I wonder how you define what a good story or book is. Especially, I want to know if your definition changed when you went from just reader to reader and writer. I want to know because I don't have that experience. I started enjoying books at the same time I started wanting to write so my view is probably a bit different. I never read books unless I  had to and stayed away from fiction when I could. I never got the chance to "enjoy" them without looking through the eyes of someone who wanted to write also. I may have missed something.

Not that I don't enjoy books now. I love books, have hundreds of them, and have plenty of favorites. But I learned to love books at about the same time as I was dissecting them in my head. I love a good book. Especially a well told story. I know literature and gorgeous writing when I see it and can spot crap a mile away. There is stuff I gravitate to and sections in a book store you could not catch me dead in. 

Because I like to write I have opinions on what is and is not good writing. Though I may read something for the beauty and pleasure in it I will eventually trip over the fact that I am going to critique it. I do it for me because, as a writer, I want to know what is it about those words that made me feel the way I do. I don't think I enjoy the book any less. Hell, I might even enjoy it any more. 

Often, while Watttpad reading, I wonder about what I can say about other people stories that will make sense or be useful to the writer. Many times I usually stick to "loved it", "great stuff", and other general stuff like that. They are true after all, but that is the reader talking and not the writer. I usually respond to stories as the reader. 

There is one critique I make that is the highest compliment I could give a writer. It's not "I love it", "gorgeous writing", "I felt that", or any thing like that. It is "I would not change a single word of it". That is the biggest compliment I could give you. I don't give that away easily. I have said that about only one story on Wattpad. I was not exactly thrilled about the story or even enjoyed reading that type of story, but as a writer, I could not think of anything I would have done different. It was perfect. 

I judge every book I read that way, even those from famous authors and literary masters. I'm no expert but I know what feels right. There are only 2 books that I have given that compliment to. They just happen to be the shortest and longest book I have ever read. The first is Hemingway's "The Old Man and The Sea" and the second is "Lonesome Dove". I would have not changed a damn thing in either one. They were perfect. How the hell Larry McMurtry remain perfect for 870 pages is just amazing. But he did it. 

I guess that is the curse of the reader turned writer. I hate going through a book all content and then you come across a sentence or phrase that just throws you off. It was going so well! And I am not talking about grammar or how the story turned out. I am talking about the writer doing whatever he was doing well and then everything changes for no reason. Almost like if a different writer took over. 

I find two types of writers on Wattpad. The ones that write because they write, and the ones that write because they want to be writers. It doesn't matter what they write, you can tell the difference in their writing. One flows smoothly like air and water. It takes you places and shows you things. The other is forced. It screams "Look at me! I'm a writer!". It's annoying to read, no matter how good the story. 

It's not easy to be just one of those guys. I switch back and forth between those two myself. Which one I am more I have no idea. But I try to let the reader in me help me be the writer in me. It's the only way to get better.