Was just thinking that ctiquing is alot like S&M
It always hurts, it's very expensive to have it done properly.
It's great to have it done for free by a willing amateur, but this can leave you more bruised than you were expecting.
Above all it's a useful learning experience.
n.b. I don't read critiques of my stuff in a leather cod piece, and gimp mask, well only if I've been exeptionally bad.
Oh dear this could get ugly. I'll just say my opinion and hide. This is seriously not aimed at anyone. it comes from a series of experiences I have had in the Critique forum for over a year.
Putting work up for critique is always difficult, unless like me you're drunk and arrogant nearly all the time. Therefore critiquers should give free and frank opinions but constructively.
However, in return, the writer should respect the critiquer's opinion and try to deconstruct it or modify it to fit in with their opinion. If someone says its not funny then its not funny (EDIT-It is subjectively not funny to that particular person at that particular time. This does not prove it is objectively not funny). Arguing over which line is not funny and demanding examples is missing the point entirely. As a whole piece that particular critiquer does not find it funny. If they knew why they would say. Not saying does not make their opinion any less valid than anyone elses especially the writer.
Also if you think that your work is so good that any negative critiques you will ignore then, and just implementing the suggestions of critiquers who say 'its great but could you change this' is just as bad, you should not put your work up. You obviously feel that it does not deservere any negative critiques and therefore the whole exercise is pointless.
The ultimate critique always lies with the writer. They will, in the end, have to decide if the work is worthwhile.
Quote: Griff @ February 5, 2008, 2:29 PM"If someone says its not funny then its not funny."
... to that person.
It might be funny to others, though.
Although obviously if armies of people take the time to say "it's shit" there might be some problems with it.
Great. First post after my one and already quoted out of context. This is how arguments start for no reason. This is what I said
Quote: ajp29 @ February 5, 2008, 2:26 PMIf someone says its not funny then its not funny. Arguing over which line is not funny and demanding examples is missing the point entirely. As a whole piece that particular critiquer does not find it funny. If they knew why they would say. Not saying does not make their opinion any less valid than anyone elses especially the writer.
But fine I will modify it to make absolutely sure that everyone knows I meant in their subjective opinion it is not funny if they say its not funny >_<
Quote: sootyj @ February 5, 2008, 1:59 PMI don't read critiques of my stuff in a leather cod piece, and gimp mask
Err .... I do. 
BTW Adam, hear hear, excellent crit of the crit forum as a whole.
Quote: SlagA @ February 5, 2008, 6:40 PMBTW Adam, hear hear, excellent crit of the crit forum as a whole.
I thought it was a bit long.
Quote: Badge @ February 5, 2008, 6:42 PMI thought it was a bit long.
Bit flabby in the middle too.
I'm still sending it to the Writer's Room and nobody's going to stop me Mwahahahahahahaha
Quote: ajp29 @ February 5, 2008, 2:26 PMOh dear this could get ugly. I'll just say my opinion and hide. This is seriously not aimed at anyone. it comes from a series of experiences I have had in the Critique forum for over a year.
Putting work up for critique is always difficult, unless like me you're drunk and arrogant nearly all the time. Therefore critiquers should give free and frank opinions but constructively.
However, in return, the writer should respect the critiquer's opinion and try to deconstruct it or modify it to fit in with their opinion. If someone says its not funny then its not funny (EDIT-It is subjectively not funny to that particular person at that particular time. This does not prove it is objectively not funny). Arguing over which line is not funny and demanding examples is missing the point entirely. As a whole piece that particular critiquer does not find it funny. If they knew why they would say. Not saying does not make their opinion any less valid than anyone elses especially the writer.
Also if you think that your work is so good that any negative critiques you will ignore then, and just implementing the suggestions of critiquers who say 'its great but could you change this' is just as bad, you should not put your work up. You obviously feel that it does not deservere any negative critiques and therefore the whole exercise is pointless.
The ultimate critique always lies with the writer. They will, in the end, have to decide if the work is worthwhile.
Here here.
Quote: ajp29 @ February 5, 2008, 2:26 PMArguing over which line is not funny and demanding examples is missing the point entirely. As a whole piece that particular critiquer does not find it funny. If they knew why they would say. Not saying does not make their opinion any less valid than anyone elses especially the writer.
It might not make the opinion less valid but it often renders the "critique" useless - and will certainly always make it less useful. How can one best improve something when the "critique" is woolly?
The definition of critique is "critical analysis" (Chambers). I fail to see how offering an 'opinion' that is not backed up by at least one example can be said in any way to be analysis. It is not critique.
And I think I for one am with the writer: if they have the courage to put their work up for appraisal the least the would-be critiquer can do is put some thought into the critique and give a reason or two.
Many people on here seem to invest more time in arrogantly saying why they don't need to give a proper critique than in giving critique itself.
It's called the "critique" area of the forum not the "opinions" area.
And therein lies the misunderstanding James. Because the crit board here isn't for professional 'critical analysis'-it's mostly for audience opinion.People put stuff up wanting 'liked it/ha,ha/very good' etc with minor suggestions for improvement,not a full scale in depth report. And theres nothing wrong with that.No ones being paid to read or comment on stuff and generally I think people are pretty generous on here and willing to help people improve their stuff when asked. As long as they're not met with attitude or abuse in return.
If you seriously want critique on as deep a level as you claim you're probably going to have to pay for it somewhere.
Quote: niteowl @ February 5, 2008, 9:03 PMAnd therein lies the misunderstanding James. Because the crit board here isn't for professional 'critical analysis'-it's mostly for audience opinion.People put stuff up wanting 'liked it/ha,ha/very good' etc with minor suggestions for improvement,not a full scale in depth report. And theres nothing wrong with that.No ones being paid to read or comment on stuff and generally I think people are pretty generous on here and willing to help people improve their stuff when asked. As long as they're not met with attitude or abuse in return.
If you seriously want critique on as deep a level as you claim you're probably going to have to pay for it somewhere.
For the record I don't think I have ever been abusive when asking for more detail but have still sometimes been met with amazed outcries along the lines of "how dare you ask for anything else."
I hardly think asking for an odd example is "professional analysis", it's critique on a fundamentally basic level and little time needs to go into it!
The definition of critique is 'critical analysis' and as it's called the critique area I think I can be forgiven for assuming that's what it's supposed to be. Otherwise it should really be called something else.
Of course people are entitled to 'just' offer an opinion, but I feel they should be prepared to enter into a little discussion if asked.
Quote: James Williams @ February 5, 2008, 8:14 PMIt might not make the opinion less valid but it often renders the "critique" useless - and will certainly always make it less useful. How can one best improve something when the "critique" is woolly?
The definition of critique is "critical analysis" (Chambers). I fail to see how offering an 'opinion' that is not backed up by at least one example can be said in any way to be analysis. It is not critique.
And I think I for one am with the writer: if they have the courage to put their work up for appraisal the least the would-be critiquer can do is put some thought into the critique and give a reason or two.
Many people on here seem to invest more time in arrogantly saying why they don't need to give a proper critique than in giving critique itself.
It's called the "critique" area of the forum not the "opinions" area.
James, if you post in the Critique forum expecting deep analysis and feedback with backing up we don’t promise that, we don't tell the BSG members what to post when they read peoples work, they can post what they want and be that an opinion or not, they can do it.
There aren't a large amount of experienced writers on the forum and there is a large volume of content posted in the critique everyday (so I'm thinking it's not that bad), so if anyone’s looking for better feedback, Marc Blake is only £75.
Quote: Paul W @ February 5, 2008, 9:17 PMJames, if you post in the Critique forum expecting deep analysis and feedback with backing up we don’t promise that, we don't tell the BSG members what to post when they read peoples work, they can post what they want and be that an opinion or not, they can do it.
Forgive me for being awkward, but you do tell people what to write, because it's called the 'critique' area rather than the 'opinion' area. An opinion that is not backed up in any way is not critique.
I didn't call for 'deep analysis'; you are putting your own spin on it.
Analysis can be as little as giving one small example. I don't feel that's too much to ask.
I'm not criticising people who take the time to read a post and just slap up an opinion - I do it, everyone does it. But usually I try to go into a little more depth and am always prepared to do so if asked, with no huffing and puffing.
Quote: James Williams @ February 5, 2008, 9:22 PMForgive me for being awkward, but you do tell people what to write, because it's called the 'critique' area rather than the 'opinion' area. An opinion that is not backed up in any way is not critique.
I didn't call for 'deep analysis'; you are putting your own spin on it.
Analysis can be as little as giving one small example. I don't feel that's too much to ask.
I'm not criticising people who take the time to read a post and just slap up an opinion - I do it, everyone does it. But usually I try to go into a little more depth and am always prepared to do so if asked, with no huffing and puffing.
It's called Critique, yes, but either way, they can write pretty much what they like, at the end of the day James you have a problem with it, don't post in it again. Simple as that really.
Quote: Paul W @ February 5, 2008, 9:26 PMIt's called Critique, yes, but either way, they can write pretty much what they like, at the end of the day James you have a problem with it, don't post in it again. Simple as that really.
I'm not being censorious but your endorsement of poor critique is absurd.