Editing vs. Commenting vs. Reviewing

What follows is only one reviewer's opinions. Take them or leave them as you see fit.

To me, a great review should accomplish three things:
1. Let the writer know what was enjoyable and exceptional about their piece.
2. Offer suggestions for improvement with specific notes when needed.
3. (And this is the most important) Be encouraging. I'm a writer as well as a reviewer and I always try and stop and consider how I would feel if I received the review I'm sending.

I know, it sounds simple on the surface, but there are always details underlying the key structure. Things that can be done to make sure the three steps above all happen.

I think every one of us loves the review that says "This is a perfect piece, I saw no flaws, write on". Even if all of that is true, how are we going to replicate this flawless masterpiece if we're not told what made it perfect? However, if you get a review with more than just the most minor of suggestions for change, your initial reaction should be one of indignation; no matter how valid the point is. If you're not emotionally attached to your creations, you'll have trouble breathing life into them. After you've let the corrections simmer though, reconsider and implement only what you think will enhance your writing.

Everyone who writes has their own opinion on what makes a good review, why they review the way they do, or how you should review. Okay, that last bit is a little misleading; very few people on WDC will tell you how to review unless you need to follow a specific format for a group that you belong to. Even then, I've noticed many of the members of these forums take 'liberties' with these formats.

I thought about my own philosophies on the subject, and in the process decided to put them into words.  Let's start with 'the rules'. I am not a stickler for most grammar. I would use semi-colons excessively if I thought I could get away with it, and I confuse periods, commas, and natural pauses in speech. Adverbs don't faze me unless they're really excessive, and passive voice is a part of author's voice (usually). However, I did walk away with some lessons from school, and consistent divergence from these will make me stop and walk away from a story.

Excessive misspelled or misplaced words. If I see "I went ot the store, and there wuz while I wuz there this girl she and wuz rilly hot." I will stop reading.

Tense. I'm not talking about 'strained' versus 'straining' if one flows better than the other. I'm talking about alternating between past and present tense, a lot, sometimes within the same sentence. For instance: I sit in the coffee shop and sipped my drink as I watched the people outside the window and I wish I was somewhere else.

Dialogue. Any and every time a new person speaks, start a new paragraph. Avoid doing otherwise at all costs. "Did you hear," Mary said. "Johnnie is dating Sally now." "I know, can you believe it?" Beth replied. "Not even. How uncool is that?" "No doubt. I so thought Johnnie was going to ask me out." See how it gets confusing?

By now, if any of this applies to you, you may be saying, "but I asked for a review, not an edit. I want to know how you feel about the piece." To me, they're the same thing. Maybe you feel that I should just say 'there were spelling errors' or 'I saw some grammar issues' and let you read through and correct them yourself. I'm making an assumption here though (yeah, I know what they say about people who assume things): that you read your piece before you posted it, and these slipped by. It happens all the time, and not because you're a bad writer or editor. I believe it's because as an author, we read what we expected to write, not what we did write. So I point these errors out not to belittle, insult, or degrade you, but because I know I appreciate the same.

I do not want to change your voice, but I will also make sentence rewrite suggestions. My sense of timing is different from yours, and these, unless they're suggested for grammatical reasons, are probably the least important part of my comments.

Content. That's the real point of a review, right? I think so. That's why I saved this for last - to make sure it didn't get lost and buried in the rest of my mad ramblings. Writing is about conveying an image, whether emotional or physical. When I review, I want you to know what you've conveyed to me. I might not repeat all of my reactions, especially if your piece was straight forward and to the point. I will, however, point out those things that left the deepest impression on me. If you evoked a strong emotion, I will tell you how. If one of your characters led me to believe something about them, not through your telling narration, but through one of their own, subtle, showing actions, I will share this with you. In turn, I hope you're able to use that feedback to recognize either that you got across the point you meant, or that you need a little reworking.

If your plot is an intricate series of tightly woven webs, I may also tell you either where I see things heading, or what questions I have. This doesn't mean you need to go back and answer my questions at the point I had them. On the contrary, if you're revealing this information later in the story it means you've done your job as a writer in compelling me to read further to find answers. I ask questions not for you to reply and answer them, but for you to know I expect your story to answer them at some point.

That, to me, is the core of a good review. Components of each of the above are the means to advancement, progression, and improvement. And no matter how good you are, there is always room for improvement.