Clever Critique etc.

13 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Fri, 2006-03-10 23:45

Josiedog said:

"Seems we're under pressure to say something clever and critical everytime, so maybe I'll come back to this, but right now I just want to flag it up and say how much I enjoyed it."

I'd like to stress - though I shouldn't need to - that I have never asked anyone to be either clever or critical. I just thought it would be infinitely more useful for a writer if you could pen a few reasons as to *why* you like something, and mention anything you don't like, or think could be improved.

If you really can't think of anything other than 'I enjoyed it', or you don't have time, that's OK. Any comment is a good comment. But in some cases - let's face it - people just can't be arsed to spend a very short amount of time picking out their favourite bits, or, in the case of poems, reading a little more closely.

So please can no one go round in the mistaken belief that I, or anyone, is dunking your head in some intellectual horse trough, or trying to turn this into a serious critique-only party.

Sat, 2006-03-11 00:04

joel

Good point. I enjoyed it.

Sat, 2006-03-11 00:09

rokkitnite

Ha ha ha ha ha. I loved the 'I enjoyed it' part of Joel's piece especially. Keep it up!

Sat, 2006-03-11 00:13

maddan

I found the laughter at the start of Rokkitnite's piece to be a bit clunky. The rest of it was good..

Sat, 2006-03-11 00:15

joel

Well done, Tim. Very good comment. However, I would consider cutting one 'ha' from the opening. You don't want to overegg the pudding.

Sat, 2006-03-11 00:16

joel

I found Joel's post repetitive and trite.

Sat, 2006-03-11 09:11

Brooklands

Enough japes. Here's some good advice (not written by me...) for beginning to formulate feedback, showing that saying something useful doesn't have to be clever or intellectual... 1. You are trying to provide feedback to the author that will be useful in helping the author understand what works and what doesn't work in the piece of writing (whether it is prose or poetry). 2. Try to find something specific that you like in the piece - a specific image, possibly an imaginative word choice. Tell the author what it was - it might remind you of a personal memory or make an interesting connection in your mind - anything. This is far more helpful than just blandly saying "I really like this." 3. If you find something you don't understand - a word or whatever, ask the author what was meant. It's helpful to an author to know where his or her audience is confused. So saying something like, "I didn't understand what you meant by..." is perfectly valid and helpful. 4. If you find something specific that you don't like, identify it and tell the author why you didn't like it. Joe

Sat, 2006-03-11 09:50

Jack Cade

That's good advice.

Sun, 2006-03-12 18:16

Jack Cade

"Mind you both, Jack and Spack, I respect you both greatly ... but these forums in their rawest state are the best authorial fodder on this planet!" Eh? There's a school of thought that says that unsupported praise is about as useful as unconstructive criticism. I don't think tha'ts *entirely* right, but it does go along the right lines.Telling an author that you liked or disliked a piece without suggesting reasons, or being more specific, is of limited use to anyone interested in reader reactions to their writing. Praise will make them *feel* good, of course, but you might as well compliment their hair. Sometimes that's all authors want, of course. But the reason I started this thread was to stress that I'm *not* trying to lay down rules. Neither is Spack, quite blatantly. His post was signposted as 'advice'. No one is trying to stop the 'I just like this' threads. But I would like to *encourage* more considered reactions, if I can. I think that's a reasonable thing to do, and when people react with "Oh, I'm being pressured to write like a literary critic - oh help!" it seems like they're deliberately missing the point.

Sun, 2006-03-12 19:28

#10

Juliet OC

i agree with Jack and spack i think - there is no harm in discussing this from time to time -and yes at the end of the day you can write what you like. But you only have to read work that has been given constructive crit to see how it and the authors talent has improved. Juliet

Juliet

Sun, 2006-03-12 22:24

#11

pesky2006

Interpreter please, am seriously confused.

Liana

Sun, 2006-03-12 22:32

#12

Jack Cade

You're jumping the gun, Venson - assuming that I'm trying to do something that I'm not. I'm not trying to create anything. I don't follow your semantics argument at all. 'Unconstructive criticism' merely refers to criticism that is useless in terms of helping the writer improve the piece. 'Constructive criticism' means the opposite. It doesn't have anything to do with trying to force people to write better, or having a very narrow and precise expecation from people's writing. It certainly doesn't call for any intellectualising. I just think that most writers, when they submit to a site like this, want some idea of how readers might react to their work. And all I'd like to encourage is people to be a little more thorough in reporting their reactions. You don't just read through a piece, and then blink at the end, and say, "I liked that."

Sun, 2006-03-12 23:17

#13

maddan

I think a point is being missed here, and that is that the site is overwhelmingly for readers rather than writers, I read hundreds maybe thousands times the amount I post, and not in some tit for tat arrangement so I get read, but because I enjoy it. However I can't be bothered to read everything, and a lot of what is posted is (due to the nature of the beast) dross, so I use this forum mainly to get recomendations. If a thread is just half a dozen people saying 'this is great' then that is little use to the writer (apart from their self esteem - which can be very useful indeed) but very useful to the reader. As for 'ontological sophistry', I had to look both those words up and I still don't know what it means. I'll be charitable and assume it means something.

Topic locked