When Reviewing, Brevity is the Soul of Wit
17 Oct
On the Young Writers Society, there is much focus on the length of the review rather than inherent quality. I’m not talking about new members who write long reviews in the hope of getting more points. Rather, I’m talking about old members who go on and on in their review.
What is the goal of reviewing? It is not to prop yourself up on a higher pedestal than the writer, much as some seem to believe. It is also not about tearing apart people. When you tear someone apart, you are not helping them whatsoever.
The goal of reviewing is to help. At the Young Writers Society, I don’t know of any active member who has a published book to their name. So in that regard, everyone on YWS is an amateur. As amateurs, our aim should be to help.
In pursuit of that goal, long reviews are not helpful. If your review is longer than the short story, something is wrong. With poetry, it’s different. Yet I routinely see reviews that are five times longer than the poem, which is ridiculous.
Keep your reviews concise. They don’t need to be necessarily short, but make sure you’re not droning on. Your review should concentrate on whether you liked the piece, and if you didn’t, why not. Critiquing the grammar isn’t really helpful (especially since I routinely see reviewers get grammar corrections wrong).
Lastly, keep in mind that the end goal is to encourage people to keep writing. No matter how good your review is, it’s not going to help the writer much. Rather, what helps the writer is simply “practice, practice, practice.” So if your review discourages the writer, then you have failed.


