Please Read This...

Firestarter wrote: I tend to distrust praise.

*jumps on THAT wagon*

People who give blind praise make me think that that cannot possibly have any idea about what writing is all about... I am my worst critic.

Criticsm is such a wonderful thing... really... seriously, I'm being honest =P People can grow and change through what other people give them in crits, constructive or not. The non-constructive ones just re-inforce that not everyone is going to like your work, quite possibly for no real reason.

That said, I often find myself thinking (or ranting) "What? As IF?!? That was totally what I did not mean, and I cannot believe you said that about something that actually took me TIME to write" - this hasn't happened so much here... and I don't tend to spend too much time on anything I write -it shows - but still... I do understand.

I think it will take time for you to accept that there are different opinions; the crits, harsh or no, come with that. I find the best weapon is humour, I enjoy not only laughing at things but myself and others this helps loads. I turn a harsh crit into humour and I'm fine. I, myself *waif-like pout and frailty*, had a crit like that from Incandescence, I honestly couldn't stop laughing... It was so silly!

Humour and a thick skin love, Life Lessons

*hearts* Le Penguin.

I have often wondered how critiques here have become as they are; you get distinctly unique critiques on this site versus others such as writing.com or word trip. You also get a lot more intelligent critiques.

I think that there lies a misunderstanding between everyone involved in this discussion thus far. From what gingerlizzy and crewgurl93 are saying, they are not arguing for critiques filled with praise; nor are they arguing for critiques to merely be emotional pick-me-ups. Rather, they are arguing against the critiques that go along the lines of "Get a new hobby and throw this out."

There is now justification for those type of critiques; they are just as bad, if not worse, than the "OMG!! DIS IZ SO AWSOME!!!"s. If that idea were to be expanded upon, then it could be a critique. For instance, if the reviewer had said "Get a new hobby and throw this out," and then went into why they though the poem was bad, then a good critique is born.

Fortunately enough, I think those critiques are few and far between, and, in any case, I'm not about to advocate a policy of deleting or editing critiques even when the majority disagrees with them. Equally however, people should not be saying "live with it."

We are all aspiring writers on this site. As thus, no one here has the qualifications or justifications necessary to say 'throw this out.' As aspiring writers, we should all be seeking to improve one another's work. And if you truly do believe something should be thrown out, then you don't have to comment.

However, once again, cruel critiques are very few. Just the other day someone pointed me to a story where they thought the reviewers would be harsh. I took a look at the reviews, and did not see any of that. Instead, the reviews were extremely thorough, well thought out, did not praise where praise was not justified, and each ended with "I hope you keep working on this." Those critiques are by far the majority of critiques on this site, and they are thoroughly excellent critiques. They were exactly the kind all critiques should be look. True, they were harsh, but they weren't cruel, and that's an important distinction.

In any case, the best way to fight against cruel critiques is not by attacking them, but by showing through example what a critique should be. At the present time, I would say 90% of members are doing exactly that.

So to finish off, keep in mind that critiques on the Young Writers Society are better than the vast majority of writing sites, and certainly better than on any other site for young writers. Even when the critique is cruel, respect it; you can't argue with bullies and it's worthless to try. Plus, I will say that in almost all situations where conflict arises, I will almost always take the side of the critiquer. It's not because I agree or anything like that, but it's because the editor needs to be respected.



By the way, if I wrote this post as I intended to, then you will realize that in the end, I said absolutely nothing

True, they were harsh, but they weren't cruel, and that's an important distinction.

(doesn't this count as saying something?) I agree! I like receiving harsh critiques because I find them to be most helpful to me. Maybe others don't think the same way, but hey, whatever works for you, right? On the other hand, cruel critiques don't normally seem to offer much help, so I would be more annoyed that they didn't tell me much than that they were cruel.

I'd say I was thick skinned [like everyone is telling me to be] when it comes to critiques that inform me that; yes, this piece of work was terrible I think you should edit it dramatically.. Here's some tips.

But when it comes to people who meerly say, I don't like this, it's all wrong etc. it annoys and upsets me because I tend to take it as a personal attack. This is because these people do not give me any tips or advice on how to improve the work, and this is what I thrive to know.

If you don't like it, what do you want me to change so that you do?!

When this happens I tend to give more praise for the review to that person, than a person who has told me that they absolutely love my piece of work. This is because the people who give me advice are helping me even though they are perhaps saying that my work is awful; and so therefore, I can use the advice and maybe one day make a piece of writing that I get all good reviews.