Why Wattpad Reviews Fail

Reviewing in Bad Faith

A cursory scan of many Wattpad review shop blurbs will indicate that said reviewers see a problem with Wattpad's unwashed masses: there are desperate writers out there who need their uncut gem polished, and only a review shop can provide that service. By default, anything submitted to a Wattpad review shop is assumed to be in dire need of critique; while this does not mean no books ever receive praise, this is not these services' primary goal. Any errors found, no matter their importance (or validity, for that matter), must be fixed. This may sound like a good thing—what's the harm in fixing a bad work?—but all work, no matter how good, goes onto the surgical table to be dissected, and when a reviewer is looking hard enough at work that might even be considered publishable by a reasonable standard, they are bound to find something to dispute. What this system leaves little room for is disagreement, or alternate interpretations: the simple act of writing a few paragraphs or assigning a numerical rating gives advice import, and some reviewers even take offense if their opinions (helpfully phrased as judgments) are not taken.

What might these judgments include? To name a few common pieces of feedback: slow plot, long paragraphs, big words, show don't tell—sound familiar? These are all excellent things to keep in mind as one writes, or reviews, but what they need is context, something rarely levied on Wattpad. If F. Scott Fitzgerald were to have submitted the first chapter of The Great Gatsby to a review service on Wattpad, odds are he'd have received complaints about all those things. And that would be helpful, if Fitzgerald were writing for the young adult audience or perhaps something romantic between Nick and Gatsby—but he isn't, and that is a point which slides past many Wattpad reviewers, even if we were to look in the other direction (many an informal genre piece has been criticized for standards which might be better applied to Fitzgerald). Rather, Fitzgerald would be considered a dunce who somehow went through the entire effort of writing a novel without realizing these elementary writing principles—but not to worry, their friendly reviewer is here to help!

And this is exactly the problem with Wattpad reviewers reading in bad faith, without consideration for what the author might desire or what the text demands. Would The Great Gatsby have been improved if the seemingly needless exposition were trimmed from the beginning, if the vocabulary were simplified, if the plot were given a prod in the rear to hurry toward Tom's affair or Gatsby's courtship just a bit sooner? I would hesitate to take the advice of any amateur on Wattpad who claims to have discovered such an improvement. That sort of condescending feedback, questioning all the author seems to have done wrong without stopping to consider they might have done something right, helps nobody. It doesn't help the author, who will now have an existential crisis when viewing their manuscript, and if a review isn't helping the author improve their writing (to borrow a phrase from Fitzgerald, not the Platonic ideal of what the reviewer believes the writing to be, presumably something in the vein of Harry Potter meets Divergent), something is very wrong.

One might argue that reviewers on Wattpad are simply inexperienced: most are young, and few presumably are James Wood in disguise. All reviews are a matter of opinion, and if an author has such a seemingly thin skin to be wounded at remarks that "aren't understanding the work," aren't they the stuck-up ones? They really ought to be more understanding as they eviscerate their own writing in a desperate effort to comply with whoever last reviewed them. Something should appear fishy with this train of logic. If Thomas Keller served a dish from today's tasting menu at the French Laundry, let's say his quail with polenta, nasturtium shoots, and a chorizo emulsion, to a first-year culinary student who immediately decried it as complex and in need of reduction—how about fried chicken with gravy? Surely that tastes better? How come Thomas Keller never thought of that?—we would take said culinary student's words with a grain of salt. Yet by Wattpad logic, Thomas Keller could use a bit of remedial education, and any attempts at deflection would be considered pride run amok.

Inexperience is not a sign of weakness in any field. What is the point of practice if not to grow? But inexperience should come with a serving of humility, an understanding that to err is human and we all err more than we'd like to admit, and our hypothetical reviewer of The Great Gatsby might benefit to appreciate the writing and not resculpt it. That is not to say a reviewer is prohibited from disliking The Great Gatsby, but that this dislike should not be complemented by a half-hearted attempt at a vivisection. Wattpad would be a better place if this more delicate, tactful touch were applied more frequently, and you know what, I'm willing to bet we'd end up with better writers.