 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
On the other hand, such a response, however negative, is a legitimate response. The critique may not know how to improve a work. And not a flame. Flaming is another thing altogether
I am grateful for any critique because it's a response. No response gives me nothing. I'm grateful because I've been critiqued before. A too polite critique often may come off polyannish, sweetly cloying.
I'd rather hear the harsh critique response. Critiques are just responses. Very little else. Our reponse to a critique varies from playwright to playwright.
Disagreement about a play's worth occurs. We should try to identify more specifically why we find a work shallow or not whole.
Though the critiquer isn't perfect. And critiquing critiques is rather worthless. I see you posted guidelines. I thought they were good. I also thought they were wishy-washy in some instances.
The real writer hasn't got a thin skin. He/she's capable of enduring responses of every kind. It's all grist for the mill.