Is it good or bad to post a critique that essentially says, "I couldn't read it"?

Absolutely.

Every hear that thing about how prose is either line a windowpane or stained glass, or somewhere in between. "Wow, this story is so clear." "Wow, this prose is so beautiful, yet I can still understand the story!"

How about "bullet-resistant glass." "Geez, how do you see anything through this?"

 

I think that when a piece is a certain level of bad, the writer's just not going to hear the full truth. I tend to take the easy way out by saying nothing. I sometimes do the wrong thing by saying everything. I suspect that the best strategy is to pick one thing, a thing that might be within the writer's current ability and that unambiguously does need correcting ("Normally, the first word in a sentence is capitalized.") and go with that.

(I'm not referring to any specific piece here. Just the general issue of pieces that have many, many issues.)

 

To be honest I'd be thrilled to have any kind of feedback from you. And from @BayView . I've read the feedback you two give and it's always seemed well reasoned and insightful to me, regardless of how short or how "everything" it is!

 

Mainly I want you both to 'move on.' Two people who are both bright and interesting with this grit in the system that is distracting to no benefit/purpose.

 

Yes.
My point was if you want your piece criticed as a whole -- yourself, then do the same for others. If you want to know where you missed it - end of discussion, than do that.
I'm not against being blunt. I just think the critique should be more thought out than - I couldn't read on. But I'm not saying anyone who wants to critique that way can't. I personally don't want to go that route as I get too much out of doing the critics myself. Seeing how someone else missed it really reveals where I'm missing it.

 

We’d all rather a lot of things be done to our preferences. This is why people have jobs and are paid. People should just be polite and accept there will be feedback that may not meet their expectations. It’s free for a reason. As long as someone tried, I’m thrilled. I don’t expect people who volunteer their time to be mind readers or to know what personality type I am. They should just do whatever they are comfortable with as long as it’s about the writing.

 

I have never had to use that as a reason to back my arguments. Omg, twice in this forum people have done that. XD

You’re missing the point. I don’t agree with your approach, but yes, your mode of delivery is offensive to me.

@matwoolf is right though, it’s time to stop.

 

Then you might consider addressing why it offends you rather than attacking me because you (and only you) felt offense. Because I didn't offend anyone personally, I just aired an untested idea that you didn't care for. But you went on the personal attack, leaving me with the impression that discussing anything with you lowers the decorum of the thread and leaves me at a net deficit.

And that would be a good place to stop.

 

I respectfully disagree. I don't know an artist who didn't use other artists as a model for his or her own first efforts. A musician learns a guitar riff from a record and masters it, a painter follows the great Impressionists, a poet may write in the style of Ginsberg or cummings or Whitman. Their ability to master those other stylists is what sets them on the road to developing their own styles and finding their own voice.

As someone once said of other craftsmen: "The Apprentice does shoddy work because he does not know the rules. The Journeyman does acceptable work because he has learned the rules and follows them. The Master does sublime work because he knows which rules to follow, and which rules to break."

It is perfectly valid for a writer to emulate another writer. But that writer can be judged, and should be judged, on how accurate that emulation is, and where it falls short of the original.

 

Also, isn't pastiche a legitimate literary technique?

 

Look , there’s no harm intended in what I write, so you need to stop trying to make it out like you’re a victim. I appreciate you took the time to respond even if I disagreed with it all.

It’s a net deficit to both of us.

 

If you don't intend harm, why do you keep coming back with post after post about how you are so bothered?

How many times do you expect someone to explain themselves to you before you stop criticising? Are you always like this, or is the word "normal" some sort of trigger for you?

If you need to respond, PM me. Then I'll send you a link to this misunderstood literary genius you are so upset about.

 

@Fallow you need to appreciate that this is a public forum. I respond to posts. You stuck with your position, I stuck with mine. How you want to do things is not how I choose to approach the issue. It’s you each time who bring in negative words and making it a flaw in others that I don’t enjoy. Do you hear me saying you’re attacking me? People are allowed to disagree in forums and not have a major whine about criticism.

Besides, I always use the very content and words people fling around. It’s often to highlight how unpleasant they come across to me. Even now you are doing it. If I don’t agree, I won’t pretend I do. I don’t sit here and judge my opinion on if others agree with you. That’s them. Lol

I keep my chats mostly public by choice. I don’t PM people to read more on things that haven’t captured my attention. My last comment was just to highlight I appreciate you taking the time answer. It’s not easy and takes a lot of energy. I can be frustrating for some, but I don’t like to upset people for no reason.

 

Which words did I use that were negative? "Normal" or "emulate"? Or maybe the dreaded "poor"? LOL

So, if you want to discuss this, you took offense at my suggestion on how someone might handle a writer who is far, far from writing something worth reading, and despite taking pains to politely clarify my position you continued to lambast me. And for using normal in quotes specifically to point out that it was not a word to be taken literally. LOL

Tell me, why is "normal" a bad word, but your "cringey" is super awesome critique talk? LOL

LOL, LOL, LOL

 

@Fallow this is where I have put you on ignore. Feel free to do the same. Lol

 

I think you no longer reading anything I write is more than sufficient to solve my problem.

 

You know, not once has anyone ever asked me for feedback on their feedback lol. I have a good relationship with a few beta readers who happen to give and want feedback the way I do, but we started off close and came together. Everyone wants to teach you how to write, but no one wants to be taught how to teach you how to write. We need an Art of the Art of the Critique channel.

What if we opened a thread with a link to a google doc with open commenting, and people could give feedback, then argue about the quality of the feedback in the thread?

I'd be willing to sacrifice something for this. I bet the thread would be a smash hit as new pieces got loaded.

 

I did that once. You’d be amazed how loud the crickets chirp.

 

I did it now. Be my guest Tear it up

 

Link?

 

It is right here at the top of the art of the critique forum.

 

I think that to say one stopped reading after a few lines is a useful critique. The opening of a piece is critical to having it read, and if you, as reader, gave up after making a good faith effort, then the author needs to know that. Your opinion need not be taken as gospel, but if you said that to me, I'd certainly take another look at the piece. At the same time, it would be helpful if you set out exactly what it was that tripped you up.