Topic ID: 11671
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Poor Imp
imp forgets what was writ
Epic Novelist
Gender: 
Age: 21
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 3776
Reviews: 417
Country: the roof
300 Points
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:20 pm Post subject: To Be or Not To Be...Constructive? |
 |
|
So, an article critical of criticism is fraught with difficulty from the beginning. Fall into the same potholes as it discusses? Hopefully not.
What on God's green earth is a good critique and why?
Like most things, critiques based on a certain balance are more helpful than those without it. Bad balance means worse falls. One can have lovely bladework in a fencing bout, perfect parries and lightning ripostes--but if the feet don't move, none of it gets to the target.
So, like lovely bladework, I've seen--and am certain to have given--some critiques that poke holes in all that needs poking. They tear the tatters of ill-conceived or hastily scrawled stories to shreds. But do they move to help rebuild?
Criticism is cutting. Of course it is, and in that aspect alone, it's hardly helpful or worth the time to type. To be bluntly honest and sharp enough to pick out flaws is an excellent start.
But a good critique tears down so as to build.
A question to keep in mind at the end of each critique: With what I've pulled apart, what have I left?
If the answer is dejection with no reasonable hope of ever seeing the light of day, you've left extremely cutting criticism. And you've obviously forgotten something. You haven't aided any truly diligent writer if you haven't moved your feet--criticism is yelling from the sidelines. A critique ought to add how? why? what?
Keep in mind the flip-side. Any problem has a solution. Inept use of dialogue is a chance to compare with perhaps, a good use of description. Bad form but good concept can always be contrasted. Strong characters and weak plot can always be brought back to characters are plot. |
_________________
'We experiment with ourselves in a way we would never permit ourselves to experiment with animals and, carried away by our curiosity, we cheerfully vivisect our souls.'-Nietszche |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
backgroundbob
Arcade King
Speaker of the Forum
Gender: 
Age: 20
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 988
Reviews: 248
Country: Manchester, England
300 Points
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's the getting halfway through a long one, and realising privately that they're never going to read or use it.
Be that as it may: we try! And live in hope. |
_________________
The Oneday Cafe
though we do not speak, we are by no means silent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Poor Imp
imp forgets what was writ
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 21
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 3776
Reviews: 417
Country: the roof
300 Points
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| backgroundbob wrote: |
It's the getting halfway through a long one, and realising privately that they're never going to read or use it.
Be that as it may: we try! And live in hope. |
Too true, bob. !_! |
_________________
'We experiment with ourselves in a way we would never permit ourselves to experiment with animals and, carried away by our curiosity, we cheerfully vivisect our souls.'-Nietszche |
|
| Back to top |
|
Incandescence
If you've nothing nice to say, come sit with me.
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 2979
Reviews: 895
Country: USA
218 Points
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poor Imp--
This recent push to be positive is based on the assumption that balance means better. I simply can't agree; any response that responds to the work in question has done its job. Suggestions for improvement are optional (if any suggestions could be made that don't invovle completely starting over).
But you have at least moved me to reconsider an old definition:
A Workshop:
* noun: a brief intensive course for a small group; emphasizes problem solving
* noun: small workplace where handcrafts or manufacturing are done.
When I read this from my dictionary, I was dumbfounded. It seemed, at least to me, that if critics, as per their definition, participate in a workshop, it is contradictory to the purpose of a workshop as a critic's role does not involve problem solving. But then I began to think: why are we so concerned with being positive, and who's job is it to be "workshopping" a piece?
We all want an audience to show us our work's potential faults so that we can fix it, feel proud of it, and hopefully get it published somewhere. Finding fault with a rough draft is what a board like this should facilitate. The atmosphere where everything gets praised (and yes, always trying to find something positive to say is synonymous with always praising) is unfair both to the honest critic and the writer as well.
A true workshop environment is pretty tough online; the conversation, generally, must be pretty one sided with the critic doing her/his job all at once followed by the poet revising. In fact, this realization led me to understand that it is NOT a critic's job to workshop a piece--it is the author's. If the critic feels like it would encourage or motivate the author to revise in a more favorable way, he or she could certainly post possible improvement, but it should not be looked down upon by others if he or she chooses not to.
We should be thankful as it were that people have taken the time to read and formulate a response to our work. I'm afraid I side with the old saying, "Beggars can not be choosers" when it comes to reviewing a piece. Of course, if YWS puts a requirement that we must be positive in our reviews, there is nothing I or anyone else could really do to stop it, so this may be all for naught after all.
Best,
Brad |
_________________
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sponson Light
The Art Guy
Master of the Forum
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 1554
Reviews: 681
Country: Manchester, New Hampshire
300 Points
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Err, I guess I'm gonna stick my own thoughts here.
Pre-cursor
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Poor Imp, a critique and criticism is the same thing. A compliment is yelling from the side line. "Oi! Yer doin' good for a runt!"
More or less, when you publically post your piece for all to see. You pretty much signed on in to be criticised.
You cant expect 100% praise, and if you were to frown upon a criticism, that would only show how mature you are about your work. But enough of this banter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
End Banter
While many people WANT positive comments (as is human nature to want to be praised and liked) along with their criticism, it may not always happen. You dont have to be positive, but you certainly cant be totally negative.
Neutrality is the safest way to get a point across. If you do want to point out something nice, you must point out something at flaw. If you cannot, and the best you can offer is a compliment, then let it be so, but do so that you point out something specific.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Imp's "what?" question is immediatly answered upon selecting something to crit.
What is strong (or weak)? Your character development is strong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The point of a criticism is to inspect specifics. "Your character development is strong in developing their emotions to one another through the use of plot. The development is subtle, as is in real life, which makes it much more convincing.", would be a good criticism (I suppose, I dont crit stories). This support's Imp's "how?" question.
How is it strong? The character development is subtle.
Whereas "I like your how your characters fall in love.", while specific, is still too vague to get a successful point across. Sure, youre doing good with your characters. But how?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Everyone knows an argument without proof sucks. So get proof. Like stated above, while explaining the good points of character development, the critic backed up his point.
This supports Imp's "why"? question.
Why is it good? Because subtle is a part of reality, and a realistic piece is convincing. Notice how a specific break down of a specific answer answers the why question.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Da Breakdown
What? Blue is better with orange than it is with red.
How? Blue offers a bigger contrast with orange than it does with red.
Why? Because reality dictates that blue and orange are compliments (as per color wheel), and therefore appeal strongest to the human senses.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Finally, a good criticism is only as strong as the recipitant's willingness to accept fault. If the recipitant denies the criticism, the criticism is utterly useless, which completely invalidates the point of the criticism. Or if they accept and do nothing about it.
- Oi! This post is really long. |
_________________
You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, instead, you should read every single book to see what every book is about before you even come close to judging its viability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Poor Imp
imp forgets what was writ
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 21
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 3776
Reviews: 417
Country: the roof
300 Points
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Incan and Sponson:
I hope I wasn't misconstrued entirely--or that my remarks above weren't too obscure.
Criticism is as defined by both of you, more or less well enumerated. It is its communication, I think, which is often lacking. Using what is well done to contrast the bloody awful aspects of a piece is better to merely damning a piece. (Though some, admittedly, deserve to be thrown out or kept merely as reccollection what not to do.)
In brief, I meant to look at another side of critiquing. And it has more to do with how one conveys it than what it (criticism) is by nature.
So Sponson, I never said or intended anything along the lines of wanting everything praised. A good critique tells whether a piece has a good side, or well executed anything. Totally 'negative' doesn't much help--even telling someone what they've posted is puerile or half-cocked doesn't need to be entirely negative; it can be encouraging to explain what the difficulty is and why.
I rather hope--and think--we agree on most points. |
_________________
'We experiment with ourselves in a way we would never permit ourselves to experiment with animals and, carried away by our curiosity, we cheerfully vivisect our souls.'-Nietszche |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sponson Light
The Art Guy
Master of the Forum
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 1554
Reviews: 681
Country: Manchester, New Hampshire
300 Points
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So Sponson, I never said or intended anything along the lines of wanting everything praised. A good critique tells whether a piece has a good side, or well executed anything. Totally 'negative' doesn't much help--even telling someone what they've posted is puerile or half-cocked doesn't need to be entirely negative; it can be encouraging to explain what the difficulty is and why. |
No, I agree, I was just throwing that out there.
Total positisism and negativeism is still pretty pointless. I agree with all your points. |
_________________
You shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, instead, you should read every single book to see what every book is about before you even come close to judging its viability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Incandescence
If you've nothing nice to say, come sit with me.
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 2979
Reviews: 895
Country: USA
218 Points
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poor Imp--
Where we differ is in what you consider "positive." I don't think "positive" or "negative" ought to have any bearing on a critique.
People too often personalize criticism, and thus they impose these subjective measures of how "nice" a critique is and how "nice" it ought to be. Pointing out the good? How does that do anything for the writer? He or she should simply assume that what was not attacked was not worthy of attack, and leave it at that.
Just because somebody's suggestion for improvement is perhaps not nice does not mean that they have been mean to a writer. I suppose in my mind I think an honest desire to contribute makes all the difference. I don't think you can damage the YWS or its users unless you want to, and there's no way (to my mind) that someone who writes in response to a literary piece could ever be anything but a benefit to this site.
Of course, I don't know you. If you are a secret puppy-raiser and lover of Hallmark, don't disillusion me. Just snicker behind your hand. Everyone else does! =]
Best,
Brad |
_________________
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson |
|
| Back to top |
|
Poor Imp
imp forgets what was writ
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 21
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 3776
Reviews: 417
Country: the roof
300 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ah, Incan, I think we're merely at odds on semantics. A definition of positive and negative (similar to that of 'optimist' and 'pessimist'--something GK Chesterton skewers well) is perhaps a false defining.
In that case, they have no bearing on a critique. |
_________________
'We experiment with ourselves in a way we would never permit ourselves to experiment with animals and, carried away by our curiosity, we cheerfully vivisect our souls.'-Nietszche |
|
| Back to top |
|
Snoink
Snuggly
Writer of Legend
Gender:
Age: 20
Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 8437
Reviews: 2105
Country: USA
546 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
...in Poor Imp's original article, she never even mention the words "positive" or "negative." Therefore, my diagnosis is that Incan and Sponson have eyes that are starting to go into the gangrene stage. I suggest surgical operation.  |
_________________
Leopluridon '08: He Will Show Us The Way!
"So, Obama calls McCain erratic. Well, I call Obama a squirrel." -- Rush Limbaugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
Poor Imp
imp forgets what was writ
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 21
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 3776
Reviews: 417
Country: the roof
300 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Snoink wrote: |
| ...in Poor Imp's original article, she never even mention the words "positive" or "negative." Therefore, my diagnosis is that Incan and Sponson have eyes that are starting to go into the gangrene stage. I suggest surgical operation. |
Ha.
...Snoink's makes something of a point. ^_~ |
_________________
'We experiment with ourselves in a way we would never permit ourselves to experiment with animals and, carried away by our curiosity, we cheerfully vivisect our souls.'-Nietszche |
|
| Back to top |
|
Incandescence
If you've nothing nice to say, come sit with me.
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 2979
Reviews: 895
Country: USA
218 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Snoink--
What would you suggest to rename it, since the best phraseology I can come up with is being "positive" versus being "negative"? It would probably help alleviate a lot of the "semantical" tension about...I do, however, worry that if we are not allowed our own generalizations and interpretations regarding others' intents that the entire institution of writing is already lost. ;)
Poor Imp--
I think you are brushing off too lightly what we are actually arguing here. Your fundamental claim is that the reviewers are as well as the writer responsible for reconstructing pieces.
| Quote: |
| But do they move to help rebuild? |
This is irrelevant. You are imposing the duty of the writer on his or her audience. It's like hiring a chef who relies on you for the secret ingredient, the best recipe.
I am sure you have read http://www.youngwriterssociety.com/viewtopic.php?t=11680 but just in case...I think it articulates much better my general thesis on reviewing.
I hope this finds you well,
Brad |
_________________
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson |
|
| Back to top |
|
Snoink
Snuggly
Writer of Legend
Gender:
Age: 20
Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 8437
Reviews: 2105
Country: USA
546 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Incan --
Her language is simple -- don't over-read it. It is what it is. Your offense to it is silly. 
Best,
Snoink |
_________________
Leopluridon '08: He Will Show Us The Way!
"So, Obama calls McCain erratic. Well, I call Obama a squirrel." -- Rush Limbaugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
Incandescence
If you've nothing nice to say, come sit with me.
Epic Novelist
Gender:
Age: 18
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 2979
Reviews: 895
Country: USA
218 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Snoink--
Perhaps so, but I think you should address the points I make instead of my basis for making them.
Best,
brad |
_________________
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Snoink
Snuggly
Writer of Legend
Gender:
Age: 20
Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 8437
Reviews: 2105
Country: USA
546 Points
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
The words "positive" and "negative" are completely arbitrary, defined by the recipient of the critique. So therefore, writing about "positive" reviews vs. "negative" reviews is pointless, which is why Imp didn't use this language. Instead, the critiquer is responsible to make the critique useful to the writer. This was the point of the article.
|
_________________
Leopluridon '08: He Will Show Us The Way!
"So, Obama calls McCain erratic. Well, I call Obama a squirrel." -- Rush Limbaugh |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
