Reviewing

[JamesSavik]

Robb, the guy that runs CRVboy has asked me to be a reviewer for stories that he posts at his site.

Reviewing fiction is a highly subjective exercise. Not every "good" story is going to appeal to everyone. I wanted to be as fair and objective as possible. I designed a "report card" of sorts for submitted material.

This is a explanation of the "report card" and I will then provide two sample reviews of a couple of stories that I like.

Is this fair? Am I missing anything?

=================================

Elements:

Plot: 30 points

------

Originality: 10

Is the story original?

Pace: 5

Does the plot move well or does it plod along?

Development: 5

Is the plot skillfully developed?

Conflict: 5

Is the drama or conflict well or realistically represented?

Craft: 5

How skillfully is the plot woven together.

Character(s): 30

---------------

Development: 10

Degree of skill in which the characters are developed.

Dynamics: 10

How well the author handles character interaction.

Presentation: 10

Are the character well represented and consistent.

Style: 30

-----------

Craftmanship: 10

How good is the writers skill?

Langauge: 10

Is the langauge used well and effectively.

Clarity: 10

Is the story clear and concise.

Intangables: 10

This rating gives the reviewer some leeway for personal like or dislike for the story.

-----------------------------

Total Possible Points: 100

============================

[JamesSavik]

Story: Tappings

Author: KIT

Posted: Nifty, CRVBoy

=================================

Elements:

Plot: 28/30 points

------

Originality: 10/10

Pace: 4/5

Development: 5/5

Conflict: 4/5

Craft: 5/5

Character(s): 28/30

---------------

Development: 10/10

Dynamics: 8/10

Presentation: 10/10

Style: 26/30

-----------

Craftmanship: 10/10

Langauge: 9/10

Clarity: 7/10

Intangables: 9/10

-----------------------------

Possible/Total Points: 91/100

============================

Comments: Tappings is a unique and interesting story with engaging characters and an intriguing mystery.

[JamesSavik]

Story: The Quarry

Author: Driver

Posted: http://storiesbydriver.netfirms.com/

=================================

Elements:

Plot: 27/30 points

------

Originality: 8/10

Pace: 5/5

Development: 5/5

Conflict: 4/5

Craft: 5/5

Character(s): 28/30

---------------

Development: 10/10

Dynamics: 9/10

Presentation: 9/10

Style: 27/30

-----------

Craftmanship: 9/10

Langauge: 9/10

Clarity: 9/10

Intangables: 10/10

-----------------------------

Possible/Total Points: 92/100

============================

Comments: The Quarry is classic Driver: an exploration of dynamic characters that grow through conflict and crisis. This story is a triumph of love and community over difficult and disturbing tricks and traps that so many fall into during life. It is difficult to tell exactly who is the hero of this story: Dave Devino or Ken.

If Driver is not the King of this genre, he is most certianly royalty.

[Tanuki Racoon]

Your system is flawed. I've read both stories. They're both good. However, I have yet to read anything online that can even remotely hold a candle to Driver's works. You've got Tapping at 91 and Quarry at 92. I firmly believe any system in which Driver doesn't get at least 10% higher than every other online story (and most offline) stories is inherently flawed.

So There.

-- wbms

[Graeme]

The flaw is not in the system, but in the judging. If you look, a lot of the scores are at the maximum. As any judge will tell you, that means that things can't be better than that.

The top mark should occur very sparingly. Otherwise you do not give yourself scope for indicating that something else is even better in that area.

I would suggest something along the lines of 4 being acceptable, 8 being good, and 10 being perfect. Work within that scale of things, and you might seem more variation in the markings.

Graeme

[JamesSavik]

I picked two stories (that I like) which were very different but I don't feel too generous giving either one of them an "A".

They are both very good stories but WBS is correct- Driver needs his own scale. While Tappings is great fun, it's not really comperable to the Quarry.

My rating system focuses on mechanics and less about value judgements or the importance or worth of a particular story. My aim is to be objective as possible with stories that I might not care for but are well done.

Graeme's point is well taken too. I gave them both a lot of 5's and 10's in key areas BUT, I would have given New Brother a lot of them too.

I picked winners to review. Believe me, I could have found some stinkers but why 'diss anybody unnecessairly. That's just not good manners.

Reviews of submitted material are viewed privately where I am apt to give less worthy works their appropriate marks.

[Tanuki Racoon]

Believe me, I could have found some stinkers but why 'diss anybody unnecessairly. That's just not good manners.

Reviews of submitted material are viewed privately where I am apt to give less worthy works their appropriate marks.

OK, I'll let you live this once :)

-- wbms

[The Pecman]

This is a explanation of the "report card" and I will then provide two sample reviews of a couple of stories that I like. Is this fair? Am I missing anything?  

I don't think that art, certainly not fiction, can boil down to a bunch of bullet points and numbers.

To me, I think you gotta judge from your gut. Is the story good or not? Do the characters involve the reader or not? Does the story surprise you and hold on to your interest?

Much more than that is just a buncha BS, in my opinion. Sure, you can start delving into technique and grammar and so on, but I can overlook many of these elements if everything else makes me want to read more.

And I agree with WBMS elsewhere that the top rating should be used very sparingly.