I invite you to critique my work in close detail. You are welcome to be as harsh as you want.
Think deeply about what I have presented, as well as the way in which I have presented it. Go beyond the surface level, but critique the surface level as well.
Take note of the context in which my work is placed, and consider any relevant subtext. Take into account the character or narrative voice that I speak in, and what it tells you about my message, and whether those choices were right or wrong.
For the sake of time, you may assume that what I have presented is exactly what I intended to present. Imagine that I have already thought of all other possible routes, and this is the one that I decided upon. No level of detail is too high. Pick apart my words, exactly as they are written/spoken.
Challenge the premises that I state or imply or rely upon. If there is something important that I missed, that is a weakness of my work, and you should call it out as such.
Your critique can be dry and thoughtful, or it can be a more artistic response. It can be facetious or in good faith. It can be a parody or satire. Whatever the case, make your point with impact. Be bold!
And keep in mind that your critique may be critiqued in return.
By critiquing my work, you enter into a collaborative dialogue with me and others.
Your critique will be helpful to me and others as we continue to improve our work.
Both of us will learn more about the topics that interest us.
You may or may not gain standing within various communities.
Your critique may become a ‘work’ of its own.
It might be cathartic to rip my work to shreds.
You could be ‘wrong’.
I might see your critique!!!!!!!!!!!
People might completely misinterpret what you say.
They will think you’re unprofessional.
Everyone will hate you forever.
The biggest downside is that making a good critique takes time. And it opens yourself up to critiques as well.
I wish more people went beyond the surface level with my work. I don’t like it when people tip toe around criticising it. I want to be criticised because then I get to learn how people interpret it, and I get to defend my work.
For me, this was one of the biggest benefits I got from submitting to LIVE last year, and I was able to make my cellpond project ten times better because of the feedback I got.
So I strongly encourage you to submit to LIVE if you’re working on that sort of thing, regardless of what stage your project is at.
The feedback from LIVE was very polite and thoughtful and considerate and helpful, which was nice.
However, I also wish I could get a taste of much harsher feedback. I’m very comfortable with being heckled and dismissed and ignored. I just wish the hecklers were higher quality. So far, they’ve all been terrible and useless. Most only give a boo/hurrah response.
I challenge you (yes, you) to critique my work well. Find its flaws and spell them out for us all to see.
Here are some pieces of work you could critique:
and so on. Everything I’ve ever made is on the table.
If you have something to say about my work then say it! Many many many people say they disagree with my work, or they don’t like it, but very few people actually critique it publicly. And I understand that work is only worth critiquing if it’s of a high enough quality itself, so that part’s on me. I have to make my body of work good enough to attract critique, and this blog post is part of my practice towards getting there.
Back to the wikiblogarden.