Opinion, Objectiveness and Constructive Criticism · 9:04pm Apr 10th, 2016
There have been a few blog reactions and more than a few private fights that have found their way back to me for my blog on "The Law of Equivalent Exchange - Comments Version", which kinda promotes a defensive, non-ideal philosophy of—yes—Equivalent Exchange: You act like an asshole, you get treated as such. So here's a bit more in-depth look at what I was trying to angrily get at back then.
Now, as I said on that blog, it's not ideal, and although it could arguably be said that by its very nature the person that ends on the receiving end of "I'll treat you like you treat me" deserves it in some fashion, it's not the right answer all of the time most of the time, and makes both parties look bad.
Honestly, applying Equivalent Exchange all the time and to anyone that pisses us off does little more than infuriate everyone in return for a short burst of satisfaction and a long time of alienation, but the point of that blog is still valid. People try to push their ideas of what a story should be, instead of what it is. People on both sides come across as dicks. People confuse their place and what they're saying with fact or the role of some sort of superior to the author based on their opinion alone.
This whole thing seems to stem from the lack of understanding of what is—and isn't—constructive criticism, and what is opinion. For this, let's start by understanding the strict definition of Opinion and Objectiveness
o·pin·ion
əˈpinyən
noun
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
objective
uh b-jek-tiv
adjective
not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased:
an objective opinion.
In simple terms, for a clear example, opinion is what feeds the Upvotes and Downvotes in the site.
It's the last thing you can have from being objective. While some people can make a conscious effort to separate their opinion from objectiveness, let's face it, we all just have one and react accordingly to it.
Hence why, in my opinion, downvoting a whole story of over 70k words for random, occasional typos is a lousy reason to do so.
But you see, that doesn't make it any less valid. Whoever is up-voting, or down-voting is sharing their opinion and whether they want to trick themselves into thinking that it's objective, it's validity to them is without question and therefore it is an honest upvote or downvote in that sense.
(Now, if said person just downvotes everything in sight on the front page, uses voting as some sort of petty revenge, or uses alt accounts to downvote the same story several times, well then, not only are they sad, sad little people, but they are also going to get banned in some cases.)
Whether the author agrees with the validity of the downvote or not is irrelevant.
The issue with opinions, becomes a problem when opinions are shared in the comments and presented (and defended) as fact.
To put it bluntly: They are not fact until confirmed.
not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
Opinions matter: They are the thoughts of those we the authors try to reach and tell a story to. An opinion can be valid, but it can also be erroneous and aggressive when it's used as an attempt to enforce a commenter's view of what is happening in the story onto the author or others, especially when ignoring the author's intent/response/clarification.
You see, this is not the 18th century. Surprise! There is no death of the author in a site where the author actively interacts with the readers. There is always interpretation, for sure, but when you share that interpretation and the author blatantly says: "no, that's not it", then your interpretation is actually, factually wrong.
Your opinion on whether the author actually achieved communicating what he/she supposedly wanted to say is valid however, and you are definitely, unequivocally, free to share that. But again, it's your opinion, and as much validity as it holds to you, it doesn't make it fact, nor does it make it more valid than the opinion of another person that disagrees with you, author included.
Opinions can be used when writing Constructive Criticism:
constructive criticism
noun
criticism or advice that is useful and intended to help or improve something, often with an offer of possible solutions
But it's not the same as the opinion discussed above: being constructive means more than saying "this is bad". Blanket statements about aspects of the story, be them quality, characterization, grammar, etc. are not constructive criticism. They offer no way to fix what—in the critic's opinion—is wrong.
This is where one thing I like repeating over and over comes in: projecting what you want a story to be is not valid criticism, nor is it constructive; it's a basic opinion that can be proven wrong by the author if he choses to address that and therefore making it invalid.
When you write constructive criticism, you must first understand that you might be wrong. Just like with a personal opinion, however, a good constructive critic, will take into account a response and either admit things were misinterpreted and let it be, or offer advice on how to make that message clear.
While writing constructive criticism, it's also important to understand the medium you're criticizing. There is—for example—no point in criticizing the lack of extensive world-building, secondary character progression and plot-irrelevant exploration when you're criticizing a short story.
However, if in your opinion the author could achieve the message they are trying to convey better, then the moment you state that, along with suggestions on how to clarify, improve, and evolve their work... then you're giving constructive feedback.
Tone has a lot to do with comments as well: Sweeping statements (when negative) only instigate a negative reaction. It really only makes you look like a dick, and again, being blunt is not the same as being a dick. There's a difference: being blunt is being honest and as objective as possible; being a dick in comments is using abrasive words and attitude in order to either impose your opinion, or somehow make the author (or other commenter) look like an idiot.
And just because you do so, it doesn't mean the author has to use it. Even if you are their editor, you're trying to help, but help is not forced. If the author chooses to ignore your advice, well you did more than most other commenters did, and it's the author's possible loss to ignore it now or for future installments.
In bullet points, Constructive Criticism:
- Doesn't just happen because you say you disagree with something.
- You have to actively understand what the author is trying to do to make your opinion and suggestions valid.
- The more you understand the medium the author is using, the more helpful you will be.
- And just because you wrote constructive criticism, it doesn't mean the author has to use it.
Now, none of us are perfect, so it's inevitable that we all will share opinions that will cause others to react negatively. The important thing to remember, is that once all is said and done, we can look back and see, as much as we can, whether we are being objective and constructive or not.
~Peace!
Edit: Check out bookplayer's response/followup blog on Author Responses to Criticism!
*applauds*
reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/slow_clap_citizen_kane.gif
This has been what has been bothering me a -lot- lately, but I couldn't find a way to enunciate it. Bravo, sir.
Edit:
I actually had a good example come up that I can share (not naming anyone specific of course). I tried to be as realistic and believable when writing Stardust, but there are some things that just slipped through the cracks. For one, I had been referring to the ammunition containers for weapons as 'clips' instead of 'magazines'. A commenter left a note about this while dropping the f-bomb or something else that was rather rude.
Was the commenter wrong? No. But I made a point stating that his suggestions would get more traction if they were framed more politely, and things improved from there.
Yay, However, on the spelling down vote. I think it is valid(my opinion) if the author refuses to correct their mistakes.
I can't say I'm a fan of the equivalent exchange approach to arguing. Once we devolve into insults, resolution becomes difficult. I recall a person who disagreed with me once, who just happened to push the wrong buttons when they started the argument. To this day, I regret how I handled it, because nothing came of it for either of us. I still believe that I was in the right, but there's no way I could've ever convinced the other party of that while insulting them back. It turned the whole thing into a matter of pride for both sides. That person wasn't going to listen to me no matter what I said once that happened, and it didn't help that I wasn't explaining myself well to begin with.
Equivalent exchange in arguing does more than make both parties look bad. It's harmful to communication itself. I always encourage de-escalating heated arguments. Don't make enemies you don't need to, even if people want to be your enemy.
This, by the way, I couldn't agree with more. Death of the author is another thing I'm not a fan of.
...
(Looks down at musket and powdered wig in hands and horse-drawn buggy in driveway)
GOD DAMMIT.
Great, now I have to go back and read some of my comments I made on stories to make sure I wasn't a insufferable prick to someone.
3861748
We are both a little late to the party, aren't we?
I suppose we should go powder our wigs together.
A wise man once said: opinions are like orgasms. Everyone can have theirs, but I only care about mine.
However, people debating what they would have done if they were writing is not the same thing. It's simply comparing writing styles and can be a fun pass time. I can't even count how many times I've seen people get pissed at people doing this.
But being blunt is often seen as being an asshole. That's why I teasingly call my biggest critics my "Helpful Assholes"
A lot of people on this site would say otherwise.
A very good followup to the previous one. People could learn a lot from you. I only wish more would actually take your advice.
Since blogs are starting to outnumber stories, do you think there should be upvotes and downvotes for blogs?
I don't think most authors want "constructive criticism" if it means being told how to fix things. Most authors like being told what's not working, but not how to fix it.
3864147 Well, yes, if we're more specific it definitely is a better approach. I prefer it that way myself, but I'd say that at least still falls under the spirit of what I'm suggesting?
I think that thinking of criticism as objective or subjective is actually problematic. A lot of criticism is actually evaluatative, for lack of a better term; that is to say, it is a value judgement. All value judgements are intrinsically subjective, but people have this idea that objective and subjective are opposites, when in reality a lot of value judgements are not what most people would think of when they think of subjective.
This is basically a necessity when evaluating art, writing, video games, or anything else which is qualitative instead of quantitative; if I cannot stick a meter into something and get a numeric reading, but instead have to make a qualitative judgement, it is always subjective.
In any case, the term "objective" has multiple meanings to the point where it is often used confusingly. It is possible to make an objective subjective judgement on something, in the sense that you divorced yourself from your own personal feelings and prejudices against the author or subject matter, but your opinion is still subjective.
Viewing objective and subjective as a sliding scale with a large gray area in between them is often a much more useful notion of objectivity and subjectivity than the notion of them being two entirely distinct and seperate entities.
"Your story sucks" can range from being extremely subjective to being extremely objective, depending on who is rendering the judgement and why they're rendering it.
As an aside, I think most of the time, when people downvote for this, it is because it bothered them. If something bothers someone, I think that indicates that it is having a significant negative impact on the story - or, possibly, that the story has failed to be immersive enough to get the reader to overlook the occaisional typo, and so every mistake in the text is obvious to them because they're not immersed in the story, but reading text on a screen.
In my personal experience, when I notice lots of errors in a story, it is either because the story is failing to immerse me, or there are so many errors that it actively detracts from my experience reading the story.
The thing is, if you don't train yourself to think about what is really bothering you, it is very easy to look at typos and blame them for the story being bad. But in reality, oftentimes, when people are nitpicking at a story, it is often a sign that there is some much larger problem which is more difficult for them to put into words (or even grok in some cases) and so they'll limpet onto something which is much easier to clearly distinguish as wrong.
I see this all the time in video game reviews, where someone suggests that a game requires a "bit more polish" when, in fact, the problem with the game isn't polish at all, but that the underlying systems of the game or the flow of the gameplay is intrinsically flawed.
When I read something for the Royal Guard, and reject it, my thought is, "If the writer fixed every error I'm listing here, would I accept it?" If the answer is no, then I'm not being honest about why I'm rejecting the story, or at the very least I'm missing something very important.
I've caught myself grabbing onto minor things many times in this way, when in fact my dissatisfaction with the story came from elsewhere.
Led here by bookplayer's blog. ^.^
Sadly, I think you'll find that people will first seek to justify their behavior by contorting philosophy or redefining words long before they actually appraise their actions.
3867112
Would you mind providing some examples?
.....I''ll tattoo that first blog post to to the inside of one eyelid and this post to the the inside of the other. And it'll be fluorescent ink.
I love this and this, so much. I just can't risk putting a link to it in my blog post or else my readers are going to complain to me like hell.
3870340 I think he means that not all feedback is given perfectly in a mindset that we understand... Someone who is objective, and thinking from it according to his/her experiences might say "this story sucks" because to him/her, it actually does and it is offensive. (extreme case mind you), and someone else who gives a detailed review, might be totally going off of what he/she feels...
3867112 Did I totally get that right/wrong?
3870340
3890009
Sorry, I thought I replied to this.
Probably got distracted thinking about a blog post.
Anyway, a story which is written with no paragraph breaks, no punctuation, and a bunch of misspelled words, which is a simplistic, telly story which has no depth to it... that's something that someone might say sucks, and be correct - that is an objectively bad story.
If you got a group together of talented writers, and had them judge a bunch of stories with a wide variety of skill levels, some would end up on the bottom consistently, and others would end up on the top consistently. You'd see a range of responses for each individual story, but they could tell you that some stories are certainly far worse than others.
I would argue that this enables you to say that some stories do, in fact, objectively suck.