[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 12 KB, 272x272, lois.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5792165 No.5792165 [Reply] [Original]

Have you ever ever been going over a critique of your work and come across a comment that reveals just how great an idiot the person critiquing your work is?

>> No.5792177

Every damn time some reviews my work. It's unbelievable.

>> No.5792179

strong defenses against vulnerability m8

>> No.5792197

Just because they say something stupid doesn't mean the rest of the points are wrong. If you're gonna take that attitude your can't have anything particularly wrong in your work either.

>> No.5792206

>>5792179
alright then here's a recent one from a friend's work I was looking over. I wasn't the first one to look it over and saw this. For point of context the person their talking about is a vampire (inb4 vampire hurr durr, their a close friend so I help out when I can). Here's the line in question:

"Her pause lasts another brief moment before my words bring her back to life, so to speak."

Now here's the critique of the line.

"If you don't mean "bring her back to life" what do you mean? Write it, don't allude to it by using "so to speak"....you're not speaking. You're writing and have the time to tell your readers what you mean."

Are you fucking serious?

>> No.5792216

>>5792197
Never said all of what they said was wrong, but sometimes you come across that one comment that just show's the person is a dumbass

>> No.5792222

>>5792206
hahahaha, someone said something like that about a thing I posted (the first person narrator described something as comparably beautiful as any other and the anon questioned why even bring it up if it's not a particularly beautiful one). They are just missing the point, sadly many readers do that. You should at least use that to learn that people will miss the point.

>> No.5792227

>>5792165
i would like it more if critiquing was a team effort. i like to distance myself from my own work, and take the critiquers side, analyzing my own piece as if it were alien to me. it is more fun this way.

>> No.5792232

>>5792206
these motherfuckers ain't never heard of Hemingway and iceberg writing

>> No.5792241

>>5792206
so to speak is useless in that sentence. If it doesn't literally mean bring her back to life, unless explained before or after it could imply a different non-literal meaning when using 'so to speak'. If it is, then why not just say it and be clear.

'So to speak' hints at another meaning

Fair criticism

>> No.5792251

>>5792241
In context the line is talking about a vampire. When he says bring her back to life he's making a joke at the expense of her being an undead being.

>> No.5792253

>>5792241
It's a vampire. Literally bringing back to life would mean undoing the vampirism.

Although it does brake a bit of the narrator wall if it's third person, and you shouldn't do that unless you're gonna go full narrator actively commenting the story.

>> No.5792265

>>5792251
Considering it is a Vampire book, surely the idea that it literally brings her back to life isn't out of the question and it could easily be interpreted that way. Especially to what I'm guessing the target audience is.

>> No.5792274

>>5792253
Wel,l if the tongue in cheek thing doesn't relate to vampirism then it's not really tongue in cheek in that context

>> No.5792283

>>5792274
But a narrator can't suddenly do tongue in cheek at one point and never again engage the reader without soudning out of place.

>> No.5792293

>>5792283
Your assuming this hasn't been going on for the entire work. All you have is a single line.

>> No.5792295

>>5792283
It just is not clear that it is a joke and not literally undoing vampirism.

>> No.5792300

>>5792165

No. I've had people make some completely unhelpful critiques that I dismissed after only a brief consideration. That's just what happens when you submit your work to the general public. But unhelpful, misguided criticism can be made for a million reasons besides the reader's stupidity. Heck, I'd even say it's impossible for someone to dip below 'average' intelligence just for simply being interested in literature.

I think you're too defensive about the criticism you receive.

>> No.5792310

>>5792293
>Although it does brake a bit of the narrator wall if its third person, and you shouldn't do that unless you're gonna go full narrator actively commenting the story.
Where am I assuming that? I'm commenting a general opinion on writing.

>>5792295
We'll have to trust the poster who said it was clearly about vampires and complete the joke ourselves, as jokes tend to work.

>> No.5792322

>>5792310
Seems more like OP being a bitch, especially if that is a prime example of the critique being idiotic when it seems pretty valid tbh

>> No.5792731
File: 42 KB, 360x403, 1388296671513.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5792731

>>5792165
I wrote a comedy about a bunch of talking vultures deciding whether they should eat their dead vulture friend.
One person's critique were things like "This doesn't make any sense" and "If they're vultures why do they talk like humans?"

>> No.5792843

>>5792731
Vulture 1: AWK AWK AWK
Vulture 2: Cawk rrrawk
Vulture 1: AWK AWK RRRRRAWK
Vulture 3, patiently: awk awk waaawk
the end

>> No.5792998
File: 15 KB, 236x415, fredo543.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5792998

>>5792165

every rejection letter I get is written by an idiot and I'm talking thousands

>> No.5793002

>>5792731
You know vultures don't talk, right?

>> No.5793039
File: 220 KB, 459x344, heckle and jeckle.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5793039

>>5793002

What about Heckle and Jeckle?

checkmate atheists

>> No.5793044

Everyone who ever said a negative or questioning word about me or my work has been--without exception--a blithering idiot. I lie and wait for some worthy adversary to come take on a good, solid critique of my work, but it's all in vain.

I'm starting to think only idiots offer critiques.

>> No.5793049

>>5793039
They're magpies.

>> No.5793062
File: 8 KB, 229x250, 138204067565.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5793062

>>5792165
>your poems made me feel stupid

>> No.5793179

"I don't understand why you keep breaking lines when new people speak. You don't have to do that."
Written about a section in the structure of:

"Blah blah blah," Y said.
Blah blah blah blah. Blah blah. "Blah blah," X whispered, "blah blah." Blah blah.
Y shuddered, "Blah."

>> No.5793192

>>5793062
>i don't like talking to you because you intimidate me... You're so smart
this has happened to me multiple times
Guess I'm autistic

>> No.5793225

>>5793179
Wait, what? I understand that some writers clump dialogue together, but I always thought it was common practice to break lines during conversations?

This really confuses me now.

>> No.5793327
File: 148 KB, 1170x1085, 4td.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5793327

>get praises for phenomenal prose (well, relative to undergrad) on literally every single undergrad paper except one
>i'm not even one of those 'look how many buzzwords i know' faggots either
>professor who marked that one other paper says 'it seems like you don't know what these words mean and you're just using them to sound impressive'
>get a 75%
>never gotten lower than low 80s otherwise
>scan paper
>there's seriously zero jargon in it, no outstanding examples of purple prose or thesaurus-ing, a few fancy words tastefully used at most
>go to talk to him about it
>five minute conversation, don't even get to the paper
>he's very friendly
>says it's now clear i would probably know what those words meant
>go home
>grade change to a 90

Years later and I'm still just so confused

>> No.5793328

>>5793327
>t seems like you don't know what these words mean and you're just using them to sound impressive'
A person like this should not be allowed to teach, that's pathetic