Good honest criticism, even if "negative," is a compliment to the author. It implies that he or she is a creative person who can come up with new and better ways to solve the problem that's been pointed out.
If you wrote something to be ashamed of then probably you went a bit overboard with personal emotions regarding that poem. You can say "I don't like this poem." It would also be nice to give reasons why, but one should never say things like "give it up you slug, you'll never be a good writer." This is unworthy of anybody concerned with writing, never mind critiquing.
Don't feel bad. I would rather get a harsh critique than have my piece ignored (which seems to be my problems on here).
Yeah, some guy recently gave me a negative critique, saying only, "I need to learn the basics of writing fiction," so I called him a child, and accused him of trolling and just writing quick one line critiques so he could post more of his own work. I feel bad about that, too.
I feel bad about language without feeling; I saw someones feelings in letters and I was like "sorry I don't feel dem dat way sir". And I felt bad and I don't know my feel anymore, my feel is different. It is more precise but it is feel and more solid. It is increasteth feels and more solideths. So basically, fuck yo feels, if it is objective, suh!
While I do not feel like posting the actual freak out scene or personal information about the author, I would like to share my criticism to his work, so you can judge if it was my fault or not: ME: I finished reading your novel last night. The ending is very original and impressive. You... it's a great story, you got me really nervous, with mixed feelings at the end...! :') HIM: What might those mixed feelings be? ME: Surprise, amazement, fear, joy and pleasure. It was very stimulating! HIM: I'm glad you liked it. ME: Your ending was very unusual. I didn't expect it. Jesus was awesome, by the way. The whole thing went in a crescendo! I was stuck to the pages and simply couldn't stop! When I finished I wanted to talk to you but you werent there, so I decided to wait. HIM: I had to build the tension and make it unrelenting until he finally (with the help of Sophia) breaks through his illusions at the end. The tension had to be palpable, intense and extreme, and I had to find a way to keep building upon it. ME: I like the message at the end. It was a cool epilogue! Why mentioning piscis and acuarius? I saw the thing with the water and I noticed the man was using the water as a symbol of spreading the knowledge. Piscis is Sophia inside Acuarius? HIM: Jesus is the symbol for Pisces and his time has passed. We are moving into Aquarius therefore it is time for a new myth that while speaking to the sme ultimate reality, does so in a way that the modern person can understand. The perrineal philosophy never changes, but our stories aboutit does. HIM: Water is the symbol of Aquarius, just as the two fish were the symbol of Pisces. ME: Okay. It is true that in a way your book carries that spiritual message, but I believe it is also filled with true wisdom, so it's not quite the same as religion. HIM: And what might that wisdom be? ME: Wisdom, as different to knowledge, would be the capacity of achieving peace and live in harmony with the enviroment. HIM: That is the point. We must learn to be more guided by these forces as opposed to setting our consciousness in opposition to them. ME: This "doctrine" of not hurting others because others are "you" is a good example of what I am trying to say. HIM: When we truly accept life as a river, we find that the river is the unconscious content carrying us along. Consciousness wants to swim against the current because it wants what it wants. But ultimately it will tire and then it will trust the unconscious content to guide it. This is as it must be. This is wisdom. The unconscious content is far superior than that which we carry in consciousness. ME: Okay, that makes sense. HIM: Amartanon thought he was going to free Sophia, yet it was Sophia who freed him. ME: Daiia is the unconscious you're refering to. HIM: I see. ME: What would Amartanon be? Intelligence, right? HIM: A man who believes that only knowledge is the way. He believes he possesses that knowledge and therefore is trapped within it. He needs the feminine wisdom of Sophia to guide him. My philosophy goes against any other in that it insists that the man must be guided by the woman. He is the engine driving the ship, but she is the rudder. The male must learn to do the opposite of what Christianity has taught... he must honor the feminine by submitting to her. In this he realizes his ultimate power. Now I must stress that it has to be the right woman. ME: Ah, okay... why a man should be led by a woman? What beneficts to the couple do you find in this that can extend to many people? HIM: Christianity stripped the feminine out of the equation leaving us out of balance. Thus my character violates Sophia even as she loves him. This is what the church has done. The restoration of Sophia is what is needed now. It is time to bring the feminine element onto an equal field with the male and to learn when the male must submit and when the female must submit.. It cannot simply be the female submitting all the time because we men are far too stupid to get through life that way. ME: Ah, okay, understood. I think I got it all now. Do you want to ask me any questions to see how I do? HIM: Not particularly. This is not a test. I voiced something deep inside of me, only to learn a year after publishing the book that my Sophia story is not unique... it comes from that same place as all our unconscious content. There is no test. I am simply sharing a vision. You will find in it what you like. Once it was published, it was no longer mine. It belongs to those who read it. ME: I thought you wanted to talk more about it. Personally, I found many things that made me consider your work as something extraordinary. Some of the things you say may have been told by other people but this is not an investigative rehash. HIM: My book does not matter. It is but a prop. The reality is that how we live our lives does matter, and that matters very much. ME: I am surprised by your humility. I think humility is good, but still, let me tell you my view on your book... at least a few more comments: HIM: Anything you need to say ME: you pointed out one of the biggest problems of human beings, and that is that people think they already know "it" and that others are wrong. Also that people cannot simply play with an idea and ponder it without first accepting it or rejecting it, and this is a great evil, a great enemy of happines and progress. You also shared a view on trust that equated it with a calculation of the behavior patters of someone else regarding out own agenda. This is VERY interesting. This are just a few things. If you think you wrote just anything, you are wrong. HIM: Yes, an evil that I must root out in me daily. Trust is simply given, it can never be verified because we never know the mind of another. Love is developed through that trust, and it deepens over time, but it dies when I try to make the other be what I want her to be. ME: Your view on human behavior is compelling and very "to the point", and your point is those things people can try to use in their own lifes. HIM: I cannot presume to know anything. Nothing of the ultimate reality can be known, but something of it can come into being through us. As the Tao says, "You cannot know it, but you can be it." You are correct, but I cannot make a human being use those tools. They have a thousand reasons why they are justified in making themselves miserable. ME: I looked at your book and phylosophy with genuine interest and curiousity. In all honesty, I don't feel capable of using a significative ammount of that information. Actually, I think I will benefict from reading one or two more times, and to seriously meditate in many of the things you say. Since it's not a manual, you put some important things scatered in several different chapters, so one may need to do some review, but the things I got from the first reading were meaningful to me. HIM: I did not want a system of thought, or of life, or of whatever, I wanted the reader to simply experience relese from bondage. ME: This is why I got a little bit confused when you started acting like your book was nothing. HIM: The book is the experience itself. That feeling of shedding all preconceptions and finally being free to simply be who you are. I wanted people to feel that. ME: Yes, I understood. Listen, I have something to tell you... HIM: But I also cannot claim to have written it. It feels more like it was written through me. I simply seasoned it a bit ME: ...not everything is nice or positive. Do you think you can take some criticism? HIM: Sure ME: Okay. The book has some serious flaws, important flaws. HIM: Ok ME: Two that I remember right now... three. The easier one is that you repeat yourself too much You project the same idea in three or more paragraphs and even in the words of the characters (all this followed, in the same page). This can be corrected by trying to edit, to "cut" everything you see that doesn't fit an informative, emotive or argumentative porpouse. If you do this, the value of your work will increase a lot, and it's not too difficult. The next problem I noticed is the nature of the main characters. Amartanon acted like an atheist in fron of the waffle, then he later revealed himself as a believer. This is kind of contradictory, at least it was to me. You can solve this by moving the scene of the waffle to a latter stage, but you really need to do a revision focused not so much in the arguments but in the characters. Who are they in some stage and who are they latter, how do they feel, and how much of that can be perceived by the reader. Sophia in the cave should have been a moving momment, but it wasn't. I didn't care about her because I didn't see her as a real woman, and I didn't see love between the characters. You can solve this by introducing additional scenes not related to the argument, but to the characters, for example, Sophia can visit Amartanon every night, and they can become lovers in Amartanon's dreams. ME: This, because she can't actually be there. This helps you in two ways: you repeated too much your theory, and you need to address that, and you forgot a little about your characters. So you delete the parts in which you repeat yourself. ME: and add emotionally compelling scenes. That would be all... ALMOST HIM: Almost? Why stop there if there is more. ME: I also wanted to tell you something else, vaguely related. I could have gone by the hypocrite route and stop in the praises in order to keep you happy. It would have been easier, if wasn't because I actually care about you and your book. If you want to keep working in that book, I would like to give you a hand, see... I believe you have something with a huge potential, and I cannot simply ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist. Your book is flawed, but it is in a very advanced stage. It could be a real masterpiece. I am so convinced of this that I am willing to offer you a detailed criticism to all of it, more than once if you want it, to help you improve on it, if you want to do it, or if you want my help. Then the man freaked out. Conversation went downhill for a couple of days until he finally blocked me on Facebook.
It also helps to ask the author what he/she was trying to achieve. It's easier to direct a critique when you know what the end result is supposed to be.
Critiques, by nature, are opinionated negativities. If you and I can't give a critique with that understanding OR with the understanding that the negativity is to push the writer to produce better works of art, we're in the wrong business. You have given this guy invaluable time. Look at it this way: he could "pay" for that negativity. You gave it for free. Now, he has to make the most of it. Like the angels with the talents in the Bible: Two invested their talents; one dug a hole and waited for the Master's return. When God arrived, he called him a "wicked" servant. Fear kept that servant no better off than if he hadn't a talent in the first place. In the end, it's up to us to use critiques to our advantage. If this guy doesn't do that, he'll be back next year repeating the same infraction. In the meantime, know that you've provided us with much needed feedback that we would normally "pay" for. So, I salute you, and thank you for taking the time to grant us your opinion.
If this poem in question was mediocre, then a negative review/critique would be necessary. If there was something you did TRULY like, then you could've listed it. My advice to you when critiquing is to be honest. Don't sugar-coat your review, tell the person in question what's bad, how it's bad, and how he can choose to fix it.