I can only speak to the editors of the Long and Short of It Reviews because that's what I'm familiar with.
I was curious about any reviews of a book that I had just finished reading. I loved it and felt it was one of the best books in the series, so far. I can't link to it right now because it has to go through its own editing process before it can get published at LASR. One thing my editors will not see are some of these that I snagged from Goodreads.
"...is an incredible adiction to the" Addiction or Addition - not sure which but an editor could have helped tremendously.
"It sparks me to want to re-read the earlier books in the series" - alright firefly. An editor might have suggested sparked interest in re-reading, or It inspired me to re-read..., or It motivated me to want to re-read... but 'sparked me' just doesn't work unless you're a fire cracker.
One review gave critical plot points away, explaining about the hero's background IN DETAIL; information I only found out when I read the book myself - as it should be. Not only that, but the so-called review showed a huge chunk of dialogue and then continued to give blow by blow accounts of what happened later. I had to stop reading it. I was going to blow a gasket. Telling readers what the story is all about, what happens and explains in intricate detail why something is the way it is has a name. SPOILERS!! They are not reviews!
Ok....I digress. Let's see what else I found.
Oh, The Pout. Yes, a reviewer pouted. "This book would have been so much better if there were more of (previous characters)....." The book wasn't about those other characters. This book was about one man, one hero, and his journey to redemption. Because this particular book didn't have "those" characters, the reviewer trashed it. HELLO!!! ::face palm:: Review and rate the book on what IS, not what you wish it could be. You didn't write the book, the author did. Her world, her rules, her vision. And then the "reviewer" ended with, " complete review to come." Really! So, this person took the time to trash the book because it didn't have the characters she/he'd prefer to see and left a CLIFF HANGER? Interesting technique.
Ah, I was wondering when I'd find a review with this element. I know the hero was as anti-hero as a man could get. He has a history of being the villain everyone loved to hate - with good reason.
I left Goodreads with thankfulness and switched to random clicking and Lo!
"... he is also a complete asshole." That's basically true but profanity really has no place on a 'professional' review site. Even if it's said throughout the book, profanity really should not show up in a review. Remember, and I'm paraphrasing, 'lady on the outside, vixen on the inside'. I think 'bastard' can be used because it is, in fact, a noun and a well used one during those Regency times.
Yes, editors work magic. They fix the flow of a review with a simple tweak of a word here or there. Their jobs are made much easier if I do my homework and proof my words. Did I mix up a metaphor? Did I type in reslut again instead of result? Did I put there instead of their? Spell check won't ever catch that because there and their are real words. This is when the human brain is superior to any computer program. I can't rely on auto-correct either because sometimes what the computer suggests is from outer space. I am the first and last to proof before I submit. Because I've had the honor of assisting with editing, I know what a thankless, eye-straining, headache inducing job it can be. But the polished product is a miracle. We all benefit from our editor's efforts and the result is a higher quality review. I'm honored to have such wonderful people scrutinizing my work. They make me look darned good.
Hats off to our editors!!!!
**VBG** After reading all of this, you are probably wondering and demanding I reveal the name of the book I was basing this post on. I'll instead share with you a review that I thought was awesome. Even better than mine and it's not out yet. I loved the insight this reviewer put into it. I enjoyed how she skirts the cliff of spoilers, giving enough to tease and make me want to read the book all over again. I love giving credit to a great review and this one deserves it. Click HERE to see the answer revealed.
As always, if you have any feedback regarding this post, I'd enjoy the chat.
Thanks for stopping by!
Showing posts with label link. Show all posts
Showing posts with label link. Show all posts
Monday, July 9, 2012
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Keep The Negative in the Closet
Happy New Year! It's been awhile but reviewing goes on. Thank goodness for that.
In previous posts, I've mentioned how a review is subjective. It's an opinion and everyone has different tastes or expectations. That has not changed.
What needs to change and what reviewers need to be aware of, are the kinds of personal opinions that should not be in a review.
I'm talking about making the decision for a reader that a book isn't worth the money because of its size. I've mentioned before that a reviewer should not rate a review lower just because the formatting is wonky on their electronic reading device - Kindle or NOOK. (Pinned Down to the Mat)
Today, I'm adding another "AVOID THIS".
Please, do not make negative or disparaging comments about a book because of its size. Or because it was a part of a series and you 'felt lost', or because you checked the publisher website and felt the price was too much for such a short story. A tale can be told well in as little as twenty pages. Does that mean that people should not buy it because of its length and miss out on a well crafted tale? No.
A reviewer's role is to comment on the content of a book. What is inside that makes it the story it is. The characters, plot, dialogue, setting, personal interaction between protagonist and antagonist are all topics that readers expect to see discussed. Do not anticipate that a reader is going to be disappointed at the length or the price of the book. Do not let personal feelings distract you from the contents. Don't presume that you can speak for all readers.
Speaking of speaking, be alert to tales from across the pond. What do I mean?: "spelled" is "spelt", color is "colour", a 'dustman' is a garbage collector, tire is "tyre", check is "cheque", and humor is "humour".
If your book takes place in England or Australia, or more likely, the publisher is based there, then words spelled in that manner will pepper the story. Do NOT take points off the rating for these. They are not evidence of bad editing or typographical errors. They are geographically and culturally correct. If the British spelling bothers you bad enough to want to drag down the rating, return it. Or better yet, learn to enjoy the unique flavor reading books from other countries can provide and expand your trivia for Jeopardy.
Another thing that I've noticed - reviews being written about a type or genre never before attempted. On the whole, that is a very good thing. It shows the reviewer is expanding their reading base. The downside is a review riddled with negatives because the parameters of this new sub-genre are not only foreign to them, but perhaps outside their comfort zone. They inadvertently try to paint it with the same brush as the comfortable "old shoe" genres they already read. By doing that, of course, it won't rate high - hence a negative review.
If such is the case, don't review it. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a review site that lets reviewers pick and chose the books they’ll read, return it.
I have a suggestion for you. Instead, before choosing a book in a new kind of story technique or subject, investigate how the genre reads before attempting to review it. Find out what is normal and typical for style. Read other reviews to get an idea of what it's all about. You'd be doing yourself and readers of your reviews a huge favor.
Another aspect to keep in mind - a reader may very well have been following a series or a reader may be buying from a site that specializes in short stories of fifty pages or less because that fits their needs. You know what that means, right? That they find treasure in something you want to trash. You see, a reader is as variable as the books that get published. Their reading needs are fluid so some days a short eighteen page erotic romp between a were-wolf, a were-mink and the farmer's widow is just right. The next week that same reader will crave a high-brow murder mystery with emotional elements even Oprah would swoon over.
A reviewer needs to be objectively subjective. If a reviewer is concerned that they might accidentally request a book that is part of a series and they usually avoid those because they don't like feeling left out, check the publisher website before asking for the title. Quite a few list all the books in a series. Some author's sites do the same.
Additionally, there are many books out there that are part of a series and yet are complete unto themselves. But don't assume. If a reviewer does end up with a soap opera type tale where you really do need to understand what went on before, but there was enough to entertain you and keep you because it was that good - then resist making it a negative. Just give a reader a heads-up. Like this:
"This book totally kept my interest and it had a lot going for it. I had fun and I enjoyed the snappy dialogue between the hero and heroine. However, I need to give readers a heads up that this isn't a standalone read. I could tell there were pieces missing and I also realized that my reading experience could have been richer had I read some of the previous books in the series. As it is, it's definitely worth checking out. It has certainly whetted my appetite for more and I can't wait to find out!"
This example lets a reader know that it is enjoyable while giving voice to something positive. It also gives the information that it's a part of a series and while not a standalone, that the reviewer was able to enjoy the story as is. For first time readers, they'll understand what the book offers and what it lacks. In no way does it allow a reviewer's disappointment to color the review with a negative flavor. And remember, for followers of the series, they are going to want to know what works in the story as it is. They know what’s going on, so please avoid trashing it just because you didn’t.
Taking this one step further – I agree that a really super awesome book will not leave a reader feeling like they missed one of the main courses in their five course meal. I also know that books in a series can and do give you a complete tale while leaving cookie crumbs about the overall story arc. Be aware that there are publishers that excel at and promote short stories in a serial manner, much like the old T.V. cliff hangers. Once all the installments are revealed, they’ll then publish a “collection” which condenses them all into one giant volume.
Know your publishers.
If that is the style they are known for and you’re not a serial reader, then avoid reviewing the installments. Wait for the collection. Or read tales from a different publisher. But don’t paint a story in a negative light for things outside of the actual contents in a book (book length, cost, unfamiliar genre).
There are enough reasons to rate a book lower, from plot holes an elephant can fall through, lazy editing (let's call the hero different names), alpha men who wail and squeal and waffle, heroines who aren’t assertive but abrasive and unlikable (you want to make her go down those squeaky stairs into that dark musty cellar with the creepy scratchy noises when the lightbulb pops), and dialogue that doesn’t match the characters’ personalities (A regal queen talking like a punk rocker on steroids), just to name a few.
Please remember: review the book, the story, the part that people read. Everything else is up to them.
In previous posts, I've mentioned how a review is subjective. It's an opinion and everyone has different tastes or expectations. That has not changed.
What needs to change and what reviewers need to be aware of, are the kinds of personal opinions that should not be in a review.
I'm talking about making the decision for a reader that a book isn't worth the money because of its size. I've mentioned before that a reviewer should not rate a review lower just because the formatting is wonky on their electronic reading device - Kindle or NOOK. (Pinned Down to the Mat)
Today, I'm adding another "AVOID THIS".
Please, do not make negative or disparaging comments about a book because of its size. Or because it was a part of a series and you 'felt lost', or because you checked the publisher website and felt the price was too much for such a short story. A tale can be told well in as little as twenty pages. Does that mean that people should not buy it because of its length and miss out on a well crafted tale? No.
A reviewer's role is to comment on the content of a book. What is inside that makes it the story it is. The characters, plot, dialogue, setting, personal interaction between protagonist and antagonist are all topics that readers expect to see discussed. Do not anticipate that a reader is going to be disappointed at the length or the price of the book. Do not let personal feelings distract you from the contents. Don't presume that you can speak for all readers.
Speaking of speaking, be alert to tales from across the pond. What do I mean?: "spelled" is "spelt", color is "colour", a 'dustman' is a garbage collector, tire is "tyre", check is "cheque", and humor is "humour".
If your book takes place in England or Australia, or more likely, the publisher is based there, then words spelled in that manner will pepper the story. Do NOT take points off the rating for these. They are not evidence of bad editing or typographical errors. They are geographically and culturally correct. If the British spelling bothers you bad enough to want to drag down the rating, return it. Or better yet, learn to enjoy the unique flavor reading books from other countries can provide and expand your trivia for Jeopardy.
Another thing that I've noticed - reviews being written about a type or genre never before attempted. On the whole, that is a very good thing. It shows the reviewer is expanding their reading base. The downside is a review riddled with negatives because the parameters of this new sub-genre are not only foreign to them, but perhaps outside their comfort zone. They inadvertently try to paint it with the same brush as the comfortable "old shoe" genres they already read. By doing that, of course, it won't rate high - hence a negative review.
If such is the case, don't review it. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a review site that lets reviewers pick and chose the books they’ll read, return it.
I have a suggestion for you. Instead, before choosing a book in a new kind of story technique or subject, investigate how the genre reads before attempting to review it. Find out what is normal and typical for style. Read other reviews to get an idea of what it's all about. You'd be doing yourself and readers of your reviews a huge favor.
Another aspect to keep in mind - a reader may very well have been following a series or a reader may be buying from a site that specializes in short stories of fifty pages or less because that fits their needs. You know what that means, right? That they find treasure in something you want to trash. You see, a reader is as variable as the books that get published. Their reading needs are fluid so some days a short eighteen page erotic romp between a were-wolf, a were-mink and the farmer's widow is just right. The next week that same reader will crave a high-brow murder mystery with emotional elements even Oprah would swoon over.
A reviewer needs to be objectively subjective. If a reviewer is concerned that they might accidentally request a book that is part of a series and they usually avoid those because they don't like feeling left out, check the publisher website before asking for the title. Quite a few list all the books in a series. Some author's sites do the same.
Additionally, there are many books out there that are part of a series and yet are complete unto themselves. But don't assume. If a reviewer does end up with a soap opera type tale where you really do need to understand what went on before, but there was enough to entertain you and keep you because it was that good - then resist making it a negative. Just give a reader a heads-up. Like this:
"This book totally kept my interest and it had a lot going for it. I had fun and I enjoyed the snappy dialogue between the hero and heroine. However, I need to give readers a heads up that this isn't a standalone read. I could tell there were pieces missing and I also realized that my reading experience could have been richer had I read some of the previous books in the series. As it is, it's definitely worth checking out. It has certainly whetted my appetite for more and I can't wait to find out!"
This example lets a reader know that it is enjoyable while giving voice to something positive. It also gives the information that it's a part of a series and while not a standalone, that the reviewer was able to enjoy the story as is. For first time readers, they'll understand what the book offers and what it lacks. In no way does it allow a reviewer's disappointment to color the review with a negative flavor. And remember, for followers of the series, they are going to want to know what works in the story as it is. They know what’s going on, so please avoid trashing it just because you didn’t.
Taking this one step further – I agree that a really super awesome book will not leave a reader feeling like they missed one of the main courses in their five course meal. I also know that books in a series can and do give you a complete tale while leaving cookie crumbs about the overall story arc. Be aware that there are publishers that excel at and promote short stories in a serial manner, much like the old T.V. cliff hangers. Once all the installments are revealed, they’ll then publish a “collection” which condenses them all into one giant volume.
Know your publishers.
If that is the style they are known for and you’re not a serial reader, then avoid reviewing the installments. Wait for the collection. Or read tales from a different publisher. But don’t paint a story in a negative light for things outside of the actual contents in a book (book length, cost, unfamiliar genre).
There are enough reasons to rate a book lower, from plot holes an elephant can fall through, lazy editing (let's call the hero different names), alpha men who wail and squeal and waffle, heroines who aren’t assertive but abrasive and unlikable (you want to make her go down those squeaky stairs into that dark musty cellar with the creepy scratchy noises when the lightbulb pops), and dialogue that doesn’t match the characters’ personalities (A regal queen talking like a punk rocker on steroids), just to name a few.
Please remember: review the book, the story, the part that people read. Everything else is up to them.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Me, Myself & I - Three's a Crowd
What in the world does the post title have with reviewing?
Let me digress for a moment. George Orwell in 1946 wrote an eloquent treatise on the English Language
** ii) Never us a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.**
I've included a link for you to enjoy at your leisure. What is there to enjoy? I found it humorous that he calls the word ROMANTIC a meaningless word. Not that I agree. lol
But, why have I included this link to Mr. Orwell's writing? Because of example #(iii).
Again, I ask you, "What is a review?"
The answer I'm looking for is, "An opinion."
Right.
So, when a reviewer is writing their review, sharing their opinion, would it stand to reason that the phrase, "In my opinion" is redundant? Isn't the whole review your opinion? Think about that.
The following may seem trivial and for many reviewers it's not even on their radar. It ties into the previous point.
A reader knows, for example, that Xeranthemum is writing the review and I'm writing my opinion about the book so anything included are my thoughts, viewpoints, rationalities, justifications, feelings and observations.
Why then would I use "When I as a reader ..." or "I myself..." ? I'm already writing as me, wouldn't the reader know that?
Can someone explain to me why using those terms might be acceptable? Is there another way to express them that wouldn't be redundant? Any suggestions?
Let me digress for a moment. George Orwell in 1946 wrote an eloquent treatise on the English Language
** ii) Never us a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.**
I've included a link for you to enjoy at your leisure. What is there to enjoy? I found it humorous that he calls the word ROMANTIC a meaningless word. Not that I agree. lol
But, why have I included this link to Mr. Orwell's writing? Because of example #(iii).
Again, I ask you, "What is a review?"
The answer I'm looking for is, "An opinion."
Right.
So, when a reviewer is writing their review, sharing their opinion, would it stand to reason that the phrase, "In my opinion" is redundant? Isn't the whole review your opinion? Think about that.
The following may seem trivial and for many reviewers it's not even on their radar. It ties into the previous point.
A reader knows, for example, that Xeranthemum is writing the review and I'm writing my opinion about the book so anything included are my thoughts, viewpoints, rationalities, justifications, feelings and observations.
Why then would I use "When I as a reader ..." or "I myself..." ? I'm already writing as me, wouldn't the reader know that?
Can someone explain to me why using those terms might be acceptable? Is there another way to express them that wouldn't be redundant? Any suggestions?
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Pinned Down to the Mat
In this case Format issues.
I have a NOOK. I love my NOOK. I enjoy reading on my handy dandy electronic reader. One thing I never gave a thought to is how a review could possibly be affected by the very venue the book is read in.
This past week, I've been searching for review angles and I found something that was never on my radar.
Here's the link: BookBuzzr
Have you ever given a lower rating to a book because of formatting issues on your electronic reader? From the sounds of this post, it's something that reviewers maybe need to turn a blind eye to. What do you think? Ever experience this issue?
I know that my NOOK has had problems with a few downloaded books and I've overlooked it. Imagine my surprise to find out that it bothers some reviewers so much, they mention it in the review.
I won't be one of them. I think it might be a good idea if other reviewers roll with it too.
What do you think?
I have a NOOK. I love my NOOK. I enjoy reading on my handy dandy electronic reader. One thing I never gave a thought to is how a review could possibly be affected by the very venue the book is read in.
This past week, I've been searching for review angles and I found something that was never on my radar.
Here's the link: BookBuzzr
Have you ever given a lower rating to a book because of formatting issues on your electronic reader? From the sounds of this post, it's something that reviewers maybe need to turn a blind eye to. What do you think? Ever experience this issue?
I know that my NOOK has had problems with a few downloaded books and I've overlooked it. Imagine my surprise to find out that it bothers some reviewers so much, they mention it in the review.
I won't be one of them. I think it might be a good idea if other reviewers roll with it too.
What do you think?
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Another Helpful Link
I liked this one.
Yes, I continued my search. What I find truly wondrous is that a lot of the stances I've taken regarding writing reviews are being validated.
Sometimes I worry about being seen as pushing my opinions about how a review should be done whereas there might be a different viewpoint out there. Then I come across a site like this one and I get all warm and fuzzy. I'm on the right track. I'm steering my readers in the right direction and by virtue, I am ensuring that I continue to write quality reviews myself.
What did I find this time? It's actually titled Writing Bad Book Reviews.
That made me laugh. The content however made me sit up and take notice. Writing Bad-Book Reviews By Amy Brozio-Andrews. The one difference that I need to point out regards the site I review for.
LASR/WC does NOT chose the books for the reviewer. Reviewers chose their own so the quandary of trying to review a book in a genre they would normally stay away from isn't an issue. Also, the author mentions a "brief synopsis". At LASR/WC the blurb is posted so a synopsis in the body of the review is not needed nor wanted.
I laughed at the part where she said "...trees cried around the world..." I agree that snark should not be a part of a review. Yes, I know that there are review sites out there that do that and are popular, but as a rule it's best to avoid it.
OK, you've clicked and read the linked site. Did you find any of the information useful? Any questions? Anything you didn't agree with?
Like always, I'd love to hear from you.
Yes, I continued my search. What I find truly wondrous is that a lot of the stances I've taken regarding writing reviews are being validated.
Sometimes I worry about being seen as pushing my opinions about how a review should be done whereas there might be a different viewpoint out there. Then I come across a site like this one and I get all warm and fuzzy. I'm on the right track. I'm steering my readers in the right direction and by virtue, I am ensuring that I continue to write quality reviews myself.
What did I find this time? It's actually titled Writing Bad Book Reviews.
That made me laugh. The content however made me sit up and take notice. Writing Bad-Book Reviews By Amy Brozio-Andrews. The one difference that I need to point out regards the site I review for.
LASR/WC does NOT chose the books for the reviewer. Reviewers chose their own so the quandary of trying to review a book in a genre they would normally stay away from isn't an issue. Also, the author mentions a "brief synopsis". At LASR/WC the blurb is posted so a synopsis in the body of the review is not needed nor wanted.
I laughed at the part where she said "...trees cried around the world..." I agree that snark should not be a part of a review. Yes, I know that there are review sites out there that do that and are popular, but as a rule it's best to avoid it.
OK, you've clicked and read the linked site. Did you find any of the information useful? Any questions? Anything you didn't agree with?
Like always, I'd love to hear from you.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Another Opinion
Sometimes I look. Sometimes I don't.
And from both ways, I find things to share.
I did find a post that references writing reviews. I want to be fair and share whatever I find to help others. I'm posting this link because I think there is a valid point. That being said:
Enjoy a post on writing reviews by Adrienne Wilder
My reaction?
I don't know much about dogs or dog judging and I think I got a little lost in all of that but in a nutshell, I think she was trying to say that one of the things books should be rated on is their adherence to their genre. If a Regency has 21st century verbage or ideals, and because of the strict rules regarding writing in that period, the review's ratings are going to reflect that immediately.
I think that's what she said.
What do you think?
And from both ways, I find things to share.
I did find a post that references writing reviews. I want to be fair and share whatever I find to help others. I'm posting this link because I think there is a valid point. That being said:
Enjoy a post on writing reviews by Adrienne Wilder
My reaction?
I don't know much about dogs or dog judging and I think I got a little lost in all of that but in a nutshell, I think she was trying to say that one of the things books should be rated on is their adherence to their genre. If a Regency has 21st century verbage or ideals, and because of the strict rules regarding writing in that period, the review's ratings are going to reflect that immediately.
I think that's what she said.
What do you think?
Saturday, October 9, 2010
You Tell Me
To paraphrase Elizabeth Barrett Browning's "How Do I Love Thee? (Sonnet 43)
I instead say:
How do I NOT love thee? Let me count the ways.
I want you to see two reviews of a book that I not only enjoyed but did a review of.
Review of Seduced By The Wolf Option One
and
Review of Seduced By The Wolf Option Two
If you've read any of my previous posts, then you realize that I have a pet peeve about a synopsis posing as a review. Last month I posted a link to a review and talked about what it should have included to make it better.
This month I want to do a comparison between two reviews about the same book and let you decide which is a better review. Which gives you more information that would be beneficial to a potential reader? Which sounds more like conversation versus a documentary? Which one would more likely sell you on reading the book or at least checking it out further?
You tell me. What works, what doesn't. Yes, I'm putting myself out there but I'm all about improving what I do. Every reviewer should want to improve her/his skill and feedback, especially if you don't have access to a reviews editor, can be an important tool.
So go ahead. You tell me. I'm all ears.
I instead say:
How do I NOT love thee? Let me count the ways.
I want you to see two reviews of a book that I not only enjoyed but did a review of.
Review of Seduced By The Wolf Option One
and
Review of Seduced By The Wolf Option Two
If you've read any of my previous posts, then you realize that I have a pet peeve about a synopsis posing as a review. Last month I posted a link to a review and talked about what it should have included to make it better.
This month I want to do a comparison between two reviews about the same book and let you decide which is a better review. Which gives you more information that would be beneficial to a potential reader? Which sounds more like conversation versus a documentary? Which one would more likely sell you on reading the book or at least checking it out further?
You tell me. What works, what doesn't. Yes, I'm putting myself out there but I'm all about improving what I do. Every reviewer should want to improve her/his skill and feedback, especially if you don't have access to a reviews editor, can be an important tool.
So go ahead. You tell me. I'm all ears.
Monday, August 30, 2010
The Context of Content
The English language is a funny thing. There are so many words that sound the same yet have polar opposite meanings. We even have words that are spelled the same way but how they are used in a sentence or paragraph means they are pronounced differently and mean different things. Talk about confusing!
For reviewers whose English is not their primary language, that can be daunting and quite a challenge. Kudos to them because I'm only a one language person. Even so, writing in the English language can still cause moments of mayhem for those who have used it all their lives. So grammar and spelling issues affect everyone no matter the expertise. Thank goodness for dictionaries in paper and online. But they do fall short sometimes. They can't catch every word because our language is fluid and evolving all the time with advancements in technology and discoveries in nature.
The basics remain the same however and as reviewers we should be conversant in them or at least I believe we should be. That's why I love the Internet - so much information at our fingertips.
I mentioned the use of Spell Check in a previous post and how important it is. But I'm going to explore it further here because there are other issues besides spelling that can make an editor of reviews want to stick his/her head in a vat of chocolate to escape the insanity.
Words out of context. Like "She defiantly agreed" Or "What she feels takes presidents over anything else". Those words are spelled correctly so Spell Checker is going to give it a green light.
Definitely and precedence are the words they SHOULD have been and it's easy to see how it can happen. However, if a reviewer has a propensity to repeat the same thing over and over again, that's just not nice. If it's a matter of habit, I believe it takes making the correction over twenty times to break the cycle and I think it's worth the doing. Refusing to learn or self-correct after repeated editing requests is a red-flag to an editor. What do you think it says?
We are on a learning curve all of our lives because each day brings us experiences we learn from. The same can be said for writing. Authors get better at their craft over time because they learn from their mistakes and editing suggestions. Why shouldn't reviewers??
I found this nifty online gadget that might help with that context thing.
Or if grammar poses questions no one can answer, this site seems to offer a variety of options: Grammar Tools
I tried out the Spell Check Plus and it actually highlighted the part where it made no sense because the word wasn't used in context. It doesn't offer options to correct it but it can alert a reviewer to its misuse. And even this site isn't perfect. It caught the president but blew by defiant. Yeah, it's a conundrum but still, this and others like it are the kind of tools a reviewer needs to have in his/her repertoire if they have a hard time remembering from review to review.
If you enjoy reviewing, isn't it worth doing well? Knowing your favorite author may be reading your review, don't you want to put your best foot forward? An editor can help, sure, but not all review sites have editors. So arm yourself with the tools you need to do the job right then you can hold up your head with pride in a job well done.
For reviewers whose English is not their primary language, that can be daunting and quite a challenge. Kudos to them because I'm only a one language person. Even so, writing in the English language can still cause moments of mayhem for those who have used it all their lives. So grammar and spelling issues affect everyone no matter the expertise. Thank goodness for dictionaries in paper and online. But they do fall short sometimes. They can't catch every word because our language is fluid and evolving all the time with advancements in technology and discoveries in nature.
The basics remain the same however and as reviewers we should be conversant in them or at least I believe we should be. That's why I love the Internet - so much information at our fingertips.
I mentioned the use of Spell Check in a previous post and how important it is. But I'm going to explore it further here because there are other issues besides spelling that can make an editor of reviews want to stick his/her head in a vat of chocolate to escape the insanity.
Words out of context. Like "She defiantly agreed" Or "What she feels takes presidents over anything else". Those words are spelled correctly so Spell Checker is going to give it a green light.
Definitely and precedence are the words they SHOULD have been and it's easy to see how it can happen. However, if a reviewer has a propensity to repeat the same thing over and over again, that's just not nice. If it's a matter of habit, I believe it takes making the correction over twenty times to break the cycle and I think it's worth the doing. Refusing to learn or self-correct after repeated editing requests is a red-flag to an editor. What do you think it says?
We are on a learning curve all of our lives because each day brings us experiences we learn from. The same can be said for writing. Authors get better at their craft over time because they learn from their mistakes and editing suggestions. Why shouldn't reviewers??
I found this nifty online gadget that might help with that context thing.
CheckPlus
Or if grammar poses questions no one can answer, this site seems to offer a variety of options: Grammar Tools
I tried out the Spell Check Plus and it actually highlighted the part where it made no sense because the word wasn't used in context. It doesn't offer options to correct it but it can alert a reviewer to its misuse. And even this site isn't perfect. It caught the president but blew by defiant. Yeah, it's a conundrum but still, this and others like it are the kind of tools a reviewer needs to have in his/her repertoire if they have a hard time remembering from review to review.
If you enjoy reviewing, isn't it worth doing well? Knowing your favorite author may be reading your review, don't you want to put your best foot forward? An editor can help, sure, but not all review sites have editors. So arm yourself with the tools you need to do the job right then you can hold up your head with pride in a job well done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)