I. Whether you like the criticism?
In 1836, in an article on literary criticism and opinions of the Moscow Observer “VG Belinsky wrote: “We love criticism – this is no dispute. Laptop Magazine has always straighten out on the criticism, the first cut in an article in the journal is a critique, no matter how Duren magazine, in whatever he may decline, but if it happens at least one great critical article, it is read, are take out of her book under a bushel, and sees the light of day, critique of the most magazine is obliged to own power. Without criticism the magazine is an image without a face, anatomical, and not a living organic being. Why so? Here lies a lot of reasons: and wounded pride, and personal relationships, but most of all desire for education. ”
I do not know, wrote to Belinsky, live it now, like the line or not. And love is love – hatred. Again, remember the dialogue from the play Grigory Gorin’s “That Munchhausen:
Mayor: And they say that humor – useful … prolongs life.
Munchausen: Not everyone! The one who laughs, prolongs, the one who makes jokes, shortens …
Maybe this is the case with criticism in a similar way: a foreign address its nice to hear, but most criticized – God forbid! And so the love of the criticism and say nothing …
Yes, like the critic and his criticism is not easy. Samuel Beckett in his play “Waiting for Godot” made the word “critic” a dirty word. Here is one of the dialogues between the main characters (translated from English – the author of the article):
VLADIMIR: Blockhead!
Estragon: And this idea! Let us-ka mutual insults!
VLADIMIR: Blockhead!
Estragon: Parasite!
VLADIMIR: Abortion!
Estragon: Lice!
VLADIMIR: Sewer rat!
Estragon: Vicar!
VLADIMIR: Cretin!
Estragon: [puts an end]. Kp-p-Hrithik!
VLADIMIR: Oh! [Defeated, snikaet and turns away.]
Estragon: Well, forget it.
VLADIMIR: Gogo!
Estragon: Didi!
And yet, doubts the usefulness and necessity of criticism there. What would be controversial or was its essence, no matter how annoying she is the author, no matter how futile nor were her aspirations – criticism is always helpful, and the creators of works of art, and the general public. Creators, it is a necessary feedback loop, allowing to improve and develop. Viewers, listeners and readers, it can somehow navigate the vast world of art and improve their education. Criticism performs its tasks imperfect, but that is no reason to abandon it altogether, because, alas, is perfect in this world is not at all.
Try to understand the essence of criticism, its forms and contradictions, so as soon as look into all these aspects, we can deliver criticism of his service.
Start as follows with a description of the dual nature of criticism.
II. Criticism as a personal opinion
First of all, the criticism may be just a subjective responses about a particular product. In this case, it is not based on an explicit desire to learn something of the author. It is simply a subjective evaluation. Yes, it is the result and in any case not the author.
A significant portion of, say, movie critics, or literary criticism relates specifically to this species.
It should also be noted that in this case and the very criticism may be an independent work of art. For example, the critical Belinsky’s articles – it is a subjective description (view) perception of the author of various works, and in and of itself, this description has a certain independent literary value.
The subjectivity of this kind of criticism, of course, is not absolute. Gleanings objective may well be contained in it. But the proportion of subjective it is still very high. However, no need to fully share what else there is no opinion. Even if it belongs to the authoritative criticism. In the end, only you to decide: Do you like any particular play, music, painting or a meal in a restaurant.
The first criticism of this kind is intended for the public and experts. But the author can learn from it much useful. If he wants to, of course. The wise author is capable of extracting nuggets of good, even from a stream of separate opinions nonprofessionals. In general, professional criticism – a minor factor. It is not for critics also creates a product! Therefore, the non-professional assessments are a good occasion for reflection.
Authors, of course, is upset that their creations talks about everyone who is not lazy. But then you always want to ask: himself, the author is always willing to rely on the opinion of a professional? Here, for example, the author will go into a restaurant and order a signature dish. And he will bring something completely inedible. And will he be indignant: how and why? ” A waiter, he would say in response: “Our chef, sir – the winner of many awards and a professional high class. So what do you scold him? Pass, please, to the kitchen. Let’s see how you yourself know how to cook. But already there and decide: Do you have the right to criticize or not! “Absurd? Yes. Or, say, tell the person: “What a wonderful music to this movie!” And he answered: “Yes, this is nonsense, not music.” But opponents were not born yesterday: “Come walk, a young man to the cello or goboyu. Let’s see whether you have the right to criticize or not … “Nonsense? Of course!
Each user of the result of creativity (if I may say so) is entitled to his personal subjective evaluation of this result. Important: in this case, the critic himself should not claim that it broadcasts the truth in the final instance. Alas, the desire to give their words for objective judgments one way or another is typical of many critics. By the way, often the authors, relating to tolerate criticism themselves with pleasure and categorically criticize others. Then, perhaps, still be treated to the critics quieter, eh?
So, in respect of the criticisms of the author must be prepared to have that opinion can be arbitrary. Absolutely any. But in life, of course, this recommendation is often wishful thinking. No more. What a pleasure to listen to the hostess unflattering comments about his cooking?
III. Criticism as a means of targeting the author
If the first type of criticism can be called “critic opinion,” the second – more than would fit the definition of “critic-prompting. This type of criticism is intended specifically to influence the author to obtain from him the desired result. When such situations are possible?
First, the critic is inherent motivation to learning. In this case, the critic becomes like the teacher, master, expert, expert, etc., and criticized by acting as a student.
In order for this kind of constructive criticism was absolutely necessary in the student’s willingness to accept personal criticism of the teacher. If this happens, the good of this criticism is not.
There is a common mistake may be criticized in that it may want to listen to criticism only from the mouth of a credible and recognized for his other master. But the teacher’s talent – it is a separate quality. History knows many examples of how a talented artist, not possessing the gift of teaching, no one and nothing to teach but could not. (That, however, does not exclude the possibility of training a talented student in the process of simply observing the teacher. But the subject of criticism this question has no relation.)
Again, there are talented teachers, who themselves do not, but know how to do. It is wise to trust such people to teaching. As an example of this is Alexander Gomelsky, the legendary basketball coach.
Another common misconception: the student often thinks that it is sufficient to resolve the few shortcomings noted teacher, and work to become a masterpiece. The teacher, in the broadest sense, is often said the most significant model error, which should not continue. No more. But if you do not allow gross errors – it does not mean that as a result of your efforts will certainly be some masterpieces. The teacher can not teach to make mistakes, but learn to do masterpieces, he can not. There could be very …
Secondly, a “critic-prompting” peculiar relationship “slave-Head”, “author-client”, “author and editor”, etc.
There is already the author does not have to choose: he is forced to listen to the critics say. And there is often a problem of another kind: critic, using his position, sometimes an obstacle, rather than helps the author achieve the desired result. In this case, to talk about non-constructive criticism.
Options worthless for the author-critics showed good motivation for his cartoon Tom Fishburne (Tom Fishburne):
Type 1: “If his lips Nikanor Ivanovich let nagging nose Ivan Kuzmich …”
- And could not you combine all these options?
Type 2: Mission neuyasnima
- All this does not meet our goals.
- What purpose?
- You have to guess!
Type 3: Meany
- Change the font to Times New Roman!
Type 4: “I am plagued by vague doubts …”
- Let’s go back to version 18D of the sixth selection!
Type 5: All the nerves
- I hate yellow!
- But this is the brand’s signature color!
- Just change it and everything!
Type 6: Creative Editor
- How do you react to the fact that instead of your work we will consider my option?
Type 7: asshole
- This is absolute garbage!
- Could you clarify why?
- No.
Type 8: the teacher
- For your job should be something to add … Here on this list.
However, it should be stressed once again: all the incidents shown Fishburne are just bad for the “critics motives.” For the “views of critics,” they are all quite acceptable. The viewer may well say: “I do not like the yellow in this picture!” This is just a personal opinion not more. Someone yellow color may not like it, but someone will like. Usual business … By no means obliged to tear my hair out and sink into despair at such a statement. He is not obliged to give up a yellow in the future. In this case the author can simply take it personal opinion into consideration. And can not accept. The trouble is small.
IV. Fundamental paradox of criticism
Alas, many critics believe it their right and that their comments one big benefit. Ah, if only! Criticism is, in itself, no matter what type it does not include, automatically lead to good results does not. Rather it would be presumptuous to expect that as a result of criticism criticized certainly learn what to do and how.
Use of critics is that it teaches the author, and that, analyzing it, the author learns himself. In the opinion of the author, and is the fundamental paradox of criticism. If it wishes to benefit from criticism of the author is not, then the sense of criticism for the author of no. The same applies to the public. If she is willing to carefully analyze and critique their own to draw conclusions – the benefits of criticism will be positive. If the public is willing to only look in the mouth criticism and expects it to only absolute revelation – that sense from this, most likely, there will be no.
Fundamental paradox of criticism also often leads to what is criticized is made of the criticisms are not the same conclusions that imply criticism. In the field of art is quite normal. Anything that allows the author to develop and move forward, it should be recognized as an important and necessary. The critic must be prepared for this: such a situation is very common.
V. Conclusion
Alas, in regard to criticism of the people are very conservative. The author is not so naive as to believe that his article would change the world and lead to rainbow coexistence of critics and authors.
If the reader of these lines will simply understanding the essence of criticism (even if this interpretation does not coincide with the above), the author will consider his task to be fulfilled.