A general question to the house

[ksmith]

When critique crosses the line into cruelty, who is served?

Besides the author au jus, that is.

UPDATE: posted in the Comments section.

Comments

[elvesforeyes.livejournal.com]

I'd say that the critiquer has some hidden agenda or withheld anger against the world, and who better to take it out on than you?

[pbray.livejournal.com]

I've seen this behavior in critique groups, where we ultimately concluded that the critiquer was playing a passive aggressive game, trying to tear people down so that she (and her writing) looked better by comparision.

Bread and Circuses

[technomage.livejournal.com]

Why the audience, of course! Nothing like a little petty cruelty to throw a reveiw over the edge between "might read" to "must read". Think Reality TV!

[torrilin.livejournal.com]

Author au jus doesn't sound very appetizing.

Usually, I do multiple passes on a friend's work. He's not published in fiction, and probably never will be, but he still wants to write *well*. So I get the first draft, and read for glaring problems ("I got really lost in the stats section, can you rework it?"). I get the second draft, and read for lesser problems ("Vic, in and on are not the same thing."). I get the final draft, and read for punctuation and typos.

Burninating a friend for a critique just seems like a bad plan. You can handle even things that might hurt, like the in/on thing, in a way where it's not hurtful. Coz well, if you burninate your friend, you might not get anything more to read out of them. And that'd be *bad*.

[davidlevine]

I think that cruel critiques are done for the same reason anything else is done -- because it entertains the person who is being cruel. Perhaps they like to see the victim squirm. Perhaps they enjoy the feeling of superiority. Perhaps it's just the simple joy of creating and delivering a well-honed bad review (for surely bad reviews are the most fun to read) unalloyed by any feelings of sympathy for the recipient.

One time I delivered a particularly scathing critique, which might have been considered cruel, because I was angry and frustrated with the writer. This person had been making the same basic mistake (failing to put the characters in any significant trouble) for story after story, we'd all said the same thing again and again, and they didn't seem to be getting the message. So I wrote and delivered a nasty, vituperative, angry crit in hopes that hurting the person emotionally might get the message across.

As you might guess, it didn't work.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I should have been more specific and said "criticism" rather than "critique," but they can boil down to the same thing, so I think all comments apply. The overall sense I'm getting is that anger can play a role. Entertainment value. Frustration.

What triggered my question was this link, and the discussions linked therein:

http://community.livejournal.com/genreneep/110614.html

Sometimes you wonder whether folks realize that their posts can be read by the interested parties, or if they care, or if they feel that they've the perfect right to post what they posted and, well, everyone's entitled to their opinion.

One thing I have noticed over the years is that there does seem to be, imho, a slant toward the sentimental in some nominated and award-winning stories. The evocation of emotion...there's a balance that is often difficult to achieve, and the balance one thinks one has achieved may not work for everyone. One reader's three-hanky I Love This is another's Fling It Against the Wall. I recall shaking my head over a couple of award nominees (one Nebula winner, one Hugo nom) where I felt the emotions were very 1-D and heavy-handed. The point was driven home with a dull axe.

But some readers like dull axes. And what do you do about that?

Many of us in this particular corner of LJ qualify as professional readers. We see missteps that the more casual or entertainment-oriented reader may not see, and things bug us that pass many readers right by. And while some of these missteps may bug the living shit out of us, there isn't much we can do about them except vote for other works come award time and swear off the writers in question. Because our tastes aren't the universal. Because Story is personal, it affects for many reasons, and some of those reasons don't necessarily include what we would call good writing.

Do I think there are badly-written stories out there. Oh yes. But what point is served by burning them and pissing on the ashes?

[davidlevine]

I have no idea why nihilistic_kid posts so vituperatively on everything. He must get something out of it, as do his readers. I suspect it is the pleasure of the bad review (and I must confess I enjoy a really scathing movie review as much as the next person).

I also want to state for the record that comments like "well, if this can get nominated, I guess anything can" can hurt more people than just the author of the story under discussion.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I have no idea why nihilistic_kid posts so vituperatively on everything. He must get something out of it, as do his readers. I suspect it is the pleasure of the bad review (and I must confess I enjoy a really scathing movie review as much as the next person).

Yeah, so do I. Especially when I feel the work isn't particularly good anyway. It's like justification--yes, I have taste. Not making any money, but taste I got.

I also want to state for the record that comments like "well, if this can get nominated, I guess anything can" can hurt more people than just the author of the story under discussion.

Been there, heard that. The cool comfort comes from the fact that the people who say that haven't been nominated.

*glyph of one-finger salute*

Congratulations on the nom, David, and good luck.