I agree with what you state here and thank you for it. It states clearly my own views. I think a clear distinction needs to be made between a critical review and a concrit. For the record? I've never written a concrit in my livejournal. Concrit's are given directly to the writer or with their knowledge. Reviews are written for the benefit of readers or for the person who is writing the review. The writer be damned. Because when you write a review - it's after the story has been published or finished and can't really be changed.
BUT, and this is where I part ways with the be-nice-to-authors crowd, concrit and reviews are two different things. Reviews aren't for the author. And if any authors out there fondly imagine that because they've never seen anyone discussing their work in less than adoring tones in public, that their work never gets discussed in less than adoring tones, they're in for a sad surprise one of these days when the bubble pops. No one is so popular and brilliant that everyone likes their work.
Yes. If you step outside your little group of fans, you will hit detractors. It's interesting - this happens with meta essays as well. For everyone who applauds your work and gives it an reward, there's someone out there who hates it.
I remember reading a blistering review of a performance I gave in a play when I was a teen. It was a summer theater camp for kids, I wasn't getting paid, actually was paying for the experience and it was from my perspective for fun. The play was the Hobbit. I was playing the Great Goblin. I couldn't have been more than 12, maybe 13 at the time. A professional theater critic reviewed the play and attacked my performance. After reading it, and being understandably upset by it, a professional actor working with us - gave me a rather good piece of advice. "I never read reviews of my work," he said. "If they are great they make me cocky, if they are horrible they depress me. Best to ignore." This advice was later echoed by Bebe Neuwirth when asked if she read the horrific reviews of her performance on the Broadway play the Adams Family, no she said - Bob Fosse taught me ages ago not to read or pay attention to them.
Reviews...aren't for the writer or actor or artist, they are for the audience. Concrit on the other hand is for the writer.
no subject
BUT, and this is where I part ways with the be-nice-to-authors crowd, concrit and reviews are two different things. Reviews aren't for the author. And if any authors out there fondly imagine that because they've never seen anyone discussing their work in less than adoring tones in public, that their work never gets discussed in less than adoring tones, they're in for a sad surprise one of these days when the bubble pops. No one is so popular and brilliant that everyone likes their work.
Yes. If you step outside your little group of fans, you will hit detractors. It's interesting - this happens with meta essays as well. For everyone who applauds your work and gives it an reward, there's someone out there who hates it.
I remember reading a blistering review of a performance I gave in a play when I was a teen. It was a summer theater camp for kids, I wasn't getting paid, actually was paying for the experience and
it was from my perspective for fun. The play was the Hobbit. I was playing the Great Goblin. I couldn't have been more than 12, maybe 13 at the time. A professional theater critic reviewed the play and attacked my performance. After reading it, and being understandably upset by it, a professional actor working with us - gave me a rather good piece of advice. "I never read reviews of my work," he said. "If they are great they make me cocky, if they are horrible they depress me. Best to ignore." This advice was later echoed by Bebe Neuwirth when asked if she read the horrific reviews of her performance on the Broadway play the Adams Family, no she said - Bob Fosse taught me ages ago not to read or pay attention to them.
Reviews...aren't for the writer or actor or artist, they are for the audience. Concrit on the other hand is for the writer.