I, for one, am not a good critiquer. And I'm sixteen. Whereas, there's people like Nyx and Carraka who can do exceedingly good crits when they're younger than me. Thus, there is the proof that age does not affect critting. And, so that you don't think I'm saying, "The younger you are, the better you are at critiquing", Shaun is another excellent critiquer and he's in his twenties. So, it doesn't really matter. I think its down to your analytical skills and a little intelligence and common sense. All of which I lack considerably. :D

[winniethepooh4102]

There are critiques and critiques. To bite others when
you haven’t anything well written and to kick around
the children who make their first steps here isn’t right
I think. Simply the forum is losing new members. On
YWS there they are very smart at this point, maybe
because they are doing business.

[Jack]

I don't think that age should affect the type of critique's you get, as long as the critique is constructive and helpful. I haven't come across any critiques that are offensive or just simply rude, and as long as that is the case then we should keep crits the same for all ages i think :)

[winniethepooh4102]

Perhaps the good times have gone
Perhaps they are still to come

Perhaps tomorrow the world will be a better place - Perhaps it won't

Perhaps what could have been, has
Perhaps what has been, was a dream

Perhaps this is all a dream - Perhaps....

This is not mine, it is written of your fellow-countryman 57 years old, one of
my contacts in Skype. Why he is thinking in a such way?

This is on www.colingroves.com

[Polly]

Winnie, Phyx get back on topic please.
I didn't make this topic so two people could argue over nothing.

[Nyx]

Winnie & Phyx PLEASE STOP NOW.
Get back on topic,

-evil mod voice-

OR ELSE

/evil mod voice

[Carraka]

Thanks Shads, but I'm only half a year younger. -points at Nyx- So let's all worship her instead.

I really try to base the "harshness" level of my critique on whether I think someone can take it. If someone comes in all sophisticated/apathetic/smart-sounding (-wink-) and then proceeds to give a bunch of really nice crits, I assume that they can take what they give. (Not true in my case, but erm, I would die before I told you guys to tone it down, mostly because your crits on EC aren't even harsh.)

If someone seems sensitive and new to writing and whatever, I try to give more generic advice and encouragement.

So age has nothing to do with it. Online, I forget someone's age almost instantly unless they're a) older than twenty or b) younger than ten.

[Rouge]

There are critiques and critiques. To bite others when
you haven’t anything well written and to kick around
the children who make their first steps here isn’t right
I think. Simply the forum is losing new members. On
YWS there they are very smart at this point, maybe
because they are doing business.

If you really feel that way, then maybe YWO is wrong for you? :confused:

in other words, please stop arguing. Or else. [yes, I did copy Nyx, but what else am I to say?]

Like Shadow said, age doesn't matter. It depends on how well you can analyze and really break stuff down. I, for one, suck. I'm good at picking out grammar issues, but that's easy. I've been trying to get more to the core of the stories that I've been critiquing, but it's harder. And then, there're people like Dio who can just completely rip a piece apart with [I hope] no problem, cause he's that much more of a literary genius than I am.

[winniethepooh4102]

If you don’t want me on your forum please say me it directly,
but not this way.

[Starry]

Critiquing is a skill, as are writing and editing. I, for one, can point out someone else's (or my own) flaws much easier than I can fix them. I hope I'm a fairly okay critiquer (if I ever had time to anyway), but I tend to just point out whatever catches my attention, either something funky grammatically or in word choice or something I really like or dislike. I'm not nearly as good with the overall-themes-where-can-you-take-this-story thing, but I try to work that part a little as well.

But basically, I think that the reason I know what I'm doing with critiques is that I was, well, indoctrinated in the correct way to critique from early on in writing, and so I never tried to do it another way. That's why I always do line-by-line and I try to intersperse both positive and negative feedback. I think we need to teach less experienced members what they're doing wrong so they can learn, as opposed to sort of ignoring them and letting them either pick it up on their own or disappear (which is definitely what I do now).

When it comes to critiquing the writing of less-experienced members--because I think that's what this issue is about, experience as opposed to age--I tend to avoid the worst of the pile, because in my opinion if someone can't be bothered to even proofread their writing they obviously don't care about what I have to say, but everyone else I just point out what needs fixing throughout the text and save my personal opinion of whether the work is any good at all for the end. So hopefully I've helped them with whatever really needs the help, be it grammar, word choice, and flow (for the newer writers) or theme, characterization, and imagery (for the more experienced).

[Alex]

There are critiques and critiques. To bite others when
you haven’t anything well written and to kick around
the children who make their first steps here isn’t right
I think. Simply the forum is losing new members. On
YWS there they are very smart at this point, maybe
because they are doing business.

I'm sorry, but mentioning YWS and how we obviously pale in comparison is pretty offensive. Maybe its the way I interpret it, but when you say YWS is very smart at this point, I feel it implies what Shaun and Andy have done here in some way isn't smart. Maybe its my personal bias, but YWS is merely a well-oiled machine, fine for young writers, but I never became active there because I couldn't see myself improving at all there.

The community aspect here at YWO (although arguablly out of control) allows for harsher critiques, as knowing someone on a more personal level (at least in my mind) makes it easier to give them an admittedly harsh critique. The goal isn't to scare off new members (although some of the new members who can't take harsh criticism probably need it), but merely to make the best writers out of people. I personally feel the wide use (or at least formerly widely-used) tactic of line-by-line critiques around here allowed writers the best opportunity to improve and do it in a rapid manner.

Why does it even matter at these points considering all the hilariously weak critiques that have come about as of late? I'm sorry, but if anything the members who have the ability to critique well should critique as harshly as they can to counter the growth in the type of critiques we all know exist. I can get applause for my writing anywhere, and while I may be hypocritical on this topic (I'm very averse to harsh critiques, overly-proud of my writing), it is imperative to stress the fact that applause does not help anyone improve.

Let me tell everyone a story, so crowd around. Once upon a time I knew one of the best writers (in my opinion) to ever be on this site in my 14 months on here, Squint (who was mostly a poet who sadly didn't post enough). While it was difficult to find many faults in her work, the good critiquers of the time would give at least relatively detailed line-by-line critiques, nitpicking, and requesting changes that probably were more stylistic than anything. Weak story? I know. What is the point of this story you may ask? The point is one that is very much against the main point of the topic, but still indicitve of an issue at hand. The point is that on a site with less personal interaction and fewer harsh critiques it would be impossible for someone of Squints level to ever improve.

Harsh critiques are need as they are the backbone of development, and if you can't take a harsh critique then either you don't care enough about your writing or you aren't mature enough to improve. There is a difference between all-out insults and a harsh critique, however: I think we get that. The point is though that a numbered age shouldn't matter as its level of maturity that dictates how beneficial any critique will be to your writing.

[Nyx]

@ Winnie: this is a DEBATE thread with a specific TOPIC, please stick to it.

As for the debate, I think if AGE does matter then it should be to make the critiques for younger members harsher and more detailed. By harsh I don't mean saying "You suck, this is garbage" (though at some point in an old forum this worked for me ><), but I mean nitpicking more and going into more detail etc. They say people learn best when they're young! Besides I think other advantages of giving clear, detailed, & if harsh then helpful critiques to younger memebers is:
A. If they can't take an honest, may it be brutal, constructive critique then they know that they are not meant for writing or aren't mature enough to be a writer yet because writing includes ALOT of critism and rejection and you need to be able to take it and younger writers need to know that it isn't all OMG i LUV iittt wriite m0re pls!

B. Younger members are just staring to learn so they need ALL the help they can get.

Anyways, when I first joined a writing forum I was nine and I can tell you that I benefited much more from the constructive crits, though some of them were a little...OUCH... at first glance, than I did from the "wow, I think you're awesome for your age, keep it up" comments.


So basically, I don't think crits for any certain age group needs to be sugarcoated.

[winniethepooh4102]

I think you here on this forum are captivated of criticism,
much more than is need of. I felt it directly from your
critiques and from private messages from the new members.
For the same time you wasting to write such long critiques
you can write something your own to show the others
and new members what is the right way for writing.
It is obviously there are persons with ideas and very good
imagination and they are ready to become writers with the
help of such forums, but some of them are leaving your forum
still after the first critique. Your criques are getting demolitional
dimensions.
It is obviously also that only a little part of members of such
forums will become famous writers. But why have to ruin
the belief of children still on their first step. No one knows
who really will become a famous writer. There surely is at
least one already wrecked from your critiques.
But the purpose of such forums is not only this to product
writers. The main purpose I think is to join people interested
of writing and of the world of ideas. Otherwise such forums
are turning into a repetition of the schools.

[Nyx]

UGH. Mother *...
Okay, I don't want to yell so -deep breath-
A. Long critiques are NOT A WASTE OF TIME. How else is someone going to learn?
B. It's better to show "children" that they're not mature enough for a path they can't handle than to lead them on. Besides, you make it sound like we're whipping the new members instead of HELPING, which is exactly what we're doing: HELPING THEM IMPROVE.
C. The members' critique do not "wreck" famous writers, surely someone who cannot even take a critique of a stranger they do not know will not be able to handle the thousands of rejections to come from editors & publishers. We are helping each other BECOME well-known authors not destroyinge each others chances.
D. Your "guess" of what the main purpose of the forum is makes no sense at all. So writers all join together to do what? The purpose of this forum is to help writers IMPROVE.

[winniethepooh4102]

You know Nyx there are writers ,whose words
are not arranged in such brilliant way as in your
critical notes and writings, but they are read
from all over the world. Because their writings
are readable and interesting. This is the main
difference between the real and arteficial writers.
And there are editors and publisher’s houses
besides this, to put in order the writings of
talanted writers. I have to see and some other
forums, because here I feel is repeating the
situation on YWS. And you personally is like
to one another green person from there.
Sorry to say that.
I see you are continuing to play your own
games on this forum as in the previous days
but I have your photo and will post it in my book
to see people from all over the world who are you.
At least in this way you will become famous.
And I have to copy and this text because you can
erase it as in the last few days to not write it again.

[Carraka]

-resists urge to take bait-

-fails-

Well, I guess this is a debate, so I'm allowed to argue.

You know Nyx there are writers ,whose words
are not arranged in such brilliant way as in your
critical notes and writings, but they are read
from all over the world. Because their writings
are readable and interesting. This is the main
difference between the real and arteficial writers.


Since we are a literary site, we're also to some point, elitist. Not as elitist as some other writing sites I know, but we seek to have writers that are not only popular, but also skilled with prose, imaginative with plot, creative with world-building, realistic with characters, etc. These are the things that are interesting to us, and we don't writers to leave our site thinking that selling millions of books and then getting a movie deal is the Ultimate Win. We have a different definition of success, because even if you sell these millions of books and get a movie deal, there will simultaneously be a large community out there bashing you, for very good reasons.

I don't know what it's like to be in that role, the role of the bestselling author with the worst-written novel. I wonder whether I should care so much what other people think, once I'm published. I know that when I come on Amazon and look up my book, there will be one-star reviews, unless I'm so unnotoiced that I only have one or two four-star reviews. But I also care what I think, and what I think is that I want to write something I want to read. And I do not want to read all that popular crap. Hence, YWO helps me improve my craft, and if it deals out harsh critiques, so be it. I personally think I benefit more when everything is sugarcoated, but I know they won't be sugarcoating rejection letters.

You talk about real and artificial. Although everyone may have a different definition of what is real and what is artificial, most of the community here agrees on a standard, and we try to set our standards high rather than low.


And there are editors and publisher’s houses
besides this, to put in order the writings of
talanted writers.

Heh, I wish.

In the broadest of generalizations:

Publishing houses have the resources to do it, but if you're a big-name author rushing to get the book out to your mass of adoring fans, they streamline the process, and the fans end up getting a book earlier, but at lower quality. Sometimes if the publishing house isn't that great, they probably won't also do a great job of editing your book.

But publishing houses won't even accept what you've written if they think it's junk. They receive many, many submissions a day, and they hire bleary-eyed people to wade through the slush pile, trying to find those elusive needles.

Literary agents may help with your work, but the same thing applies -- they're selective in accepting submissions.

Our job isn't to get a writer's craft to such a level that they don't need an agent or an editor to look over their work. That would be just about impossible. Our job is to get a writer to the point where they will be good enough to find an agent or an editor.

And hopefully what they've written is stuff that we'd like to read -wink- because at the most mundane level, we only encourage what interests us.

[MasterCarlton]

I dont think age should affect crittiques at all!

This site is for people to IMPROVE their writing, and therefore should be thankfull for every harsh crittique they get!

If someone gets upset about a harsh crittique then they didn't join to improve! They just joined for praise, which is NOT good!

[lango]

The harsher the critique, the more honest it is, usually. I only see a problem on being harsh when you intent on hurting the person when all you should be doing is critique a story. Still... I guess it's good to have arrogant critiques too, we'll get much of those out in the world, so it's best to prepare for it in a friendly forum.
I personally try to be helpful in my critiques though, not harsh. I'm conscious that not everyone is born a writer. Most writers are hard worked, only a very selective few are born amazing writers. And I'm willing to bet most of the well-paid writers are the hard-working type, so I'd rather try and teach someone how to start improving even if their story is on a VERY low level of "skill" than rant about how they don't deserve to breath our air or something. ;)

[Phyx]

You know Nyx there are writers ,whose words are not arranged in such brilliant way as in your critical notes and writings, but they are read from all over the world. Because their writings are readable and interesting. This is the main difference between the real and arteficial writers. And there are editors and publisher’s houses besides this, to put in order the writings of talanted writers. I have to see and some other forums, because here I feel is repeating the situation on YWS. And you personally is like to one another green person from there. Sorry to say that. I see you are continuing to play your own
games on this forum as in the previous days but I have your photo and will post it in my book
to see people from all over the world who are you. At least in this way you will become famous. And I have to copy and this text because you can erase it as in the last few days to not write it again.

Haha.

Lawl.

Wiggles.

From all that you've said there, you're acting as if all you want on a forum is people sharing their work and getting no feedback. And either way you look at it, that's absolutely useless and gives nothing but an inflated ego. Ever heard of Ashley Domenic Augustine? Well, he's a young writer who signed up for YWS, before the change occured - and he received good crits that helped. And because of he's scarred ego he referred to himself as 'Jesus', and that they would all go to hell purely for disliking his book.

If such forum was constructed, surely writers would feel as if their work was being neglected? I'd rather not participate on a site that just handed out 'it was really great' and so on, because, frankly, that's a waste of my time. Critiques, on the other hand, what if I enjoy them? What if I find critiques fun? What if people enjoy receiving critiques? If age is a factor in such a thing, I'm pretty sure that improving would be all part of writing, and critiques are the way to get there. Shitty forum like those (http://www.meez.com/community.dm?page=forum) you speak of don't help. In fact, all they do is delude the writer.

By the way, just because someone has an almighty green name, that doesn't give you the ability to knock them for it and call them power-crazed. They're there for a reason, not just for the entertainment of banning, deleting and modding. It's a writing forum, they've become such a thing for obeying the rules and not giving out bullshit.

Writing like this in
no way supports your point
and does not improve
skill or anything else.

And now I'm off-topic...

[jordanisonfire]

Ugh, this back-and-forth ranting is annoying me now. Will one of the Mods PLEASE just take action, other than giving warnings, cos they're clearly not working.

[Diocletian]

Why, do you dislike debate?

[Rouge]

Does anyone else want this closed?

I'll do it, if it's asked of me.

[jordanisonfire]

Why, do you dislike debate?

Nah, I enjoy it. Especially when I win. ;)

Edit: I'm not for its closing, so long as it actually gets back on-topic instead.

[Nyx]

Okay I think this topic is WAY out of hand right now. Im going to close it because what was supposed to be debated is done being debated and I don't think we're really going to get back on track.

BUT if anyone wants this open because they want to keep discussing whether age should or should not affect critiquing and wants to do so WITHOUT attacking YWO or its members then please feel free to PM me & I will re-open this thread.

[Shaun]

I'll jump in real quick, having not read everything since I find winnie to be incredibly irritating (which is why he or she was banned).

I don't think age matters except in how you interact with someone. There are mental differences between someone who is 21 and someone who is 12 and you can't always approach the latter the same as the former. You should still give the same kind of critique, but realizing that a writer has a different mental state is important in trying to make sure they understand that at 12 you're not expected to be the greatest writer ever.

But that's just what I think.