The internet may or may not be reality, but it seems as though criticism is considered unacceptable socially, or perhaps for any reason. I was raised to value criticism and consider it necessary, especially for artistic process. Certainly, the absence of critical thinking is noticable. How about critical speech? What’s the difference?
Honestly, I think that not only is criticism not considered acceptable, any disagreement is, unless you cloak it in such heavy disguise that it is almost unrecognizable as such.
If you say you disagree you can get away with it so long as you wimp out and say something like “we will have to agree to
Seems like the only place one sees criticism anymore is reviews of movies, concerts and other performances.
If we are really open to constructive criticism for the sake of education/enlightenment, could I please (without any intent to offend) mention something I have noticed in many posts on this website (and other places, too)?
I love you all and want you to know for your own sake: “it’s” is a contraction of “it is,” “it was” or “it has.” “It’s” is never possessive. Think of “its” as part of a set along with “his” and “hers.” Example: This post is almost finished. It’s on its last sentence.
It’s that way here, too. We may not agree with each other but we all get along and help each other when there’s a need (like a broken pedal rod or missing orchestra part or more personal problems).
Getting back to criticism (not an easy word to type), one fine example of helpful criticism is the master class. Perhaps that falls more into the realm of critique than criticism, but most participants find it just as crucial to know what they need to work on as what they are doing well. (Notice I didn’t say what they’re doing wrong or right!) Good criticism can be the best incentive to spur one to greater achievement.
Diane- I’ve been holding off posting to this thread to see what some of the responses would be. There are many things I agree with in the previous posts, but also feel that maybe some things are still to be mentioned. What follows is put down in haste(I have to deliver an instrument and I’m already late!) and not at all organized, but I didn’t want to forget what I was thinking about now.
There’s a difference between critical thinking and personal criticism. The latter is at best a cheap shot, demeaning, snide, needlessly negative, and unproductive. The former is an assessment of an idea, a product(like a work of art), a performance, an effort, etc. It may be very critical of any of the above, but the criticism is based on reason, fact, and perhaps comparison to similar things being discussed. It is not a personal attack and is not based on emotion. So a scientific theory presented at a conference for example may be torn to shreds, but the blithering criticism is based on sound judgement and facts that accurately portray an opposing theory.
In the context of the Harp Column forum, I think the forum has been at it’s most interesting when topics are fervently discussed with strong opinions expressed, PROVIDED there are no personal attacks, no nasty or demeaning opinions that are either not true or needlessly hurtful, and no sweeping generalizations that cannot be substantiated. That’s why I cringe when someone starts a thread titled WHICH IS BETTER? L & H, VENUS, OR SALVI? Or WHICH IS BETTER? SALZEDO METHOD OR GRANDJANY? UGH!!!
A comparison of methods for example is enlightening and informative, especially to those new to the harp. If the discussion and posts are dispassionate and objective, then the reader can draw his/her own conclusions. A comparison of makes of instruments for example should clearly state that the writer is expressing his/her experience with one instrument from a particular company.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.