Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: This meddling intellect that murders to dissect

  1. #11
    Kindness vs. Honesty... There is a whole thread on that prickly subject in Writing Discussions. Honesty, while it can sting, tends to be my prevailing policy. And as you said, cases of irreparably poor writing are few and fair between.


  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkkin View Post
    Kindness vs. Honesty... There is a whole thread on that prickly subject in Writing Discussions. Honesty, while it can sting, tends to be my prevailing policy. And as you said, cases of irreparably poor writing are few and fair between.
    Yeah, I️ started that thread

  3. #13
    If one considers the OP without the bias of precept, therein lies fleeting insight camouflaged in the manner of articulation. We are a subjective lot, expending considerable effort in pigeonholing with dogmatic categorization. Such can be beneficial in evolving more concise communication (that 'tree' is a 'Bur Oak'), but also, more in the arts, writing in this case, such can be fodder for experimentation by imaginative practitioners. Experimentation in turn may result in new or redefined dogma.

    Thus, to me, a poetic effort is recognized as 'poetry' by an author relative to intent, and by a reader relative to a varying mix of dogma, breadth of perception, and subjective impact. So, unless an author is attempting to be constrained by some current dogma, critiques are often little more than individual 'takes.' In turn, how useful reader's 'takes' are is dependent on an author's consideration.

    "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." -- Albert Einstein

    Site:
    Natural World Reflections and Book: Calan's Eden

    The simplest truths are written on the wall,
    where we see imaginary greatness in our fall.

  4. #14
    Poets can do anything they want with poetry. There is no concrete method. There are known recipes (classic forms, elements such as rhyme and metre, assonance and so forth). What bothers me is that readers are faulted for voicing a thought that does not coincide with an author's vision. It is an observation, not gospel. It doesn't make it bunk.


  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeC View Post
    If one considers the OP without the bias of precept, therein lies fleeting insight camouflaged in the manner of articulation. We are a subjective lot, expending considerable effort in pigeonholing with dogmatic categorization. Such can be beneficial in evolving more concise communication (that 'tree' is a 'Bur Oak'), but also, more in the arts, writing in this case, such can be fodder for experimentation by imaginative practitioners. Experimentation in turn may result in new or redefined dogma.

    Thus, to me, a poetic effort is recognized as 'poetry' by an author relative to intent, and by a reader relative to a varying mix of dogma, breadth of perception, and subjective impact. So, unless an author is attempting to be constrained by some current dogma, critiques are often little more than individual 'takes.' In turn, how useful reader's 'takes' are is dependent on an author's consideration.

    "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." -- Albert Einstein
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkkin View Post
    Poets can do anything they want with poetry. There is no concrete method. There are known recipes (classic forms, elements such as rhyme and metre, assonance and so forth). What bothers me is that readers are faulted for voicing a thought that does not coincide with an author's vision. It is an observation, not gospel. It doesn't make it bunk.
    Having re-read, I think the big problem here is that the OP really made two complaints, one of which is valid and the other of which is total crap. He then committed the cardinal sin of forcing two totally different issues into one.

    - The valid: That criticism is sometimes (actually, quite often) garbage and, worse still, malevolent garbage posted for the benefit of the critic not the writer nor reader. I see a lot of this on here. Actually, it has made me reconsider remaining active on the forum more than once in the last few days. I enjoy a bit of an argument and don't hold back, but there is a massive difference between being brutally honest and an egregious nitpicker. The belittling of those who have the courage to share work - especially if they are newer or if English is not their first language - drives me nutty. It's ironic to me that many of those who engage in that sort of thing do not often post their own stuff. Kind of telling.

    - The not valid: The assertion that criticism (or critique, whatever) is not relevant, that there should be some kind of line drawn between what is ok to criticize and what is not, that an opinion well-voiced can yet be bunk simply for riling the sacred cow of ego. That is ridiculous and an insult to all those who try to help.

  6. #16
    The thing about line by line critique, far from missing the point or getting off track with noncorollary info dumps (discussions that should be in the discussion forum, not a critique thread), it keeps attention focused on the work itself. Lines are held accountable, as are words and context. The sum of the whole and the individual parts. Look at A, (work submitted), it seems like such and such to reader X. Was this the author's intent? Seems akin to B, (example B). Look at A and B. Consider how they are similar and unique. What works, what doesn't, and why.

    Pretty rudimentary. How is something like that bunk? It is linear reasoning and a heck of a lot of work.

    One begins to wonder, why bother critiquing at all if all it amounts to is drama and ego. Talk about wasted effort...When thinking is an affront to an artist's sensibilities, then art has ceased to function. As the core of creativity is thought.
    Last edited by Darkkin; November 10th, 2017 at 03:19 PM.


  7. #17
    Darkin-I think even if the particular receiver of the critique doesn't appreciate it , the critique exchange still serves as learning experience for the rest of those that view said exchanges. Personally, even if I don't agree with whatever has been said I will still take whatever statement and question if it is valid or applicable.

  8. #18
    It's not that complicated, IMO. If the critique seems invalid the professional thing to do is thank the critic for their time, smile and move on. If the critique verges on abuse, report it, smile and move on. Inadequate, incoherent or impolite critique reflects much more poorly on the critic than the author or the piece in question - at least that is my impression when I read it. If its simply a case of people not liking it when others don't care for their work, they are not writers but children who have traded crayons for computers.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •