Some guidelines for critiquing non-fiction writing

Good non-fiction writing depends on two things: accurate information and clear writing. Here are some questions to ask yourself when you are critiquing non-fiction writing.

Accurate information

Essentially this comes down to this question: Do you believe the information presented in the article? These might help you determine that:

1.     Are authoritative sources quoted? Is their expertise or credentials given? If the writer is the expert, what are her credentials (academic background, experience in the field, etc.)?

2.     Is there more than one source to confirm accuracy – especially if the source is anonymous?

3.     If anonymous, is the reason for that given?

4.     If material is used from other documents (studies, other articles, books, public documents, etc.) is there enough information given that you could check the accuracy? Not that you will, but it shows the writer’s confidence in her sources and information.

5.     If the information comes from direct observation by the writer is it specific and detailed? Are there reference points (descriptions, locations, times) that help verify that the author observed this event, place or person? Is all the information consistent?

6.     Is the information germane to the topic of the writing, not just “piled up” to impress or snow you? Does the information fit together, not conflict internally? Or, are the contradictions explained?

7.     Does the article give different points of view or at least acknowledge that there are other points of view? (This may not be true for a personal essay or a polemic, an argumentative, piece of writing.)

8.     Does the information ultimately make you believe that the article is accurate as a whole and in its smallest parts? Remember Zinsser’s words here: “If the reader catches (the writer) in just one bogus statement that (the writer) is trying to pass off as true, everything (the writer) writes thereafter will be suspect.”

Clear writing

1.     Are you interested/intrigued from the very first sentence – or at least the first two or three paragraphs?

2.     Is the organization easy to follow from beginning to end?

3.     Does the article have a purpose? Is that purpose clear before you lose interest?

4.     Are you ever left stranded between sentences, paragraphs or even words? Does the writer switch time, place or person referred to without taking you with her? In other words, are there clear transitions?

5.     Are these transitions appropriate to the subject and the tone of the article? (Scientific or technical writing might employ numbered paragraphs or other “signposts,” but in a personal essay, for example, the transitions should be unobtrusive.)

6.     Are the sentences themselves easy to follow? (Subject-verb-object is easiest.)

7.     Is there a variety of sentence structure and length?

8.     Is the writing flabby? Does it stick to the point or go off on unrelated tangents? Are verbs mostly active? Are there qualifying adverbs and adjectives that rob the article of force and clear statement? Are the strongest words at the beginnings and ends of sentences? (What words stand out to you as you read?)

9.     Are specific words used and generalities and jargon avoided?

10. Can you “see” what the writer is describing? Are images original? Again, are they specific things, not generalities?

11. If metaphors are used, are they original and not clichéd? (The no cliché rule applies to all aspects of clear writing.)

12. Is the tone appropriate for the topic?

13. Is there unity of pronoun, tense and tone?

14. Can you recognize the writer’s voice or is it buried in listed details, clunky sentences, etc.?

15. Is there a pace or rhythm to the writing that carries you along? Or do you find yourself stopping after every sentence, or, worse yet, rereading the previous sentence to decipher it?

16. Has the writer built up suspense or drama, dialogue or a well-constructed argument to carry you along?

17. Are there gems along the way that you will remember? These could be something you didn’t know before, an insight, a catchy phrase, a bit of humor, etc.

18. In the end, is the purpose of the article realized or did the writer fail to support her argument (opinion or writing with a point of view) or not give enough information or detail to make her premise believable?

19. Do you feel rewarded at the ending of the story? Does the ending surprise you? Summarize the story for you? Make all that has gone before clear? It’s not just the last paragraph that offers that reward. When you finish reading the article, do you sit back and think to yourself, “I’m glad I took the time to read that?” Or is the thought in your mind, “What a waste of time!”?