The Craft of Writing: Reviews

[rmthunter]

What makes a good review? What elements have to be included and what do we want to see that's going to make a review stand a little taller than others?

I tend to pull in historical/biographical information on the artist/author, a discussion of context, a reaction to the particular work under discussion, and comments on formal aspects as displayed in the work.

And sometimes I get a little self-indulgent, especially with works I'm passionate about, and only talk about those things that interest me. And sometimes I don't even realize it.

What do you try to include when you're writing one, and what are you looking for when you're reading one?

Bob

[anderclayton]

*laugh* Ummm... You talking reviews on Epinions?

Basically I look for two things on there. It is a bit more complicated than that really but these are the basic things:

1. Define the topic.

You can go into great detail about whatever as long as you give me an idea of what the topic you are reviewing is about. Failing that I have no basis for entry into the subject reviewed.

2. Expound on an opinion of yours about the topic.

I suppose that you could expand "opinion" to include any number of things and even increase it to "opinions" instead but basically I simply want to know what you think about the topic. Personal opinions, not just the basic stuff. It could be as simple as the fact that you liked it and why you liked it but you could spin the topic any way that you want.


Of course whether I actually like the review depends on how you develop these two things but that is something else entirely

Ander

[rmthunter]

Epinions or anywhere else. I also write for two other sites, which are edited, and I find that the emphases are slightly different. Epinions tends to be less formal, and since it's a consumer-oriented site, personal reaction is emphasized.

Rambles and Green Man Review tend to be a little more formal (although there is a range), and for my own reviews, I try to keep subjectivity to a minimum (given that a review has a strong subjective element to begin with)-- I'm after the best critical analysis I can come up with, which seems to work well there -- or at least, I've gotten some very good responses.

How much information do you want on the topic? I got sniped at recently for not noting which poems were included in a collected works volume, and it's partly my fault: the collection was the authorized canon (which I did mention), and I figured that was such basic information that it didn't need to be included. Apparently, I was mistaken.

Bob

[anderclayton]

anderclayton said

Of course whether I actually like the review depends on how you develop these two things but that is something else entirely

Hmmm... On the other hand, this seems to be more what you are looking for, eh?



Honestly I don't really care about the content of the review as long as it keeps me interested. You could go off on how your cousin Matilda was the best boy grip on Spaceballs and as long as you cover your opinion on the film, certain aspects of the film--enough to give me an idea of what it was about and the style of film--and entertained me, I'd like the review.

I suppose that there are things that I do look for in general terms from the reviewer and possibly in the review but it is all relative. I'd say that there are several sorts of reviews.
I guess I could try to list some of them...

1. Info-heavy. This sort of review goes into the background about the product. It might go into the history of a film, go into tech details about a camera, talk about the history of a band, stuff like that. Sure you generally indicate your opinion with your enthusiasm but you might not go out and say it.

2. Personal. This sort of review might go into your whole experience, what you felt when it, how happy your kids were when they came out of the theater/used the product, what your feelings were about the film/used the gadget, stuff like that.

3. Opinion. This is sorta like the personal one but goes into a bit more detail about your opinion about the technical aspects of whatever.
3a. Capsule opinion. This is where you don't have to go into any detail about the product, just give your opinion. It is the sort of review that you would find in the paper that might only be a sentence or two.

4. Essay. Sorta like the opinion one but goes down the technical road about aspects. Generally these are less personal opinion than trying to prove a point. Kinda a bit of a spin on the technical review (or maybe the tech review is a spin on this)

5. Combined. Where you combine the opinion with the technical one.


This sort of stuff is more off the top of my head than anything else but I've been kinda thinking about it off and on too. What do y'all think?

Ander

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

Epinions or anywhere else. I also write for two other sites, which are edited, and I find that the emphases are slightly different. Epinions tends to be less formal, and since it's a consumer-oriented site, personal reaction is emphasized.

One trick about Epinions when you consider it against nearly any other forum for writing is that when you post on Epinions, the assumption is that you aren't an expert on the topic in question so you should probably go into it somewhat to prove you know what you are talking about (if that is what you are going for in a review).
Another assumption would be that the reader doesn't know about the product in question (the audience is anyone/the guy off the street) so you should catch the reader up. [In writing terms the "audience" is anyone]

With most other forums you can narrow the audience down a little and assume some established credentials just by having been selected to write in the forum.

Ander

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

How much information do you want on the topic? I got sniped at recently for not noting which poems were included in a collected works volume, and it's partly my fault: the collection was the authorized canon (which I did mention), and I figured that was such basic information that it didn't need to be included. Apparently, I was mistaken.

Bob

*grin*

This depends on my own motivation behind reading the review. If I were looking for a scholarly one, I'd want the tone to be a certain way and you could probably assume I'd read the book in question, tried the product (I'd probably prefer a comparison sort of review than anything else).

If I were looking for a 'should I try this product' one though, I'd probably be looking for certain things in the review that I might not in the scholarly sort of one.

Personally for the most part I couldn't care less about lists and you could assume that I have access to lists of things (ingredients, technical specs, chapters...). I kinda like main actors named in a movie review but I very much prefer the names to be shifted into the body of the review as opposed to being listed in a big list (along the same lines as how I'm not really a big fan of books with huge dramatis personae lists at the start because the cast of the story is so stupidly huge that you can't keep track of names without looking them up in a database).

Ander

[anderclayton]

Hmmm... Note that the things that I listed were just off the top of my head and I probably missed a few (even *lots*) and a couple might be combined...



Sigh. Basically what I'm saying is that there are all sorts of review types and how you write depends on what you are aiming to accomplish by writing the review. You could go through different reviews and you could point out the audience, purpose, voice, style etc. with each review and each would be subtly (or outrageously) different.

Another category might be "humor..." On the other hand, that might simply be a sort of style

Ander

[anderclayton]

Also note that I might be something of an anomoly in the review reading side of things. I've been reading movie reviews on Epinions since I started and have pretty much read any and all reviews on there. They vary pretty widely so I've gotten a crapton of different writing angles of reviews on there and I enjoy most of them for what they are. Granted I've been a lot more selective when I've had limited access/time but there have been times where I'd read everything in the category.

Ander

[rmthunter]

anderclayton said

With most other forums you can narrow the audience down a little and assume some established credentials just by having been selected to write in the forum.

Ander

You can't count on that. I'm now Special Acquisitions for classical music at Green Man Review, which is an area that they've only decided to start building up, so, in addition to finding people who will give us review copies of CDs, I'm seemingly one of the main reviewers in the area. I do a lot of historical/critical stuff in those, because I can't count on the audience having the background -- their music categories are mainly folk/trad. (Ditto for Asian music, which I seem to have done a lot of over the past few months. It's fine -- I'm learning a lot -- but it certainly affects the kind of piece I'm writing.) Reviews of fantasy books are a lot easier on that site, because that's a major category for them and the audience is ready-made and pretty sophisticated.

Hey, Ander -- how'd you like to start a thread on identifying your audience?

Bob

[rmthunter]

anderclayton said

Sigh. Basically what I'm saying is that there are all sorts of review types and how you write depends on what you are aiming to accomplish by writing the review. You could go through different reviews and you could point out the audience, purpose, voice, style etc. with each review and each would be subtly (or outrageously) different.

Ander

So maybe what we should be doing is trying to figure out the basic elements of any review: what do you need to have to make it successful? (Such as: try to tell people early on exactly which book/CD/toaster oven you're talking about.)

Bob

[anderclayton]

Sorry. I'm kinda retreading things a little because I'm not totally sure whether what I'm saying is exactly valid. Like I said, I'm talking off the top of my head (and typing about as fast as I can) so it tends to be less than completely organized.

Ander

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

So maybe what we should be doing is trying to figure out the basic elements of any review: what do you need to have to make it successful? (Such as: try to tell people early on exactly which book/CD/toaster oven you're talking about.)

Bob

I told you the two basic elements:p (fact and opinion essentially)

There are little tricks to doing it though. With films for example you should probably tell people at least something about the plot, name actors/actresses or say if they are unknown but other than that it is more or up to your (or perhaps your reader's) personal taste. I'd also suggest establishing in the reader's mind the tone of the film. Frequently this can be done in a brief plot synopsis (sigh--my spelling is going downhill as it gets later) but it can also be done with commentary.

I could give you examples where the review is essentially all plot with commentary snuggled into it and the reverse where the plot isn't spelled out in so many words but you get the idea of what it is about by reading the commentary. Hmmmm... Actually I'm not sure if I could give you examples but you could perhaps envision it? In general I consider establishing the tone of the film to be more important than plot (I could give examples of this)

Film reviews are kinda oddball though because you can base them soley on the content as opposed to getting a bit technical. You are reviewing something that is in between a product and a service. It is a product because it is something (it has content) but a service because it is something that you can't really hold. With DVD's and other nontheater sorts of film mediums you might go for different things...

Ummmmm... When you are talking noncontent related product reviews though, functionality of the product might substitute for tone. Features might be another necessary thing.

Ander

[rmthunter]

anderclayton said

I told you the two basic elements:p (fact and opinion essentially)

Ander

Yeah -- this is turning into "Late Night with Ander and Bob."

Except for me it's "The Morning Show."

[anderclayton]

Geeze man, its pretty much the morning show with me too. You are getting into "Good Morning America" territory over there though:p

Ander

[anderclayton]

This is just stuff that has been interesting me and that I've been batting around in my head for a bit. I've debated off and on writing some sort of review writing article on Epinions for... Well... I guess a few years now so the "bit" that I've been batting it around is fairly considerable.

I'm *not* trying to be definitive (or exclusive) with the "two elements" statement but it is essentially what I look for when reading Epinions reviews. Am I off base with that or just spinning my wheels? Feel free to tell me that my theory is a crackpot one

I guess a lot of what is necessary in a review does key in on who your audience is for whom you are writing. Different audiences will want different things both in the info you are providing, the method in which you provide it, and ummmmm some third point that I can't think of right now [Sigh I'm not sure I'm up to "Good Morning Ander and Bob"]

Ander

[rmthunter]

Well, now you have a place to write your review-writing article. Be warned, however -- I'm a tough critic. (On the other hand, I'm much more interested in talking about what I think is good than in dishing what I think is not so good.)

I think the "two elements" thing is fine, but I'm wondering if maybe it's not just a good beginning. So, we'll work on it, with some input, I hope, from all those sensible people who are fast asleep right now.

Oh, Lord! Cat break.

Bob

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

You can't count on that. I'm now Special Acquisitions for classical music at Green Man Review, which is an area that they've only decided to start building up, so, in addition to finding people who will give us review copies of CDs, I'm seemingly one of the main reviewers in the area. I do a lot of historical/critical stuff in those, because I can't count on the audience having the background -- their music categories are mainly folk/trad. (Ditto for Asian music, which I seem to have done a lot of over the past few months. It's fine -- I'm learning a lot -- but it certainly affects the kind of piece I'm writing.) Reviews of fantasy books are a lot easier on that site, because that's a major category for them and the audience is ready-made and pretty sophisticated.

Hey, Ander -- how'd you like to start a thread on identifying your audience?

Bob

See but even there you do have an audience that you can assume has some basic knowledge of music. Even though it might not be the same sort of music you are reveiwing, at least they aren't totally in the dark.

I could definitely find you some examples of the educating sorts of reviews (Don Krider writes them on Epinions, Chris Bickel used to do some, Mike Bracken does sometimes). You can also shift the info into the rest of the review but that can take some doing sometimes.

I'm not really sure how to do the other thread. I started one but I'm not sure whether that is the sort of thread you are looking to discuss. I could cut and paste some of this thread into that one or...???

Ander

[rmthunter]

Do whatever makes sense to you. The rest of us will deal with it. And take as much time as you need to make yourself comfortable with it. All things considered, there's a good chance EA will still be here when you're ready.

[rmthunter]

anderclayton said

Geeze man, its pretty much the morning show with me too. You are getting into "Good Morning America" territory over there though:p

Ander

Yeah -- one of the joys of having misplaced my biological clock.

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

Well, now you have a place to write your review-writing article. Be warned, however -- I'm a tough critic. (On the other hand, I'm much more interested in talking about what I think is good than in dishing what I think is not so good.)

I think the "two elements" thing is fine, but I'm wondering if maybe it's not just a good beginning. So, we'll work on it, with some input, I hope, from all those sensible people who are fast asleep right now.

Oh, Lord! Cat break.

Bob

Heh I wasn't saying that the theory wasn't more complex than that. The trick though is that there are so many different approaches to review writing that once you get very far past the basic stuff you are getting into a stylistic sort of thing.

Also a problem with my theory is that the place that I've read the most reviews from has been Epinions so I'm perhaps not so sophisticated with the theory as it warrants.

The theory is a bit like my theory for dancing (on an only semi-related topic)

No prob on the tough critic thing though because I prefer tough to easy.

Ander

[anderclayton]

rmthunter said

Do whatever makes sense to you. The rest of us will deal with it. And take as much time as you need to make yourself comfortable with it. All things considered, there's a good chance EA will still be here when you're ready.

At this point in the conversation I begin to regret having posted so many seperate posts because I'm not sure which one you're addressing with this. Great advice in general I guess (kinda along the lines of a fortune cookie )but I've the feeling your post is directed at one of mine in particular.

Ander