RapeTheDead wrote:
I can never jump into writing my review right away. I always let it swirl around in my head for a while, almost until I have to review it to get all the opinions and thoughts on the album out on paper. If I try jumping into a review directly after the first listen, even if I've already formulated a solid opinion on the album and have a good idea of what I'm going to say, I always end up drawing a blank. I don't really understand why, perhaps it's just that I know what to write but I don't know exactly how to say it.
Back during a couple of years ago, while my own style of writing was at the sure onset of gradual improvement, I experienced a slightly similar dilemma. In general, I formulated ideas and arguments quite easily, however, I lacked the array of vocabulary and techniques to properly, appropriately appropriate my ideas into phrases and paragraphs. Nevertheless, a remedy that I find feasible considering your situation is to begin reading classic literature if you have not already--yet, if you do spend an ample amount of time reading, then read much more challenging and abstract writing.
Doing so, will stimulate, both, your right and left brain hemispheres, i.e. gradually empowering your creative, artistic and accurate, concrete cerebral realms, respectively. As such, enveloping yourself among a trickling stream of words, phrases, and aphorisms (which numerous authors implemented throughout their writing(s)/musing(s) during the nineteenth-century and before) will (in time) progress your individual writing, hone your reading comprehension, and stimulate your overall brain to function at a much more advanced, accurate, and precise manner. In turn and over time, you will recognize that your compositional skills will have improved--your sentences will vary in depth, detail, length, and impact, your arsenal of techniques will have expanded (perhaps incorporating detailed, metaphorical comparisons, stark or subtle literary allusions, quirky syntactical structures, etc.), and most importantly, your process of thinking/train-of-thought will muse with sophisticated thinking arrangements, advanced vocabulary, and much more.
Simply said, that is generally how I began to improve my writing and overall style of speaking. However, I am
far from being able to express myself with a sense of ease, depth, and clarity--which is a task that I am currently undertaking. Yet, keep on pursuing your writing, and in time, your apt to naturally improve.
yentass wrote:
Slightly off topic - Naught, could you add a side note to the thread's title, something like "Review writing tips", to disclose the thread's purpose and attract the proper audiences? Despite liking the title, I was quite oblivious to it's content until I've checked it, I could have as easily not done so, and its a shame, since the thread could be very useful in my opinion.
I agree with your suggestion and as desired, I have included a bit of a brief description within the thread title. Thank you for the keen observation.
Empyreal wrote:
I write the reviews I would want to read. I start off with an introduction before kicking into some musical description, telling certain things that are good or bad about the album, or just what it makes me feel like. Sometimes I can't think of an introduction, so I just kind of jump in...either that or I make a really witty or scathing introduction by asking questions and posing metaphors to give a starting portrait of the album in question.
I like to end with a bang, finishing off with the most memorable sentences I can think of to either praise or destroy the album in question. I believe there is an art to doing this - remaining memorable long after the review is done with. I like to sum everything up with a laundry list of what was done well or poorly, and then finish off with some over-exaggerated jokes for a negative review, or a statement of why it is good for a positive review.
Sometimes my reviews are pretty short - usually they are, actually. But I always enjoy digging into a really long review. I like elaborating on things and going over different aspects in detail. I just don't always have the inspiration to do it.
I tend to enjoy reading through reviews that
I would personally desire to read, as you do Empyreal. Unfortunately, since I have a taste for writing that is dense, abstract, or perhaps metaphorical, my own writing follows in-step. I understand that this quirk could potentially detract readers from my writing, however, I am certain that there are those select crowd of readers who would enjoy inhaling attempts at complexity (or complexity, itself) while reading. Notwithstanding, beginning any piece of objective writing with a concrete assertion is always a tactical choice. It enables the reader to acquire a clear, no-strings-attached understanding of what the writer is attempting to convey, rather, than confusing the reader in a muddle of contradictory verbiage.
I tend to view the composing of a review as conducting a symphony. I aim at sullenly luring the reader in, snaring and enthralling him/her in a linguistic trance, while invoking my arguments and opinions all the while. I then, as how the climax of a symphony progresses and erupts (Richard Wagner's
Ride of the Valkyries springs to mind), begin to assert my arguments in a clear light through metaphors, alliterations, and the occasional cultural or literary allusion. However, this process is prone to failure if one neglects to pay careful and close observation to the most minuscule of details. Hence is why I try to limit that technique, as of late.
Writing that concludes with a memorable statement (witty, humorous, scathing, etc.) often leaves a favorable taste in my (and I am sure of several others') mouth. If one can constructs memorable phrases and insert them at the proper intervals throughout the writing, then they certainly possess an either unsung or apparent talent with the pen.
Lengthwise, it generally depends on the aim of the writing. Of course, for a graduate-thesis essay, one should write with a sense of clarity, cohesion, and unity, while organizing their arguments with note to detail, elaboration, and accuracy. For reviewing purposes, the length is not as important as it is to professional, scholarly writing, however, it is critical to a fair degree. The review should, at least, be long enough to properly assess the music as a whole, and explaining how the music sounds. If one can complete the mentioned tasks in two paragraphs, then all the better. However for those writers that either cannot or choose not, then the length becomes a lurking mandate that the writer must fulfill. I tend to leave the length of my reviews with, at most, five-to-seven paragraphs as I enjoy elaborating and progressing into the detail(s) of the music. The length depends on the time and effort that the reviewer wishes to spend on composing the given review.
Actually, I was musing over this thought the other day. Which writing techniques do you (from the point-of-view of a reader, mind you) enjoy reading? I tend to relish the moments when a clever wit is immersed throughout the writing. Wit tends to enliven the words that partake within the composition, while leaving a memorable impact on the reader. In addition, I also cherish skillfully-construed strings of alliterations, as it produces a unique, often-charming cadence to the writing as a whole. Again, this grants memorability to the writing as a whole.