Personally, I reply to works that I like and connected with in some way. If something stood out to me, I'll let the author know.
I won't ever slag someone's work off - I'd hate that to be done to me so I don't do it. The only time I criticise something is when I've thought of a solution myself. I won't say "oh btw I think you should change the last two lines" and leave it as that - what does that help? I'll always try to add some ideas in aswell. If I can't think of something to improve it, then what gives me the right to say it needs improving?
And criticism should always be constructive IMHO.
Agreed, Scarling. There is almost always a way to make it so.
Jes, the problem with people asking --> go ahead and critique is that even "constructive criticism" is so subjective. To some people, that would mean "I loved it!! Maybe make it a bit shorter?" To others it would mean something much more rigorous.
Then in that case, maybe some guidlines or a definition of constructive criticism should be written?
I've been on a poetry forum before and it said that you must reply to two poems before posting your own, and a line saying you like it isn't sufficiant enough and won't be classed as a comment. Although that makes you think of something more meaningful to say, it's quite intimidating and it actually put me off. Being forced to criticise is a bad idea, but being encouraged to leave longer and more meaningful comments can work quite well..
I guess it's putting that theory into practise that's the difficult part.
criticize (M-W online)
1 : to consider the merits and demerits of and judge accordingly : EVALUATE
2 : to find fault with : point out the faults of
Tricky finding the balance between 1 and 2.
I think just about everyone here is right. For me I hate it when people try to be critical about grammer and English usage in poetry because that's not what poetry is about. I think if a writer asks for your opinion you should give it to them and if you give advice make sure it's good stuff that can help them be better at what they're doing.
I agree, aljobob.
Welcome to able2know.
had to do a quick edit there - i was going to call you absobob!
Oddly enough Phoenix, I was just about to pose a similar question.
First, I never liked the term "Constructive critiicism", it's like "Positive punishment"!. I like Constructive critique.
To a great extent I'm a "I know what I like" sort of person. As such, I hesitate to comment on the works of others. On occasion I have made comments about a piece of work but, in those instances, I addresses something (good or bad) that just jumped out at me at the onset. When I read the newspaper, there are things of interest and things thatr are simply read. I remember what interests me and discuss them with others when I can. It is the same with postings here. I read many but comment on few. I think it would be shallow of me to post a canned observation just to let the person feel that that his/her piece had been read. I have posted a great deal of work on other sites and a couple here. Some were very good and some should never seen the light of day. I felt pumped when I received compliments but did not feel shunned when things were nor applauded. A lack of comment is simply that; a lack of comment. I don't feel that it indicates displeasure on the readers part. I have no real formal training. I write for speed before the thought escapes me and edit later. My structure is based solely on what sounds good to me and, I just try to have fun. These are not attributes that lend themselves to accurately critiqueing the writings of others. One other small point of consideration is that there are people that don't tolorate critiques well. Given my lack of expertise, why ruffle feathers?
morganwood- I have read some of your work in the past, and found it fascinating. Love to see some more of it.
Maybe it would be a good idea when someone posted a work, they might make a note if they are interested in criticism of it!
Thank you and that may well be a good way to approaca the issue.
I posted a piece last week (A season for the senses) that really needed critique. I missed the mark and would have liked some input. In the future, when I post a topic I'll put "Critique" in parenthsis in the topic title. Very seldom do I not at least consider outside input.
In the end, constructive criticism usually winds up being nothing more than somebody saying something in your work sucked with little smileys around it, although they'll insist they're "encouraging" you. My problem, tho, is I seldom take ANY kind of criticism well, helpful or no, so such I'm actually rather wondering how much it'll piss me off to see Time Magazine or something give my work a crappy review.
Query
edgarblythe wrote:I often am reduced to writing a mere outline of my subject. Then I come back and fill it in in layers until I have done all that I can. Then I rest on it for at least a few months before giving it a final version. I have a few that I have been struggling with most of my adult life. I think they may never be complete.
As you are a veteran member could you tell me where a short story I posted on this forum this afternoon might have gone to? I am new on these forums and having the same trouble with my poems. Please oblige Maggie
Well as a poet, an artist, performer, director and screenplay writer all I can say is personally I want criticism in any form. I want to know my work did something to make some one say something in any respect.
If I have submitted something to the public I want them to view it and have an opinion otherwise I would have kept it to myself.
Anybody who puts any creative work on display must understand that they will be judged weather on subconscious or conscience level. I think if some one has chosen to display something they deserve a response. Constructive criticism being the key word. To add to this I would say if you don't want a response or crittism then quite frankly why display your work? Keep it to yourself.
If no response and no constructive criticism are given then how can we know our work is successful? The public from such forums, as these, are the best audience as they are every artists target market in some way.
To comment on the earlier discussion on weather grammar and spelling should be corrected I think that is immaterial to a poems substance and only if a word is can not be read or understood should one comment on it. We are not school teachers or editors.
Wonderfully stated, tagged.
<now searching for tagged's stuff>
I posted on this thread waaay back in June, when the summer was still ahead(sob) , and , within the last week, Ive posted 2 critiques of others works. Both were poems, one by Terry and one by cusick. I was simply blown away by Terrys completed work, and I was impreassed by cusicks work , although I felt he was just beginning what could be a compelling tale and we need more of this poem. I meant both critiques as constructive and I admired each work. I just read Morganwoods post and found it so like him, to the point, not excessively flowery , and strait forward
I then realized what i like to read. Its a style that tries to communicate a thought (or two) and doesnt spend time making victorian sounding excuses or using profound statements or many syllable words. Thats what I like. Both poems were like that and Morganwood spoke like we were talking over the fence. Ive found that Even the most complex abstract thoughts , when crafted in a well written style like rosborne, drags me inside and I want to look up something.(and I never usually wanna look things up, Im lazy). If its written to communicate, we all can see it. However, if its only written to be impressive, that too can be seen , and its often not too pretty.
Sometimes, however, I find Im not reading anyones A2k words. Im actually reading some quote from a columnist or reporter. This drives me nutz. I dont mind posts that include the url, but when the entire url is posted and nothing else, yecchhh. Rarely will I post (Except for one recently where bongster drug some of us in talking about weed)
And while Ive begun speaking about things that annoy me in posts, I think Craven has created a monster with the quotes feature. When this is used correctly, a line or two is quoted and a response is begun , mostly specific comment or disagreement. Thats ok, its reasonable use.
However, when it is used for evil, its nothing more than a printed form of nyah nyah nyah. Often, An entire post gets shanghaid by 2 opponents who wind up reading like two lawyers cross examining each other , or worse. Its nothing more than someone trying to soothe their egos (in often chidish rhetoric) This can be really annoying, so Ive taken to punting anytime I see more than 1 quote line in someones response, for if I see two or more, someone is usually trying to insult someone else.
