In judging a
national contest, I hope to offer writers and editors specific
suggestions so they can improve their craft. In exchange I'll get a
modest honorarium. But I'll receive a bigger benefit the entrants may
not realize.
As I'm forced to
analyze individual components, I see things I'd miss if I were just
reading. As I search for what worked and what didn't, I also learn
about the craft. I'm reminded why certain techniques shine and others
fail. I find examples worth following.
I can't simply give
a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. My score comes from weighing five
elements. For each article, I have to pay attention to:
1) The idea (timeliness, appeal)
2) Effective development of idea
3) Writing style
4) Use of imagery/emotion
5) Originality of treatment
I'm also expected
to make comments – offering examples for all five of where and why
they succeeded or missed the mark. That means I need to pore over
each piece.
If you're reading
this, I hope you participate in a critique group. As you do, please
take full advantage of the opportunity.
Yes, the other
writers can learn from your comments. But that's the tip of the
iceberg.
As for me, I hope
the next fifty-three entries prove as valuable as the first.

