I think the original post should be brought back to remind us Hatrackers that critiquing is more than just drowning new members in negative feedback. I'm guilty too and had to remind myself that there is an art to critiquing so as to help lift new members, not discourage.
For a veteran, it's easy to find all the flaws. The harder part to a good critique is to help guide. Don't get me wrong, learning to take your lumps is part of the business, but I do believe we have become a little lazy at the art of critiquing here.
Professional courtesy should outweigh self-indulgence.
It's easy to forget that once we were all brand new at this.
The forum should remain a safe place to learn the craft because the lions in the arena are waiting just outside the door to tear us apart. Tough love, not abuse.
Just a thought,
W.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Easiest to find fault in others' works, an odd facet that workshop processes are based upon. Next, middle easy-hard, locate similar faults in the self's writing. Hardest, note standouts worthy of note. All according to Hatrack's basic guide -- what works and what doesn't work for an auditor, and all points between does and doesn't, plus, for more dynamic practice, infer what a given audience or, say, editor or publisher or house might favor and disfavor.
The sandwich principle for critique is some bread, maybe some lunch meat, maybe some cheese, some condiments, some vegetables, some fungi, toasted or fresh bread, submarine, hero, sliced sandwich loaf, baguette, pita, tortilla. It's a deli counter rapt with options and all tasty-preference substitutions allowed: tomatoes cost extra. Tuna melt no way works for me.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Sorry, walexander, but I'm confused. I'm not clear on what post you are referring to, so I don't know what happened to it.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
If you are asking where the topics are that belong to this area of the Hatrack River Writers Workshop forum, they are still there, but you have to go up to the area (Ways to Critique) page and select "Show All Topics" at the bottom of the pull-down menu near the upper right corner of the page (below the "New Topic" button).
Once you go to the "Show All Topics" page, you will see the missing topics.
I hope that helps. (If I knew how to make topics stick, I would do it, but if no one posts in them after a while, they more or less disappear.)
Posted by Jack Albany (Member # 10698) on :
The act of critiquing is to engage in criticism; finding both fault and merit in the work. Sadly, the calibre of the majority of the prose submitted here tends to throw up more faults than work worthy of merit. Me included.
For me,there is no merit in being able to string together a few words into a sentence. It is expected. If you want a pat on the back you'll need better than that. It's why getting published is such a high bar to leap.
[ March 01, 2018, 01:32 AM: Message edited by: Jack Albany ]
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Hatrack and general workshop critique guidelines imply some chosen from column A, some from form the second, some from area 111 is best wanted. Yet Hatrack's grace is self-selection. No assignments, no grades, no deadlines, few mandates -- no personal attacks -- no returns except for those which the self deems meaningful rewards. Self-discovery, self-governance, self-responsibility, self-reliance, and consequent self-success therefrom, are their own rewards.
Posted by Jack Albany (Member # 10698) on :
I have also found that I get the most return from my own critiques. A number of observations I've made about other's work have materially enhanced my own understanding of various aspects of proses construction.