The Writeoff Association 937 members · 681 stories
Comments ( 10 )
  • Viewing 1 - 50 of 10
Foxy E
Group Contributor

I'm great at saying "I should".

"I should go for a bike ride." "I should start working out." "I should write more." "I should probably not go down that shady alleyway."

One of my biggest "I should's" is "As well as writing every day, I should probably start analysing writing if I want to get good."

As of this week, that "I should" is becoming an "I will".

I've rummaged through my bookcase and found my favourite books. I've bought a notebook, sharpened my pencils, and planned what I'm going to focus on improving.

. . . And I've realised that I don't know diddly-squat about analysing a text.

I realise that there are likely others in the same boat as me, so I think it would be beneficial to everyone to pool their knowledge and show off what they know. Not only will it equip us with tools to better ourselves as writers, but it will aid reviewers when they come to give feedback on writeoff entries.

So, with that in mind, I ask you: How do you go about analysing a text? and when you do, What do you look for?


We’ve had some excellent responses here, so I thought I’d index and summarise each of the analytical methods here. It’s still advisable to read through each person’s piece, as they discuss their method in much more detail; but for those who want a quick refresher on what each person said, look below.

Nekonyancer (4271138)
Be an active reader. Question why you find a piece of writing “good” or “bad” and what the author has done to make you feel this way. Break it down into three components – emotional, intellectual, and aesthetic – to help you understand.

Epicazeroth (4271150)
Know what you want to study before you go in. It will give your analysis a tighter focus and help prevent you from being overwhelmed.

FloydienSlip (4271154)
(This is a concise, bullet-point review of things to look out for. It doesn’t need summarising.) After asking yourself these questions about a text, ask yourself, “How can I improve this?”

HoofBitingActionOverload (4272095)
When you find something you like, ask, “Why do I like this?” then “What makes it work?”

Belligerent Sock (4272294)
Read multiple times – the first should always be for enjoyment and should help you get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses of the story.
Analyse using three levels of “zoom”. Look at WHAT and ask WHY and then ask HOW. When you break a piece of writing into fundamental techniques, you gain valuable tools which you can use to improve your own writing.

Idio Adustum (4272662 )
Ask yourself, “Who is the author writing for?” and “How did this choice of target audience impact their writing?” Being able to judge what will or won’t appeal to your audience is a valuable tool.

Swirlstar (4273019 )
Know what you want to learn before you delve in. Focus on one aspect at a time. Analyse a text based on its strengths (I.e. don’t analyse 50 Shades for the quality of its writing). Read other analyses.

Not a Hat (4273046 )
For a strong, broad analysis, read for theme, plot, and pacing.
Theme explores your emotional connection to the story and the issues it presents. It’s how you engage with the piece as a whole.
Plot explores the twists and turns of the story. The story should evolve naturally from point-to-point, following the flow of the theme.
Pacing is a mix of theme and plot. It explores how the author emphasizes the material to create effect.
Analyse in terms of these three categories to better understand the broad structure of the story.

Nekonyancer
Group Contributor

4271084

So, with that in mind, I ask you: How do you go about analysing a text? and when you do, What do you look for?

Well, when I proofread a fanfic for someone and I point out something that's bad, I have to then explain why it's bad, and what could be done to make it better. That's not always an easy question to answer, and often requires some deep thought, or even a night to sleep on. All my analysis comes from that starting point - why is it bad, why is it good?

Well, the basis for any measurement of good and bad is how much you like it. If you like it, it's good.

So then the question is "why do you like it?" Reasons for this fall under three categories of appeal - aesthetic, intellectual, and emotional.

Aesthetically good things are written with exactly the correct words to curl the lip of your mouth. It's all about detail, about choosing words like "demolished" over "ate," and about phrases that stick out in your mind simply because of how they're worded or positioned in the passage.

Intellectually good things make you think. Exchanges that make you stop to consider the implications behind each revealed bit of information. In addition to ingeniously woven plotlines, this includes things like symbols and metaphors. The intent of the author comes into play a lot here - after all, if the author took the time to describe a fire hose hanging on the wall in this scene where character A meets a hot slut, there must have been a reason for it. So then, why? Ruminations like these, while boring and inconsequential to some - (so what if Coalhouse, a black man trying to be successful in a white world, wears a black, white, and gray ensemble?), can often be very satisfying.

Emotionally good things bring teh feels. Uh, that's about it. I would have grouped this in with intellectually appealing things, but then I realized some fics are written poorly (aesthetic), written with little thought for complex plotlines or symbols (intellectual), but still bring feels. My Little Dashie, anyone? How about cupcakes? Horrific feels count too! In all fanfiction (some would argue in all of human culture), this tends to be the most important element, and if a fic fails to make you sympathize with the characters or bring out some sort of emotional response or investment in you, it's doing something wrong. Or at least, it's missing a crucial element for this particular audience, which will probably result in poor reviews. This category is also very gray in that many questions can be raised as to why something is emotionally appealing. Uh... I'm not gonna get into those.

One could call all this pointless explanation of things that don't need to be explained, but I find that organizing various threads of thought into something like this makes it easier to analyze, as one can more easily see the whole package of what a fic has to offer. While it's certainly not a necessity, I think analyzing from a perspective like the one I've outlined forces you to think more carefully and more comprehensively before you type a single word, resulting in better analysis and fewer instances where you forget crucial bits of information in the story.

Also, it is important to keep in mind that since this philosophy is built on the question, "Why is it good?", and good is an inherently subjective thing, all of analysis is thus subjective as well. This includes the intellectual things, since it's all about what makes you think. Some passages might inspire deep epiphanies in one person, and be dismissed nonchalantly by another, even though some might see this category of appeal as more objective than the other two. Thus, an analysis can never be "correct," only "generally agreed upon." This is very important to keep in mind as a proofreader, since other proofreaders may disagree with you, but it extends to all of analysis in general. No two pairs of eyes see things the same way, even if they're equally sharp.

Wtf why did I suddenly write a whole freaking essay i have stuff to do fml. Wait, it's not an essay unless I have a concluding paragraph. I won't write one - I'm not a nerd!

So uh, here's a TLDR instead. Analysis is about saying why you like something. Maybe something was worded well, maybe it made you think, maybe it made you feel. Always remember to get multiple opinions and stay open-minded because analysis is all about answering "why do you like it," and while everyone can produce a valid answer for that, it takes a collection of answers to even begin to tackle the question "why is it good?"

Wait a second... concluding paragraphs basically ARE tldrs O_o;

*mind blown*

I usually analyze myself first to figure out what I need to work on. Then I look for that in the text. For description, I look for vivid, interesting words; but not purple prose. But really, what you're looking for (and to an extant, how you look) will he dependent on what you think you need. If you need help with characterization, then obviously you wouldn't look for descriptions like I described above.

FloydienSlip
Group Contributor

- Does the story have a good plot (not necessarily an original one)?
- Are the characters fleshed out (not just having a single defining trait. Do they seem realistic)? Are they dynamic or static?
- Are the story's themes consistent?
- Are there any points in the story that don't make sense or give the impression that the author didn't know what to write?
- Optional: Do I enjoy the story (note that you don't need to like a story to appreciate that it's well-written)?
- For fan fiction, are the characters in character?
- For fan fiction, does the story have good grammar and spelling (since published books have editors that catch those mistakes)?

There are other story-specific and genre-specific points, but, in general, this is what I use. Then you have to ask, "How could the issues in the story be improved?"

HoofBitingActionOverload
Group Contributor

If I find something in a story I like--particular line, scene, character, whatever--I ask, 'Why do I like this and what makes it good?' and then figure that out. Same for things I don't like. Writing notes and comparing notes with others helps. Writing notes also gives you something to look back over while editing your own stories.

Analysis doesn't have to be complicated, and all I care about is what makes some stories good and other stories bad.

Belligerent Sock
Group Contributor

4271084

I've found that there's no real "right" way to go about learning things from a work of fiction, but let me lay out my method and see if it works for you. The way I do it, I seek the fundamentals of a piece of writing, and to do that, I need multiple readings.

My first reading is done "blind", and its sole aim is to have fun. I read the work without prior conceptions, without any biases, and without the aim of "learning" from it. I immerse myself in it and let it tell its story as it is meant to. I don't necessarily jot down any notes, but I nonetheless remember what qualities I find attractive about the piece or what I find repulsive. These can be broad in scope or minute: overall plot construction, pacing, and such are "broad" topics, whereas individual scenes and their effects are "minute". If something really draws me in and elicits a strong response, I remember it. If something turns me off and I stop reading altogether, I definitely remember it. This is the easy part; the highs and lows of a story are what stick with you, after all.

Once the initial reading is complete, the work becomes a reference tool. I think of what worked and what didn't, and start homing in on why it worked or didn't. This is where I let the analytical part of my brain take over, and let it combat the fog of vagueness surrounding my feelings about the story. I ask questions of the text: "Why does the action in this scene flow so smoothly and clearly?" "Why does this description produce such a clear and concise image in my head?" Once I have answers to those, I ask how the text accomplishes those feats, and this is a key distinction to make; I've found that trying to ponder things without breaking it down fundamentally in this manner does not produce precise enough conclusions.

Think of it as multiple levels of zoom. The "what" tells you what parts to focus on, the "why" zooms in one level further, focusing on the root causes, and the "how" is the most intimate level, where you reach the fundamental building blocks. As an example, say I'm thinking of one of Raymond Chandler's works. I recall that there was a really good bit of character description in it (the what). I ask why, and find that's because it used a really good metaphor ("It was a blonde. A blonde to make a bishop kick a hole in a stained glass window"). And then I ponder how said metaphor was constructed, which produces another answer: "By using the established figure of a clergyman, and having him perform sacrilege in response to this character's appearance, it implies a certain tempting quality about her, which implies both physical beauty and a seductive manner, all in the space of a few words."

Once I have a detailed answer like that, it becomes possible for me to internalize those inner workings and utilize them myself. Over time, I've gradually assembled a reference library of little tricks and methods. By breaking it down to the fundamentals, I see just how the author constructed his work, and with those in mind, I find they can be applied in myriad ways and in myriad situations. I might be describing a character in a work of my own one day and start thinking, "Hmm, I could use an impactful metaphor here to drive home to the reader everything about this character in a single breath." Internalize and apply.

Again, this is just my method, and all I know is that it works for me. As with any writing trick, experiment and see if it works for you.

4271084 I have not "written" much for people, but what few I have has taught me a few things, the biggest thing to look for is "Who am I writing this for?". This question will change how you write, as it leads you to write differently. If your target audience enjoys humor, you will write in more jokes and scenes meant to cause a laugh. If your audience likes 'the feels' than you write up a tragedy or something to stir emotion, and so on. Therefore you write to meet your main audience, then fill in the gaps of story to meet other audiences. This is why fan fictions are labeled as a comedy, slice of life, or sad, so people can read what they want, enjoying a read that is written specifically for them.

This also plays in proof reading or critiquing as you need to make sure you fit in that target audience, or you can think like that audience. For instance, I am not a fan of "sad" stories or fics, yet I am a sucker for a good romance. So I would read a "sad romance" story and applaud the romance aspect, because I loved it! But I would chew them out for making the sad parts too intense or whatever excuse came to mind that made me dislike the story. A good proof reader and critic can look at a story and ask, "What do these people want?"

Being able to do this is a hard task as you want to only praise what you want to, because you like it, and the rest made you uncomfortable and such feelings, but to look at something you don't like and see what other people can see, I believe, is an impressive talent that many lack. To do it to your own work is a challenge, but one that has to be tackled one day as it makes writing much easier. later on.

Anyways, that's my opinion. Just remember, it's better to listen than to speak.

4271084 First thing you need to know is what you're planning to analyse in the text. Words? Structure? Symbolism? Part of a text, or the story in full? You should focus on one aspect at a time, because taking all of those things at once is going to be mighty confusing.

Also, different texts have different strengths (like I wouldn't analyse actual word placement/sentence structure in Twilight (the book), but I would probably think its plot was worth analysing). It might be worth saying what texts you're planning to analyse so people can give more specific pointers.

It's worth it to look at some story analyses by other people as well. A good story analysis should have readers learn something even if they've never read the story before.

A few short-ish analyses I've thought were pretty good (all search & view/download-able from Google):

"The Moral Urgency of Anna Karenina" , Gary Saul Morson (writing in Commentary magazine). Analyses the text, symbolism, and sentence structure in Tolstoy's novel, Anna Karenina. If you only have a little time, you should at least read a few sections of this, especially "IV. What We Do Not See", "VI. Open Camouflage" and "IX. Self-Deception". Excellent ideas on how to use sentence structure to advance your story, and how to construct believable characters.
"The Kernel of Truth" , Janet Malcolm (writing in the Guardian newspaper). Analyses the symbolism behind Chekhov's short story, "The Lady With the Pet Dog"
Anton Chekhov's "The Lady With the Pet Dog", Dana Gioia. A more straightforward review of the same Chekhov story compared with the above. In fact, just read the story; it's considered one of the best ever written.
"Rome: Sex & Freedom" , Peter Brown (writing in the New York Review of Books [SFW except to the really puritanical]). Analyses the themes of a non-fiction book, "From Shame to Sin", by Kyle Harper.

Not_A_Hat
Group Contributor

Currently, my analysis focuses on things I'm trying to learn myself. Theme: how a story makes you feel, and plot: what actually happens in a story.

I analyze theme by considering how I feel about a story, why I feel that way, and how it matches what the author seems to be trying to convey. Fiction read for entertainment is, IMHO, about evoking an emotional experience. If I have strong feelings, that means I'm connecting well, if I feel 'meh', that means I'm connecting poorly. After I have some idea what I'm feeling, I simply go back and search through the story for what made me feel a certain way, and think about why.

I analyze plot by considering what happens in a story and how it's communicated. If there's a lot going on in a few words and I'm not confused, I feel that's good, if there's not much going on or I am confused, I feel that's bad. I break down plot by considering 'turning points'; things written that change what's happening. These can usually be summed up in much less words than is used to convey them. If the turning points proceed logically from previous events, and take the story in a direction that fits the theme, I can follow and I'm not confused; if the turning points seem random, or take the story in directions that seem contrary to the tone the author's trying to set, I have a hard time following it.

Pacing is part of both. Things that are important should be emphasized, things that aren't should be summarized. If the author spends too much time on things that don't serve the theme or plot, I get bored. If they skip past things essential to the theme or plot, I get confused.

I look for evocative theme, interesting plot, and good pacing in a story. If all three of these are used well together, a story is engaging and draws the reader in. Used poorly, they confuse the reader, give mood whiplash, and create dissonance.

I'll freely admit I'm not very scientific about my analysis. I just sort of think about things until I feel I've got a grasp, and then go from there. I don't have a method I use, except reading and pay attention to my reactions, then going back over those reactions to compare them with what the author is trying to convey and how I feel that could be conveyed more effectively.

  • Viewing 1 - 50 of 10