1 Guest viewing this page
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

Even grammar and typography, which you would think would be the most objective things to highlight in criticism have stylistic differences that professional typographers commonly debate upon depending on time period, publication, etc. You can try to be without biases in a critique, but the critique will still be mired in subjectivism.


Something I don't really disagree with.

And to address a joke made earlier.

Nah. Now, it's gotten off the rails.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by mickilennial
Raw
Avatar of mickilennial

mickilennial is trying to survive

Member Seen 4 days ago

This whole thread has been off the rails with incessant, superfluous argumentation since the end of page one.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by BrokenPromise
Raw
Avatar of BrokenPromise

BrokenPromise With Rightious Hands

Member Online

Me yesterday: Hahaha having friendly discourse about the nature of bad writing advice is fun!

Me today:
What have I done?
1x Like Like 2x Laugh Laugh
Hidden 4 yrs ago 4 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 19 hrs ago

And truthfully, writers are often the worst at judging their own merits. For better or for worse.


Boy tell me about it.

Uh...no. No, I didn't do that. That was the other person.


What the fuck ever you know what I meant. Point still stands since you can't tell me what makes an objectively quality story.

Is this a "your an idiot" kind of ironic example of making the very same mistake within a critique? Where you meant, "I disagreed that there's subjectivity to quality? If so, that's still not correct. I conceded on a personal level, the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.


It's 'you're'. As a writer I would expect you to know this.

Also, from the very moment that this was posted, this already had the issue of being dated. (Because I've posted so much now, that I can't honestly tell which one that you're describing. (INB4, lul them all.)


Yes that's the joke. It's way funnier now.

But duly noted, regardless. I did my best to make my reply's of "you're an asshole, because I thought so." a little more...substantive let's say.


Hey man I would respect you or anyone way way way more if they just came out and called someone an asshole instead of getting into pissing contests.

Hidden 4 yrs ago 4 yrs ago Post by Roach
Raw
Avatar of Roach

Roach retired

Member Seen 3 mos ago

Hey, look your mind reading again.

I don’t think this is the ‘gotcha’ you think it is. I’m calling a spade a spade – in my subjective opinion, of course.

Pray tell. If no one took a person's critique personally. Why would someone like you feel the need to make ad-hom attacks exactly?

And ironically, this almost proves my point. (In that someone is flat out stating something, that has no example offered, or elaboration on why it's so bad.) But, I digress.

So, before you had to bring it up the second time. When I wanted to be nice and shrug the obvious cheap shot off. I was weighing on questioning precisely what you think critique is meant to do. When you posted right under my review, "Long review is bad. Because it's not friendly."

If you are going to quote me, you should not strawman my argument. I believe what I actually wrote beneath your review was: "I won't be doing an in-depth sentence by sentence breakdown because I don't think those are helpful outside of creative writing workshops and don't fit the vibe of casual, friendly critique on an internet forum".

It was not the length of your critique that was bad, it's that line-by-line, word-by-word critiques are unhelpful – and I stand by this. The writing contest is short form (sub-5000 words) so really anything that could be said about a piece can be done in broad strokes rather than on a minute scale. I'm sure you found this yourself when you ended up repeating yourself in many places by going line-by-line.

I am also confused by what you mean by the following: "If no one took a person's critique personally, why would someone like you feel the need to make ad-hom attacks exactly?" It's not like you've critiqued my work such that I could take it personally. I am an observer to bad writing advice and sought to call it out.

I'm sure it would be a laugh and a half, though.

Well, here's the thing.

Critique isn't friendly. It's not fun to hear. No matter how lighthearted and filled with sorry's one makes it. Because people can utterly freak out regardless. Or act like you, and attack someone's method regarding their own preconceived flaws on what was said. When here's the dirtiest truth of them all, it's only meant to help and offer suggestions for improvement. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, providing every detail of not only what you liked, why you liked it, what you didn't like, why you didn't like it, what was actually wrong, and friendly suggestions to improve, is not, nor will it ever be "bad critique". And because I *do* know what I meant. And many people who appreciate it, knew it wasn't "to feed an ego".

Critique also doesn't have to be presented in the most ruthless, more brutal than honest way. There are well-attested ways to providing nice, measured, and helpful critique: you know, the sandwich method. Attempting to balance negative things and positive things in a way that is impossible with a line-by-line critique, because quite frankly, whenever a section of text is rewritten, that isn't neutrally-charged advice; it's saying 'this would be better'.

Besides, this is a bit of a tangent, isn't it? My complaint was specifically with rewriting sections of text and masquerading it as advice. Criticism isn't to feed an ego. Rewriting someone's work without first being asked is.

Though since you take umbrage with the phrasing of 'feed their own ego', I'll put it this way – in nicer, softer, kid gloves critique:

It reframes the criticism from the writer who's work should be in the spotlight to the reviewer's own personal writing style. People who do this seem to care more about showcasing their own edits than promoting ones which can further the writer's style (in my subjective opinion, looking from the outside in, as someone who has critiqued and been critiqued many times throughout university and on the internet).

Nothing is stopping an author from explaining that themselves then. And better yet, taking one's rewritten words, going "Hmm. Okay, how do I take that advice, and then make it my own?"

That's not the point, and I don't think you understand that. Rewriting is not advice. It is pretending to be advice. When you rewrite, you strip the author's own authentic voice from the sentences and lose sight of what made the piece theirs in the first place. You replace their sentence structure with your own. Their word choice with your own. Their cadence and tone and intentions and replace it with your own.

How is that not focused on the reviewer than the writer?

Because, I don't believe anything is perfect. If I fuck up in writing or critique, the more specific you are, the better it is to me.

Again, you can be specific without rewriting. I have given several examples of how to do this in previous posts that you don't seem to have noticed. You can point out errors, you can give example sentences, you can move around clauses to show what is grammatically correct or not.

'Here's how I would rewrite this' and then rewriting it is not advice.

And the total reverse of you claiming "suggestions to fix sentences are always bad". Isn't useful to me at all. Because it provides me no wiggle room to grow as a critic. Something that everyone should work to improve upon.

I didn't say the first part. Again, to quote myself: "Point out the problem, suggest a fix – or better yet, multiple fixes – but don't write the actual fix out in your own words, dude, jesus christ." The bolded parts are things I did suggest as reasonable alternatives, please check your reading comprehension before putting words in my mouth.

Secondly, I am giving you advice on how to be a better critic: don't rewrite people's work. That's it. That's my subjective advice.

And let's cut to the "bring me down" chase, and say I've had many PM from people I've critiqued/advised in the exact same way, and thank me for how clear I was. So, don't tell me that it can never work. Because I know it can, and does help people. Especially, those who can actually assume one's good faith.

I don't know who you are quoting "bring me down" from or if it's meant to be air-quotes what it's referring to, but, anyway...

Proof? Because here's a thread of people disagreeing with your methods here.

And, cherry on top. If the author is allowed to have a voice that is unquestioned in their method, breaking any rule that suits them.

Well, why can't the critic or the reader be allowed to have their own methods of review, that may even be different from how someone else tells them "the right way to offer help"?


Criticism =/= creating. Also, you're right that there's no rules to criticism. There are, however, guidelines on how to do it in such a way that helps the person being critiqued. Anyone is allowed to call out said critique as flawed if they perceive it that way, just as people can call out writing as flawed, but the actual act of structuring a critique may be a little more objective than creative writing.




Hopefully this clears up some misconceptions you may have had about my arguments and views on constructive criticism and why literally rewriting parts of a work would not constitute as that.

2x Like Like
Hidden 4 yrs ago 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

Boy tell me about it.


Unlike everyone else on the original topic they avoided, I usually do tell it like it is. In that I'm not just spewing attacks to feed my ego. (That line is more general, than directed at you, by the by. But take it how you will.)

It's 'you're'. As a writer I would expect you to know this.


I'd like to pretend this self-aware. In knowing exactly why "your" was in quotes.

Instead of getting into pissing contests.


So...what everyone else is doing right now?
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 19 hrs ago

<Snipped quote by Fabricant451>

Unlike everyone else on the original topic they avoided, I usually do tell it like it is. In that I'm not just spewing attacks to feed my ego.


We're not trying to get the topic closed, pal. Gotta pull the punches.

So...what everyone else is doing right now?


Yes, that's the joke. It's way funnier now.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

@BrokenPromise So, hey I guess while I'm still around. I liked the article you posted. :D
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Ammokkx
Raw
Avatar of Ammokkx

Ammokkx ShaDObA TaNOsHiI

Member Seen 5 hrs ago

Me yesterday: Hahaha having friendly discourse about the nature of bad writing advice is fun!

Me today:
What have I done?


The train has not just derailed, it got turned on its fucking head.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by skidcrow
Raw
Avatar of skidcrow

skidcrow see you in the movies!

Member Seen 7 mos ago

But all suggestions can either be taken with sheer hostility and ignored. Or they can be evaluated and worked upon. (And I can tell you the latter makes you more successful in every avenue and medium.)


not to hold a grudge but you blew up on me when i corrected some minor grammatical mistakes you made and then blew up on me again and called me a "lying bitch" and "fucking insufferable" when i brought it up at a point far enough forward in time for you to have moved on
2x Like Like
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

I don’t think this is the ‘gotcha’ you think it is. I’m calling a spade a spade – in my subjective opinion, of course.


It's called projection. ^-^'

Critique also doesn't have to be presented in the most ruthless, more brutal than honest way.


I don't think my reviewing style is particularly brutal or ruthless. But you can dislike it. Calling me an asshole for doing it, isn't anything but being one yourself.

I don't think you understand that. Rewriting is not advice. It is pretending to be advice.


Ironically cutting through the filler. No, that's you perverting my intentions. Whether intentionally or not. It's meant to be advice. It's not "pretending" to be anything else. You just don't like it. I don't think you understand. Or at least, you're pretending not to.

Again, you can be specific without rewriting. You can point out errors, you can give example sentences, you can move around clauses to show what is grammatically correct or not.


You can. But it doesn't mean you always should. Because I hate to tell you, all I did in mine was give examples. Moving clauses IS changing/restructuring someone's original work.

Here's a thread of people disagreeing with your methods.


Ah yes, the best example of obvious cases of two people who took something personally and spewed a bunch of ad-homs at me. Also, some of those very people told me how great my reviews were, and how my posts belonged on R/MurderedByWords.

So I don't really see that as point in your favor. But one in mine.

And again I ask, if this wasn't being made personal, how else would doing this be considered relevant?

Hopefully this clears up some misconceptions you may have had about my arguments and views on constructive criticism and why literally rewriting parts of a work would not constitute as that.


You and others don't like it. And will name call critics. Plenty of others did and do, which is why I will continue. Glad we cleared that up in the most mature and non-aggressive way possible.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Bluetommy
Raw
Avatar of Bluetommy

Bluetommy Disastrous Enby

Member Seen 12 mos ago

not to hold a grudge but you blew up on me when i corrected some minor grammatical mistakes you made and then blew up on me again and called me a "lying bitch" and "fucking insufferable" when i brought it up at a point far enough forward in time for you to have moved on


Damn just hit him with that RKO outta nowhere
Hidden 4 yrs ago 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

not to hold a grudge but you blew up on me when i corrected some minor grammatical mistakes you made.


You failed. It was in chat where people used slang. You know that's not the same thing whatsoever. And you weren't even correct with your corrections. Saying "you're wrong actually" isn't "blowing up". Time doesn't change this. Grow up please. ^_^
1x Thank Thank
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by SleepingSilence
Raw
Avatar of SleepingSilence

SleepingSilence OC, Plz No Stealz.

Member Seen 3 hrs ago

Damn just hit him with that RKO outta nowhere


When you need ten people to circle jerk against one person.

You're not winning.
1x Laugh Laugh
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 19 hrs ago

Also, some of those very people told me how great my reviews were, and how my posts belonged on R/MurderedByWords.


Ah yes the most objective measure of quality. If your post belongs on Reddit you're an expert in the field. I only trust things if someone has posted on r/AmITheAsshole
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Bluetommy
Raw
Avatar of Bluetommy

Bluetommy Disastrous Enby

Member Seen 12 mos ago

I don't think my reviewing style is particularly brutal or ruthless. But you can dislike it. Calling me an asshole for doing it, isn't anything but being one yourself.


Ah yes, the best example of obvious cases of two people who took something personally and spewed a bunch of ad-homs at me. Also, some of those very people told me how great my reviews were, and how my posts belonged on R/MurderedByWords.


Bro...
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by skidcrow
Raw
Avatar of skidcrow

skidcrow see you in the movies!

Member Seen 7 mos ago

Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Bluetommy
Raw
Avatar of Bluetommy

Bluetommy Disastrous Enby

Member Seen 12 mos ago

<Snipped quote by Bluetommy>

When you need ten people to circle jerk against one person.

You're not winning.


Man it isn't about winning, I'm just entertained by your lack of self-awareness and poor takes.
1x Like Like
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 19 hrs ago

<Snipped quote by Bluetommy>

When you need ten people to circle jerk against one person.

You're not winning.


When you can't accurately defend against the comments of others and resort to cherry picking while maintaining the pompous attitude because you think it makes you anything other than an inexplicably confident asshole...

You're not winning.
Hidden 4 yrs ago Post by LegendBegins
Raw
Avatar of LegendBegins

LegendBegins

Moderator Online

This discussion and its content is interesting; just remember to keep it civil. There's merit to looking at writing as both a personal art form and expression, along with writing being a medium that can be optimized to broaden its appeal or tweaked toward a target audience.
1x Like Like
↑ Top
1 Guest viewing this page
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet