Chronological method is effective
in that it’s easy for the reader to follow, but it always seems a little
amateurish, at least to me. One of the disadvantages in the method is that it
encourages clutter – “and then the hostesss showed us to our table.” That is,
you fall into storytelling mode and include bits that really don’t tell useful information about the restaurant. Better reviewers usually focus on the
points they want to make and don’t present them chronologically because that
can waste valuable space and fog the emphasis of the review.
Of course, once chronological
order is abandoned, it can result in an “elusive” structure. That is, we aren’t
quite sure why the information is presented in the order it’s presented. Some
reviews do seem to be exercises in “nut graf” structure. There’s the lead that
grabs us by the nose, and then comes the nut graf making one key point or several key points,
which are developed in the order presented in the nut graf. And some reviews do have the feel of the old
inverted pyramid structure, as if the points of criticism were presented in
order of descending importance. And in other instances, the structure seems
purely associational, which does give such reviews a kind of casual,
conversational quality.
Bottom line: Understand what sort
of structure you are using or – having “jumped into” the writing and having, without planning, come up with a structure that works – be able to explain why you think it
works.
No comments:
Post a Comment