Quickie - Bound & Gagged Page 2

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 10:21 AM BST

Are you joking me or what?

Have you even read what you said?

Should you wish to do so....

Should I wish to do what?

Your initial message read like you were going to suggest something but you never did.

If you remember right I actually said it would be best if you just never responded to any of my threads. You clearly like to stir things up and are obviously a pretentious git.

I like nothing more than constructive feedback as you can see from my many posted sketches whereby people have offered constructive feedback and I have taken it on board and more often than not bettered my material.

Let's leave it at that.

View original

Tell you what, since you've personally insulted me, let's not leave it at that, eh? Please indulge me with one instance where I've 'stirred things up', Craig, I'd love to read it.

I do remember you asking me not to offer critique on your threads now but when I reponded last I'd forgotten who I was talking to - I'd rather hoped I'd made that clear in my last comment but then I gather you don't comprehend the language too well. Since I'm here now, let me strip away some of the mystique and lay things out for you a little clearer...

The critique I offered read as follows:

"There's not really enough going on in this sketch for me. I know breaking it down isn't really a fair way of critiquing comedy but in this instance, should you wish to do so, you're left with 'parents interrupted during sex game by kid(s)'. It's an awkward situation for sure but it's not much of a sketch, is it?"

By "Should you wish to do that" I was referring, naturally, to the very thing I said that had preceeded it. It's a pretty common way of constructing an argument but fair play if it's new to you.

Now let me crack the code wide open and explain what it was I was referring to in that previous sentence...

There are really only two actions described here: 'critiquing' or 'breaking it down'. Using the process of elimination you can dismiss 'critiquing' which leaves, you guessed it, 'breaking it down'. I go on to explain this in some detail if you follow through to the end of sentence 2. Read it aloud if it helps, Craig.

Quote: David Bussell @ April 20 2010, 10:47 AM BST

Tell you what, since you've personally insulted me, let's not leave it at that, eh? Please indulge me with one instance where I've 'stirred things up', Craig, I'd love to read it.

I do remember you asking me not to offer critique on your threads now but when I reponded last I'd forgotten who I was talking to - I'd rather hoped I'd made that clear in my last comment but then I gather you don't comprehend the language too well. Since I'm here now, let me strip away some of the mystique and lay things out for you a little clearer...

The critique I offered read as follows:

"There's not really enough going on in this sketch for me. I know breaking it down isn't really a fair way of critiquing comedy but in this instance, should you wish to do so, you're left with 'parents interrupted during sex game by kid(s)'. It's an awkward situation for sure but it's not much of a sketch, is it?"

By "Should you wish to do that" I was referring, naturally, to the very thing I said that had preceeded it. It's a pretty common way of constructing an argument but fair play if it's new to you.

Now let me crack the code wide open and explain what it was I was referring to in that previous sentence...

There are really only two actions described here: 'critiquing' or 'breaking it down'. Using the process of elimination you can dismiss 'critiquing' which leaves, you guessed it, 'breaking it down'. I go on to explain this in some detail if you follow through to the end of sentence 2. Read it aloud if it helps, Craig.

View original

It's almost like you've given evidence for my previous comments. You know the one about you being a pretentious git.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 11:38 AM BST

It's almost like you've given evidence for my previous comments. You know the one about you being a pretentious git.

View original

Stop being a tool Craig, The Buss Man's comment about your sketch was perfectly valid and straightforward. You don't have to agree with his thoughts of course.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 11:38 AM BST

It's almost like you've given evidence for my previous comments. You know the one about you being a pretentious git.

View original

I could come down to your level, Craig, but I'd have to dig a pretty f**king big hole first.

How am I being a tool?

David Bussell knows that I think he's a twat, as previously discovered in a previous debate.

I come on here to share my material and read others. I leave honest and constructive and helpful feedback.

I just find it funny that the way David offers his criticism tends to be alot more pretentious than everyone elses. He doesn't seem to be able to get his point across without sounding pretentious.

"It's not really a sketch though is it?" - I mean is that a rhetorical question? everyone else seems to think it is? He then goes on to refer to me as kiddo....as he also done in our previous debate.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 11:57 AM BST

How am I being a tool?

David Bussell knows that I think he's a twat, as previously discovered in a previous debate.

I come on here to share my material and read others. I leave honest and constructive and helpful feedback.

I just find it funny that the way David offers his criticism tends to be alot more pretentious than everyone elses. He doesn't seem to be able to get his point across without sounding pretentious.

"It's not really a sketch though is it?" - I mean is that a rhetorical question? everyone else seems to think it is? He then goes on to refer to me as kiddo....as he also done in our previous debate.

View original

Here's the thing, Craig, when you insult someone you run the risk of them responding unpleasantly.

If you find my critique pretentious, fair enough. Being as I've taken the time to offer it though, probably the classy thing would be for you to respond graciously and disregard it. Snapping back with a quip about Brad Pitt (that, if I can offer some more critique, doesn't really work) makes you look like the sort of person who only comes onto Critique for a round of celebratory backpatting. That or you have some personal vendetta against me, which would be fine if I could just place the root of it.

Quote: David Bussell @ April 20 2010, 12:08 PM BST

Here's the thing, Craig, when you insult someone you run the risk of them responding unpleasantly.

If you find my critique pretentious, fair enough. Being as I've taken the time to offer it though, probably the classy thing would be for you to respond graciously and disregard it. Snapping back with a quip about Brad Pitt (that, if I can offer some more critique, doesn't really work) makes you look like the sort of person who only comes onto Critique for a round of celebratory backpatting. That or you have some personal vendetta against me, which would be fine if I could just place the root of it.

View original

"Here's the thing, Craig, when you insult someone you run the risk of them responding unpleasantly."

followed by....

"If you find my critique pretentious, fair enough. Being as I've taken the time to offer it though, probably the classy thing would be for you to respond graciously and disregard it"

I don't know about you but when someone offers me pretentious tripe I tend not to respond classy or gracious.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 12:17 PM BST

"Here's the thing, Craig, when you insult someone you run the risk of them responding unpleasantly."

followed by....

"If you find my critique pretentious, fair enough. Being as I've taken the time to offer it though, probably the classy thing would be for you to respond graciously and disregard it"

I don't know about you but when someone offers me pretentious tripe I tend not to respond classy or gracious.

View original

Like I say, Craig, you find me that first helping of 'pretentious tripe' and serve it up. Then we'll see who was the first to start slinging mud.

Quote: David Bussell @ April 20 2010, 12:20 PM BST

Like I say, Craig, you find me that first helping of 'pretentious tripe' and serve it up. Then we'll see who was the first to start slinging mud.

View original

"It's an awkward situation for sure but it's not much of a sketch is it?"

Like I said before, is that a rhetorical question or pretentious comment?

Also, you said breaking it down "Should I wish to do so". Then all you really did was give a brief synopsis of the piece.

Craig could you please stop bumping your thread by conjuring up arguments.

Thank you.

I think Bussell was kinda right with his original assessment, structurally to me it reads like a scene as it is a bit A to B in its progression; she finds him in chair, thinks he is being held hostage but then instantly we find out he was actually involved in a sex game. Maybe there needs to be a heightened level of concern from the young girl, looking around the house for the people she assumes are holding him hostage, then finds mum in bondage gear (an e.g. but something better) or at least something delaying finding out it's a sex game.

Shake virtual hands and make-up D and C, it is all a misunderstanding.

Focussing on the sketch alone - as I said, I like it. Craig, you've labelled it as a 'quickie', and that's what it is. That awkwardness, followed by her friends also coming around is funny and made me chuckle.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 12:24 PM BST

"It's an awkward situation for sure but it's not much of a sketch is it?"

Like I said before, is that a rhetorical question or pretentious comment?

View original

It wasn't a rhetorical question, no, it was stated as a suggestion that you ask it of your work.

It's a question of mechanics. With the odd exception, sketches are a pretty formulaic construct. Your construct, to my mind, doesn't hold up. As another poster said, it simply goes from A to B. There are no revelations or surprises. Ask yourself what's funny about your sketch when you break it down to its component parts (a synopsis if you will). Is the idea of a sex session being interrupted by one's offspring a funny enough idea to justify calling it a sketch? Maybe you think so but I don't. I think what you've written is a scene not a sketch. There are others who disagree with me. You get to choose which of these appraisals is the one for you. Nothing is served by getting angry at negative critique except making you look like a bit of a sore loser.

Quote: David Bussell @ April 20 2010, 1:53 PM BST

It wasn't a rhetorical question, no, it was stated as a suggestion that you ask it of your work.

It's a question of mechanics. With the odd exception, sketches are a pretty formulaic construct. Your construct, to my mind, doesn't hold up. As another poster said, it simply goes from A to B. There are no revelations or surprises. Ask yourself what's funny about your sketch when you break it down to its component parts (a synopsis if you will). Is the idea of a sex session being interrupted by one's offspring a funny enough idea to justify calling it a sketch? Maybe you think so but I don't. I think what you've written is a scene not a sketch. There are others who disagree with me. You get to choose which of these appraisals is the one for you. Nothing is served by getting angry at negative critique except making you look like a bit of a sore loser.

View original

I didn't get angry at negative critique - I think it was more patronising than negative andthat's why I ignored it. Your wording wasn't very constructive - more having a dig, no?

I never called it a sketch, in fact, I never called it anything other than a quickie. I agree, it's probably more a scene than a sketch.

And yes, it goes from A to B and it could do with a twist here and there and suggested by others - Mr Paterson (DHL delivery driver would be good idea). I don't take my comedy writing as seriously as yourself I think that's perhaps where the problem lies. I think up some funny ideas/scenes/sketches - I don't sit for hours pondering over it.

Now, let's just drop this please and let this thread sink and give others a chance.

Quote: Craig H @ April 20 2010, 2:20 PM BST

I didn't get angry at negative critique - I think it was more patronising than negative andthat's why I ignored it. Your wording wasn't very constructive - more having a dig, no?

I never called it a sketch, in fact, I never called it anything other than a quickie. I agree, it's probably more a scene than a sketch.

And yes, it goes from A to B and it could do with a twist here and there and suggested by others - Mr Paterson (DHL delivery driver would be good idea). I don't take my comedy writing as seriously as yourself I think that's perhaps where the problem lies. I think up some funny ideas/scenes/sketches - I don't sit for hours pondering over it.

Now, let's just drop this please and let this thread sink and give others a chance.

View original

You didn't ignore my critique, you wrote a reply accusing it of being nonsensical. Ignoring it would have been just fine by me.

In any case, I think perhaps we're getting somewhere. See, to me, a quickie is still a sketch and should be treated with just as much scrutiny. The fact that you posted it in the Critique section led me to believe that you were looking for an analysis of your writing, which is what I provided. I in no way intended to be patronising (until you forced my hand with a personal insult - bad form on this forum BTW) and I fail to see why you would take my response as such. I was perfectly constructive, even going as far as to talk directly about the construction of the joke and its component parts. Perhaps you feel that critique is only worthy if it either celebrates your work or spoonfeeds you fresh ideas but it's not my job to write your sketch for you, only to give you my opinion on it.

I've said all I need to on the matter anyway and I'm happy for you to have the last word should you so wish.