lido_bmt
lvl.3
Flight distance : 87772 ft
Offline
|
If you believe this, you've never been critiqued, and you have no idea what a critique is. For a good critique to occur, you must point out very specific things that you think are the problem, otherwise you are of no help to anyone.
Critiques can be as gentle or as brutal as the person wants them to be, but it has NO BEARING on being "rude" or "inconsiderate". Why? Because the thing being critiqued isn't a critique of the creator. The only time something a critique is wrong or rude is when the critique makes statements that cannot be defended. "THIS SUCKS!" is a rude critique. "This is great!" is also a poor critique.
"This sucks because x is a poor implementation of y and a is a poor choice of subject matter in this situation." That's not a poor critique because it explains exactly what the person felt was good or bad and it gives the creator (or others) a chance to explain their rationale for their choices, leading to a back and forth discussion and the trading of ideas, opinions, and positions on what works and what doesn't. To you it may sound abrasive, but the point remains, and if you feel strongly about it, you should counter the point with examples of your own, not attack the way it was presented. This is the heart of a critique - to trade discussion on the work, not have metadiscussions on talking about it. Would you learn anything if all you received from people were these two variations on feedback?
When you see an awful art installation, do you focus on balance even though there is little to redeem it? At what point is that balance? What if your words become completely unfocused because you're trying to salvage a few "good" points because you think you'll hurt someone's feelings? This is an example of a very poor critique, because you can't even explain yourself, and you're placing feelings in front of a deconstruction of something that needs to be discussed with honesty. You are actually hurting the creator this way, because you're saying certain things are pretty good when they're actually not, and you're only saying that because you want to "be nice". Now the creator is going to use those specific techniques and procedures in the future because they think it was effective.
The hilarious thing about anyone complaining about my points is that they think I was being rude, when I was in fact being the exact opposite (and if you've ever been critiqued at all for your work, I wasn't even close to brutal!). The way to "be nice" in a critique is to be fully honest and fair enough that someone can respond with counterpoints – if you feel so strongly that I was mean or disrespectful, then you should be able to easily counter my points by showing me where they were incorrect. That's the way to respect the creator AND the work. It's something that most people here just simply do not understand (maybe because a lot of Phantom flyers have not been exposed to these types of discussions in a creative field). If you wanted a cheerleading squad, go find some yes men.
|
|