korra and asami are in love

There's an attitude I've been seeing more and more of where having any kind of artistic opinion that isn't praise is seen as some kind of faux pas designed to yuck people's yum or whatever, and while I understand the kneejerk response behind it I do have to wonder like. How sustainable do you think it is to foster an environment where even the most casual criticism is met with hoards of defensive with Whoa Mama Mia Cunt Let People Enjoy Things style comments

smiley-asylum

OK so yes feedback is necessary specifically in art but I have seen people just be full on mean or unnecessarily harsh. There's creative criticism and then there's just being a dick for the sake of it.

Okay. And I'm saying people are allowed to, when they want to, on their blogs, be a dick about things for the sake of it if they feel like doing it. I'm wildly skeptical of the idea that constructive critique is the only kind of feedback one is "allowed" to make in their own siloed corner of the internet, or that insistence on this will somehow create a healthier space for expressing opinions.

Once again. I can understand the kneejerk impulse here, I do. It sucks to imagine, say, a creator scrolling online coming across some needlessly vitriolic post about something they worked on. But anyone is allowed to go "That's dickish" and move on, or people can engage with "I think this is oversimplified blah blah" if they want to but at the end of the day it isn't some kind of crime against the hobby or a fandom or even a singular person if someone just shoots off "This sucked I wasted my night" in their own accounts.

Like. A lot of people are trending towards thinking I'm talking about the importance of constructive criticism and like, sure, I think that is probably a more interesting avenue of analyzing something's flaws, but once again if you're not like, addressing an artist or interested in doing a deep dive that doesn't mean you're Not Allowed to be flippant or quick to judge. It's kind of startling how many times I've seen someone be like, "I can't stand this album" on their blogs, untagged, had that shit shared, only for it to come across someone's feed and for them to respond with "Why? What's wrong with it? People are allowed to like it, why are you being so negative, why are you tearing people down for no reason, this isn't even real critique," as though the intention in the first place ever was or ought to have been substantive critique in the first place.

It's difficult to articulate my feelings on this, but I do increasingly feel that the insistence upon there being a correct form of disliking something that precludes the possibility of making anyone feel insecure or hurt because they like it is significantly more stultifying than an atmosphere where people can shoot off "Fuck this" and be blocked or ignored for it

smiley-asylum

Having been through art school with a BA as a result let me just stop you there.

OK sometimes you don't like a certain art style. That's fine. Doesn't mean the art is bad, it's just not to your tastes.

That doesn't give you the right nor even a reason to be a dick on the Internet because you don't like something. If you want to be a dick, do it to someone who has time and energy to give it back. Because at that point you deserve shit in return.

If someone is outright asking for constructive criticism, that still doesn't give you the chance to be a dick. It means they want help learning something they're putting time and effort into.

By all means, be a dick, just do it to people who have earned it.

I feel like you're misunderstanding the entire thrust of this conversation.

Why do I need a "right" or "reason" to post anything online? Why is it that my enjoyment of something is intrinsically justifiable, but my lack of enjoyment requires justification? And based on whose standards? If I can thoughtlessly tweet out a "This album rocks," without expecting people who hate it to demand a longform review from me to explain my enjoyment, I'm not sure I understand why I can't say "This album sucks" without having to go into the trenches about its positive qualities and negative ones. Why do I need to formulate every opinion I have in the form of an art school critique addressing nobody at all?

Why can praise be thoughtless but criticism must, at all costs, be formulated in art school constructive form in case the creator happens to see it and get their feelings hurt or a fan finds it harmful? Particularly when someone could very well have their feelings hurt by thoughtless praise of something as well! I'm not even trying to claim a more substantive form of criticism isn't more interesting or more valuable for one's interpretive abilities. I just think this notion that there is a moral obligation in all online spaces-- no matter how siloed-- to tiptoe around the potential hurt feelings of a hypothetical audience that may or may not even be courted, is at best stultifying for any real plurality of opinion and at worst enabling people whose insecurities about their own hobbies lead them to confidently dictate what people say in whatever passes for privacy in an online space nowadays.

I dunno, I've read works of brutal polemic that I've found immensely creatively engaging, thoughtful, and substantial in its knowledge of a particular form or medium. I've read works of praise I've found miserably trite. Why is the former not allowed to exist because of its dickishness? Why is the latter beyond critique itself?

A lot of people seem to be laboring under the idea that this is describing a situation where someone is literally walking up to someone and going "Your shit sucks" and walking off, but I clearly indicated in that first reblog that that's not even what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about how to talk to people who solicit criticism. I'm not even talking about how to talk to creators at all. I'm talking about this ongoing, deeply insecure assumption held by a number of people in a number of spaces where any kind of negative opinion, regardless of who said it, whether no one was tagged, whether they intended this for a massive audience or for two mutuals, is treated as a personal attack on one's identity rather than a (perhaps douchey!) articulation of one's own tastes. I personally would deeply prefer an environment where people can feel comfortable just saying whatever shit they feel like on their blogs/accounts and just getting blocked if someone's feelings are hurt over it than this constant assumption that there's a morally acceptable formatting one must adhere to for fear of reducing some hypothetical reader to tears, IN CASE they were to, by whatever means, encounter that opinion in the wild

diamondintherug-blog

You can be a dick, and you can expect people to listen to your opinions. You can't do both.

Constructive criticism is the art of walking that line. Good critics aren't good because of their good taste. Good critics are good because they can appropriately contextualize and dose dickish opinions so artists can build the art they want to build.

I think you, too, are misunderstanding the primary thrust of this conversation.

Why do you think someone being a dick is "expecting" someone to listen to your opinions? Why do you think that person is "expecting" any sort of audience at all? I am critiquing the inherent assumption that people who are "rude," however this is defined (and I believe it is ill-defined specifically because so much of this is conflated with whose feelings are hurt rather than the actual substance of whatever hypothetical comment is centered here), and have repeatedly emphasized in multiple places that there is a difference between approaching someone and insulting their tastes and creations versus airing an opinion in the (admittedly, increasingly decreasing) privacy of an online space.

I don't disagree with your definitions of constructive criticism or what makes a good critic, I disagree fundamentally with the notion that online users are morally obligated to be critics at all, that the standards of what constitutes criticism needs be imposed to the average user who has any kind of negativity to opine, and the double-standard of not applying such lofty standards to praise.

daybreak993

He’s so danmei

wyvern-witch

𝕊𝕒𝕪 𝕙𝕖𝕝𝕝𝕠 𝕥𝕠 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕠𝕔𝕖𝕒𝕟 𝕗𝕠𝕣 𝕞𝕖

siwanpeizi

In the Arizona heat, summer fling saw your best side

From II HANDS II HEAVEN

Uh,

#um.

depresed-duck

azula (final agni kai version)

mooreaux

I think they should have been in Inquisition and also married

#dragon age #not avatar

soncee

The gaang

kerizaret

Overheard in a manga store yesterday: "we need more yuri in here. I've had at least 5 girls coming up to me last time asking for yuri. Everyone wants yuri now". The world is healing

when katara asked if aang wanted to help heal the injured refugee and aang refused, I momentarily wondered if they were going to make him a misogynist. like "we listened to your feedback and have decided to reintroduce misogyny to the narrative" (they did not do that).

giving natla season 2 a shot 👀

aang just broke all the bones in that guy's body

aang is not fucking around. he just fully impaled this guy's foot

giving natla season 2 a shot 👀

aang just broke all the bones in that guy's body

giving natla season 2 a shot 👀