Criticism of literary works. Criticism - what is it and how to criticize correctly? Good and bad

Where is the connection between joke and criticism of the text? She is the most straightforward. As a child, we do not know how to joke so that everyone would be funny. Because there is always a goal for jokes - ridicule. This goal is the other person, and the joke, more often than not, hurts his feelings. Strictly speaking, the ridicule that can be seen in schools is a bad parody of a joke. After all, everyone laughs at a good joke.

What does the criticism of the text have to do with it?

Anyone can criticize everything. Anyone who takes the first text that comes across is able to smash it to pieces. Here the verb is not the same, here is a water word that can be easily removed, and there the author made a mistake. It looks like small bites, attacks, and not full-fledged criticism.

Critics- a separate layer of people. Some criticize films, others criticize music, and still others criticize books. In general, I hardly understand how a book can be criticized. Therefore, I will not talk about the "big" critics. It will be about writers and copywriters working on the Web and "little" critics living in each of us.

In the world of web writers, there is one interesting technique - selling criticism. The goal of the person using selling criticism is to attract attention by parsing the material of another author. The text may already be hanging on the selling page, but a wise critic appears and finds its problem areas.

By showing himself as an expert and establishing a business contact, the critic will receive an order, and the owner of the text will increase sales. An expert opinion is always valuable. But not everyone knows how to use criticism.

Selling text criticism - 7 reasons not to "bite"

When should you criticize a text? This is the right question. You need to ask yourself before you start scribbling your analysis for an article or a devastating book review. It is not always necessary to criticize, because you can give your own assessment.

The words "evaluation" and "criticism" are synonymous. However, they have different meanings, in my opinion. Rating - I liked this and that, but I did not like this, because ...

You can always give your assessment without asking. They wanted to write, they wrote. When a text is criticized, they turn it inside out, take apart every word - because any criticism must be specific... Evaluation is always welcome, but open-ended parsing is not always appropriate.

When it is better not to criticize the text:

• If the author did not ask for criticism, then there is no need to "dissect" his material. As a last resort, send your review to the author in private messages - it will be useful and correct.

This works with selling criticism too. You find a selling text and sell your services one-on-one. Just write how you can improve the copy so that sales grow. Show yourself as an expert and find a new customer. Entrepreneurs themselves are often asked to criticize their website or text. Look for live business forums and sell your expertise.

1. Can't find real text problem. It seemed to the person that your remarks were a little overblown - the expert does not make an elephant out of a fly. It's funny, but finding an elephant in a text is harder than a fly, but it also works better.
2. There is no justification for his opinion - there are no facts. Each person has their own opinion. It may not coincide with the opinion of the whole world. The opinion of one person always loses to the opinion of the majority, so it is important to substantiate your opinion and back it up with facts.
3. You cannot put everything in one capacious message.... Brevity is extremely useful when it comes to criticism. Nobody likes to be criticized. The more accurately you express your thought, the easier it will be perceived and the less likely it will be misunderstood.
4. There is no solution to the problem... Selling criticism is free, well-grounded and clear advice on how to solve a text problem you find. Having found a problem and rolled out the amount to solve it, you will act as an ordinary seller from the outside. Find two problems - solve one for free, and hint about the second.
5. You cannot do without negative criticism. The entrepreneur, like the author of the text material, loves his text. You need to learn to criticize the text in a positive way, so as not to offend anyone, but to give useful advice.
6. There is no ultimate goal. If you have wasted your time criticizing other people's material for no purpose. In order to amuse your vanity, why couldn't you limit yourself to your assessment? Criticizing blog posts is a criticism that works worse than a constructive review of the material.

Can you get clients through criticism in other areas? Yes it is possible. People react painfully to criticism and problems they find. This is how 80% of businesses work. The more real the problem, the higher the chance that the person will want to solve it with the help of your services.

Reader, thank you!

Polina Bogdanova

Who do the critics write for?

The Editor's Reflections on Contemporary Theater Press

THEATER has changed a lot over the past decade. Its rise took place in the mid-90s. A whole galaxy of new professionals came, both in directing and in drama. The older generation works powerfully. No less interesting are those who can be called the "seventies", some of them have gone into small spaces, into chamber halls and are guided by a narrow audience. Now we are not talking about that. And that in a lively and stormy theatrical process the principle of diversity really triumphed - in aesthetics, methodology, ideas. Today is the time of polystylistics.

Entreprise. Private and semi-private theaters. Non-governmental organizations have spread all over the place. A new viewer has come, which was not there ten years ago. The theater ceased to serve the state. For the first time in many decades, he began to engage not in ideology and politics, but in art itself. It is a colossal achievement for our cultural and creative elite - not to keep a fig in your pocket. It became possible to be not a tribune, life teacher and preacher, but simply an artist and a professional.

Commercialization has taken place. This is also a new phenomenon for us, which not everyone is able to correctly assess. Personally, I don’t think this is bad. This is a natural process of democratization of art, which begins to work for a wide audience, to fulfill the order of various social groups. And in the so-called commercial theater there are already achievements - this is "The Sheep" by Nadezhda Ptushkina directed by Boris Milgram, "Master Class" by Terence McNally directed by Viktor Shamirov, the stunning performance "City of Millionaires" by Eduardo de Filippo directed by Roman Samgin director Mark Zakharov), the grand premiere of the past season. The theater has split into many different spheres.

Only our theater criticism remained unchanged. She does not seem to notice the general movement. And it is unable to adequately reflect the theater, remaining on the periphery of the theatrical process.

Who are our theatrical publications for? They are too narrowly oriented: they do not go beyond the boundaries of the theatrical environment proper. I will say more. They exist only for those who print in them. As a last resort, for those about whom they write. And that's all. But this is not enough. I am very sorry for my colleagues from Theatrical Life, but I have to say that serving the needs of individual theaters for their own money is already the last thing in the line of available opportunities. For which reader was the "Theater" magazine created, or rather reanimated? In the first issue of this magazine, on behalf of the editorial board, it is said that, in addition to the theater, it is intended for some other humanitarian workers, who will supposedly read all this. Will not. Don't flatter yourself. What is there to read? Boring wordy evaluative reviews? Sluggish interviews? Any themes and problems that theater criticism has been chewing on for decades? You leaf through its pages, and you get the feeling that 1984 is an era of stagnation in the yard. Maybe a different situation with theater criticism exists in new editions?

"Jokes" - do they match the tone of Galina Volchek's performances? "Jokes" is the own word of young critics, this is how they define their style ("cool", "joke" and, as the characters of the playwright Nikolai Kolyada, a wonderful imitator of vulgar speech, say - "something like that"). The reviewer crucifies Galina Volchek. A year ago, Volchek was rather bitingly “defeated” for “Three comrades”. And now they give out a "joke" about stomach catarrh. Say, the sisters in Chekhov's latest production of Sovremennik are so “worried” as if their digestion is not in order. Sovremennik is one of the most popular theaters in Moscow. The last Chekhov premiere is sold out (as, incidentally, and "Three Comrades", a performance for which the audience has been buying all the tickets for the second season). Why should the "new" criticism not think about what, in fact, is the reason? No, this criticism is not interested in reasons. The "new" criticism shows striking ignorance. So, for example, they write about Volchek's previous performances: “I haven’t seen it. I don’t know.” So go read it. You must know this. Or they write a review of the play by Anatoly Vasiliev, where each passage is accompanied by questions: "And what is this?", "How is this to be understood?" Go read it. Take an interest. A graduate cannot act like a layman. Have you ever heard anything about Orthodoxy? You are not interested similar topics? But they are of interest to Anatoly Vasiliev. And I want to read a competent and professional interpretation of what Vasiliev did. Critics must have a professional curiosity, something that would make them analyze, compare. No, they have their own opinion on this matter. The critic calls "Three Sisters" a "fiery greeting from the past." And he opposes him with his fiery greetings from the present, believing himself to be the bearer of some kind of extremely relevant knowledge. The entire past, the "exemplary Soviet theater" (as the critic again denounces the last contemporary performance) is now canceled. It is not necessary to oppose Mirzoev - Volchek on one page of the magazine, keeping the scheme "yesterday" - "today". Comparisons are possible, but at some deeper levels and not on the basis of good or bad. Today is a completely different time. Today there are no first and last. There are representatives of different generations, each has its own style of thinking. Each is associated with a specific viewing environment. When critics put labels on, I feel like they have a pretense to make theatrical politics. At the same time, the degree of aggressiveness is very high. Before there were newspapers "Pravda", "Soviet Culture", where a negative review of the play or the director was a verdict. But these were the "big games" of state-biased criticism. And today these are "small games" of small groups, which in this way spread their influence.

I am ready to answer all reproaches and objections. Listen to your colleagues. In the heat of controversy, unfair things can be said. But this conversation was prompted by my professional own work critic and editor. I can no longer read the evaluation reviews.

Estimates. Estimates. And once again estimates. This disease affects not only young critics (about whom I spoke, their assessments are simply sharper and in many cases more offensive than others). Today, very, very many are susceptible to this disease. Those who write to either scold or praise. Sometimes the authors call me and ask, here, they say, I'm looking for a place where you can defeat this and that. I am jerked by such questions. No, of course, not everyone writes that way. There are excellent authors whose articles are very interesting to read. But such, alas, are in the minority. Why it happens? Due to circumstances, partly objective, partly subjective, criticism is still "spinning" the old system of relations between herself and the theater. The system in which it occupies a position "above" the theater. It is overflowing with ambition, the soil for which no longer remains.

Today, the assessment of the press is not a verdict and there is no need to pretend to it. This is just the opinion of an individual newspaper. And most likely - the opinion of an individual critic with a very specific name. This, by the way, significantly increases personal responsibility. We must not forget that the critic writes precisely about the artists, and they do not need to evaluate their activity, they need to reflect it by means of criticism. Criticism should be a link between the artist and the public, act as an interpreter, propagandist, image-maker, if you like. At least - that expert who, of course, knows more viewers and due to this can explain a lot to them. But we should not forget that he proceeds from the audience's interests and expectations. He knows what he will accept and what will not accept today's hall. This is very important to understand. This is a new urgent task of criticism. Only then will it be possible to overcome this narrowness in orientation, isolation within one's own - theatrical - environment. Do not be afraid to include the opinion of the public or to be guided by it (the public is not a fool). Our theater, which works in a very interesting way, needs a press that could adequately reflect the diverse and polyphonic theatrical world. Criticism should not have a top-down relationship with the theater, but on an equal footing. In what directions could theater criticism work fruitfully today? In my opinion, in two main directions. The first is cultural criticism that analyzes theater in the context of culture, examines its tendencies and processes. The second is theater journalism.

Cultural criticism can be concentrated in a "thick" theater magazine. And it is focused on specialists - theater experts and representatives of related humanitarian disciplines. Do we have such criticism? I work in the criticism department of a thick magazine - "Contemporary Drama" - and I know well from experience how difficult it is today to get a good analytical text from an author. Per last years I can list such texts on my fingers. Therefore, as an editor, I often turn to culturologists, economists, sociologists, as well as to theater practitioners - directors, playwrights, producers.

Theatrical journalism is something that should be associated with a wide audience. And here, of course, we need bright, catchy texts and photographs, lively, captivating essays, portraits, reports. What is needed is a sincere interest and love for the theater as such, and not evaluative reviews and not intra-theatrical games.

Writers are strange creatures. They are eagerly looking for the first readers and at the same time they are afraid of them. After all, these strangers, who do not know us, will decide our fate. They will say whether we have talent or not, we will get something out of us, or the humpbacked grave will fix it.

All this would sound ridiculous if it were not for the true truth. Yes, we are like that ... We really need criticism, but intimate and benevolent (although we can easily exchange it for a reader's delight - so contact us if anything).

Who is worth listening to and who is not

The most profitable option is professional and. As long as you pay them money, they have a stake in your success. Such consultations help to identify mistakes in the early stages, give a boost of inspiration and open your eyes to so many things.

But be careful: there are a lot of impostors in this field, so check your track records and reviews. Better yet, read the books of potential consultants. Usually from the second paragraph it is already clear whether the shoemaker is with or without boots.

Brothers in the pen

Another great option is to find colleagues who write in the same genre and at the same level as you. You can negotiate with them about mutual assistance: you will proofread their manuscripts, and they will yours.

Don't look for those who will praise your book - these people are not conducive to development. The best critic is the one who disassembles a piece of work and explains what seemed to him to be successful and what was not very good. At the same time, he will not be unfounded and will not stick labels either to you or to your work.

Beta readers

Try to have multiple people read your manuscript: what one misses, another will notice. But all beta readers (that's what the primary critics are called) must be within your target audience. A sentimental novel should not be shown to a paratrooper officer, and a cool action movie will not be appreciated by a lady in love with the Victorian era.

Does it make sense to post drafts on the Internet?

I do not recommend putting the manuscript on the Internet and asking people to criticize. Firstly, you do not know who exactly will respond to your appeal - quite often inadequate people live on literary forums. Second, a raw manuscript will make you a graphomaniac. Thirdly, the book may be distributed on the Internet - and you will no longer be able to control its fate.

Beta Reader Questionnaire

Ask your beta readers to rate the manuscript for the following:

• initial interest in the book, based on the annotation;
• language level;
• interest in the development of the topic / plot;
• how easy it is to keep track of different storylines, whether there is a sense of confusion in the events;
• the tempo of the piece: is there a feeling of being drawn out or, on the contrary, excessive haste;
• interest in heroes as individuals - how attractive the characters have been created;
• the logic of the story;
• novelty of ideas / information gleaned in the book;
• the likelihood of recommending to friends;
• general assessment of the work on a five-point scale.

Who should be avoided

Family members are not the best critics. They love us and do not see a commercial product in our works.

And it also happens that they do not approve of literary studies and criticize the work not because they found mistakes in it, but because they want to discourage their native blood from "meaningless occupation."

Casual readers who, as a favor, look diagonally through the text are also not a gift. There will be no sense from them.

Professional writers who agreed to read your manuscript as a load, i.e. in addition to the main job, is another unfortunate option. Firstly, their eyes are blurred, and secondly, snobbery will interfere with them. To be meaningful, you have to tinker with newbies, spend time and energy on them, and if a person already sits on texts all day long, then he has no time for novice authors.

The worst critic is an unlucky evil writer. He himself has not achieved anything, and is not able to help others. He is poorly read, and therefore has no taste, he never studied literary skills, so he does not know what writing technique is. But he is quite capable of rolling his eyes and shrugging his shoulders in disgust. A sure sign of such types is self-affirmation at the expense of others.

Verbatim criticism

Over time, you will build up a "thick skin" and gain confidence in your abilities, but until this happens, take care of your nervous system! It is almost impossible to write in an environment of bullying, so if you feel that someone is spoiling your life with unfounded criticism, expel such people from your sites and social networks... If you are being criticized in real life, do not tell these people about your work.

Fair criticism

Public fair criticism hits hardest. We are all human, we all make mistakes, and as we learn, mistakes come like an avalanche.

Give yourself the right to "shoals." Say thank you to fair critics for taking the time and teaching you. Gratitude does not have to be given out publicly, but you need it yourself - as a ritual that allows you to dump negative energy.

It is important to distance yourself from criticism. Don't say to yourself, “I’m a mediocrity. It's all over ”- it works destructively. Better to translate the conversation into a different plane: “Yes, the beginning sags, and my dragon looks not like a formidable battle lizard, but like a dried grasshopper. But I will fix everything - I know where to look for information! " (The Writer's Handbook is your best friend!)

We are our own critics

Sometimes we ourselves act as critics, especially when we see that the author is doing something wrong.

Should I or should I not talk about it?

It depends on what purpose. If the goal is to show your own education, then it is not worth it: in the same second you will receive a retaliatory blow from the series "the fool himself." In his heart, the author may agree with you, but if “our people are beaten,” you have to defend yourself.

How do you communicate constructive criticism?

• First, ask if she is needed at all.
• Never criticize a newcomer in public unless asked to do so.
• Maintain a friendly tone and make it clear right away that you want to help the author.
• Do not insist on your point of view and emphasize that you are only sharing your impressions.

The article tells about what criticism is, what it is for, what it is and what it takes to become a critic.

Creativity and discussion

Even in ancient times, when our ancestors were not very similar to people, there were those among them who were attracted by everything unusual and strange, for example, music and drawings. With rock art, everything is clear, however, to this day there are not as many of them preserved as we would like, but primitive musical instruments made a splash when they were found.

In fact, creativity with art is loved and recognized by all highly developed creatures with high (by the standards of the animal world) intelligence. For example, dolphins and elephants can paint, and the latter even recreate some pictures of their lives that they saw many years ago.

Art, as such, is closely connected with the development of society and, in general, the formation of a person as a person. It has long been proven that without it, the normal development of civilization is impossible. And criticism is an integral part of art. So what is criticism, what is it for and what is it? In this we will figure it out.

Definition

In the process of criticism, the value of the work is also analyzed, if the topic of criticism is something other than a picture, poetry or song, then such a phenomenon helps to find the correct point of view, or the closest to it. So criticism can be applied not only in art. For example, scientific hypotheses and assumptions are necessarily criticized. So now we know what criticism is. But what types of it are there?

Good and bad

Roughly speaking, there is good, constructive, and bad criticism. In the first case, her judgments are based on an impartial analysis of the material, when a person or a group of persons in the process of discussing a work of art, scientific theory and other things relies precisely on facts, messages and actions, and not a personal attitude towards the author. Simply put, a good one that carries a constructive discussion, indicating errors, shortcomings and minuses, and all this, regardless of the personal relationship to the author or group of authors.

Well, if we talk about bad criticism, then everything is exactly the opposite - it does not carry anything sensible, the claims do not have a clear justification, it strongly depends on the personal attitude towards the author. By the way, bad criticism can also be one that simply praises a work or something else, without justifying positive assessments in any way.

Meaning

What is the essence of criticism? Without discussion, assessment and analysis, any creator, author or scientist will not be able to develop adequately. Sooner or later, he will either get sick or, on the contrary, become discouraged because no one even discusses the fruits of his labors.

In science, criticism is simply necessary, usually, theories and hypotheses are developed further only if they withstand the initial

History of criticism

Criticism as such has always existed, but perhaps the most famous it became in Ancient Greece and Rome, where there were many talented poets, sculptors, painters and scientists. But nevertheless, it is worth remembering that sometimes criticism is harmful, especially if it is given by a person who absolutely does not understand anything in this matter. But is it correct to say that before you start to criticize something or someone, you need to understand the topic in detail?

Yes and no. On the one hand, a person is not obliged to be able to write poetry himself in order to appreciate someone's creation, the same with songs and other legends.

But on the other hand, if a person begins to criticize the technique of painting a painting, the design of a building or the proportions of a sculpture, it is useful for him to get at least some idea of ​​these processes to begin with.

It is always much easier to criticize than to create. And, by the way, few people criticize, for example, Einstein's general theory of relativity, or the assumptions about the origin of the ancient hurricane on Jupiter, because for this you need to understand what you are talking about.

Some treat critics negatively, considering them to be simply swindlers who profit from other people's works, and such cases sometimes do happen. And some critics deliberately provoke the authors to quarrels, fights and scandals.

So, now we know what criticism is, what it is for, and what it is.

"Sorry, but this color dress absolutely does not suit you." “How can you listen to your advice ?! You always talk nonsense! " “And what only did he find in her ...” “C grade work” It so happened that in our society we are used to paying more attention to the negative than the positive aspects of the personality - noticing the shortcomings of others is much easier than pleasant qualities or happy opportunities.

Nobody likes criticism, no matter how delicate it sounds. The development of social networks and the phenomenon of trolling only exacerbated the situation - it has become much easier to express your "phi" or arrange a real harassment on the Web.

No matter how much we persuade you otherwise, everyone knows very well that any comments - regarding appearance, work, behavior, and even culinary abilities - affect our emotional health and self-esteem. So why not learn how to give the omnipresent critics the correct rebuff? This will help maintain self-confidence and prove that you are not fooled by provocation, are able to draw the right conclusions and can confidently move forward. No resentment, complexes or disappointments.

What not to do if you are criticized?

1. Completely deny, avoid, or ignore another person's remark. In other words, pretend nothing happened or "change the subject." Hushing up the situation, as a rule, guarantees even more unresolved problems in the future, the risk of returning to the same "closed topic" later, and the accumulation of negative emotions.

2. The most common reaction to criticism is not just offense, but rather aggressive response. Which, for objective reasons, is not the best tactic.

3. Another form of rejection of other people's criticism is making excuses about what happened. More often than not, this is even more annoying - the other person decides: you ignore their point of view, not attaching importance to it, or deliberately do not want to ask for forgiveness.

How to respond to criticism?

#1. The easiest way to find out what a harsh or sarcastic critic meant is to ask him about it. Feel free to ask questions! What exactly do you dislike? Why do you think I shouldn't do this? Did what I said offended you? Why do you say that? This way you will have a better understanding of the complaints and reasons for the dissatisfaction of the other. It often turns out that behind the criticism strong feelings and resentment are hidden, and the remark itself is not the final goal, and in fact the person is worried about something else. For example, someone might feel angry not because you showed up ten minutes late, but because they feel that you are not taking them seriously.

# 2. Throw away all emotions and think - is there at least some truth in the criticism against you? Maybe these are quite constructive comments? It is difficult to agree that you are doing something wrong or that your lifestyle is not the most suitable ... But this is an important step to overcome the situation. Feel the difference: were the words spoken only to hurt you? Or can there be any benefit from them? Perhaps you are really dressed or behaving inappropriately for the situation or status, and the other person did a great favor with your remark and gave you the opportunity to improve.

#3. Learn to accept the other person's opinion even if you don't share it. Do not change your behavior because you disagree with the criticism, but at least admit that there is a different, acceptable opinion, and avoid attacks.

#4. If you understand that there is some truth in the comments, and the criticism hears attention - work on yourself... For example: "You are right, I am regularly very late, it looks like it's time to set two alarms so as not to oversleep."

#5. Don't be afraid to tell the truth and set boundaries... Feel free to tell us about your feelings - it is unpleasant for you to hear comments addressed to you, explain what exactly hurt you and upset you. Thus, you will protect yourself from barbs in the future and indicate what kind of communication you consider unacceptable.

#6. Criticism as a source of information about a person... Or a silver lining. Remind yourself of a simple truth - remarks about others often speak more about the commentator himself than about the person being criticized. Use feedback as a source of information about who gave it. Keep calm and you will learn a lot about the person. Note that someone who is used to upsetting others rather than encouraging or supporting is an unhappy person himself. Do not take his words to heart.

Deconstructive criticism

It is worth admitting that criticism often sounds incorrect, and an angry "accuser" resorts to humiliation, insults and uses words that exaggerate and distort reality. In these cases, one can admit a grain of truth, but disagree with the overblown facts. For example: “You forgot to pick up the package. You always spoil everything! " "It is true that I forgot it, but there are many things that I do beautifully!" This way, you admit to wrongdoing, but also do not underestimate your self-esteem.