[Thursday, Oct. 21, 2004][13:00]

Thursday, Oct. 21, 2004
review: suta
review: suta.

first impression: goodness. an european otaku. this should prove to be intresting.

layout: [ twenty-six of forty-nine points] the picture's a little large. even on broadband it takes a few moments to load. this might be a function of your image host, or lag on our behalf. we like the blurry, dreamlike quality of the image and it also cleverly disguises some minor jpeg distortion, and scaling issues. good job on that. the smaller picture ruins the effect, though. its crispness in contrast to the other image doesn't sit too well with us. while your links all seem to work, there is a significant greivance we have with your layout: whenever we put the cursor over the left hand column, it goes black. fix this, and we'll re-evaluate your layout score.

content: [fifty-eight of eighty-seven points] we started at the beginning, and worked our way in. you seem to have a cryptic style that stems either from translation effects, while this could be taxing, we are finding that you are in love, but it is unrequited. you are either young, or so painfully in love with this person that the situation has become your world. and it has scarred you. we're going to lean towards young. it appears that you're learning these things for the first time.

we enjoy your use of metaphor. it elevates your teen-angst above most others. the way you switch languages occaisionally also adds to the color of your diary, and being that we have a rudimentary understanding of french and german (as well as access to a babelfish), the significance is not lost on us.

you include a cast, but never really write about them. actually, reading further, you don't write about them at all. your diary also seems to suffer from a few organizational issues that stem from lack of planning. not that this is wholly a bad thing, just makes your diary seem hapazard. perhaps once you get a few more entries under your belt things will become more coherent.

frequency: [twelve of twenty-two points] erratic. a sort of binge/purge way of updating.

bonus: [three points] for instilling hope that the younger generation is not completely lost.

judgement: lamentably, your cryptic style runs the risk of alienating your readership. in operatic terms, you are writing these beautiful arias, but without exposition to let the audience know what is going on, they are left in the dark, and have no choice but to try to glean meaning from your metaphor. this is dangerous. someone might come away thinking something different than what is intended, because of their interpretation of things.

write more about your cast. try to tell us more about what is going on, rather than how you feel about what is going on.

[nintey-nine of one hundred fifty-eight points]
[sixty-two percent]
[mister biased]

[previous][next]