![]() |
Post Reply - Review Etiquette and Rationale |
Post Reply |
Message |
Topic - Review Etiquette and Rationale Posted: 28 May 2012 at 12:39pm By Diogenes |
This may turn into more of a survey than a blog, but...
Here at MMA, reviews are strongly encouraged. There are guidelines, but generally the rules and regulations for reviews are more lenient than those of other websites, and everyone with an opinion is allowed to share it. This is great for a general audience and it's very user-friendly, but letting everyone do their own thing will inevitably raise questions about one's review process, writing style, and so on. Basically, it's tough not making comparisons and assumptions when you see a 100-word review and then a 1000-word review of the same album; however, I think it's safe to say we all have our own rhyme and reason for writing the way we do, and I think it would be cool to share some of it, both to get different perspectives and to get to know each other a little better. So I ask you: what's your reviewing style and process? What's your logic behind writing reviews the way you do? Me, I love writing. I always have and I always will. It's something that I do when I'm bored, spending hours on end just plugging away at whatever's on my mind, but I don't take it very seriously; I've been a very informal writer since I was a kid (too many comic books, I guess), and at almost every grade level, I've had points taken off on my papers because they weren't written in a "professional" manner. This is something I found ridiculous and frustrating, and I finally stopped writing on my own for a while because it was no longer fun. I felt as if my creativity was being squashed. When I found MMA, I figured I would try my hand at reviewing; I love music and the site didn't seem to have restrictions on how to write, so why not? I quickly found that it was something I really enjoyed. I could write about whatever the hell I wanted, however the hell I wanted, and be making a contribution somehow. I would just keep writing, and writing, and writing, without much of an idea about what exactly should have been written. The other problem with this was that I would go through long droughts of just not having any inspiration, since how I wrote reviews drew so heavily on whether I was in the mood to ramble or not. Lately, I've tried to make my reviews more concise; it doesn't come as naturally to me, but it's a hell of a lot easier to read, and I feel that I can be a more productive reviewer (although I'll never be on Jonas or Kim's level when it comes to quantity). Still, I never want to force myself into writing something I'm not interested in writing, because then it might as well not even be my work. I wish I could say that I have a specific review process, but I don't. It's really something that depends on how many listens it takes me to "get" and album. Oftentimes I will begin a review, get hung up on how to write something, and then I won't touch it again for a week or so. That really sucks! What about you? What are your thoughts on reviewing? Pet peeves, interests, changes in style, etc. I'd really love to get everyone's take on this. Post whatever you feel! Edited by Diogenes - 28 May 2012 at 12:39pm |