On Literary Criticism and dA Critique

This is going to be one of those days in which I simply decide in forsaking my usual approach towards writing poetry or short stories or an obscure essay or a review or even a non-fiction tale, for something of a much more important degree of understanding.

Critique.

Now, before we collectively peruse the nature of the critique; the method of the critique; the varieties of the critique; and the balance needed in writing a critique; let us first define what a critique truly is.

According to (Pickering, 2004), a critique - or more correctly, "literary criticism" - can be defined as:

Literary Criticism is nothing more or less than an attempt to clarify, explain, and evaluate our experience with a given literary work. (Pickering, 2004, "Reader's Guide to the Short Story", Pearson Prentice Hill)

There's a wonderful paragraph about the purpose of writing a critique but I won't post it here since:

1. This is not a literature paper
2. This is an essay just to help people understand why critique is important
3. This is a basic framework meant to signify the nature of critiques and what can be classified as a critique

With that definition already made, the best possible and plausible way to truly understand the nature of criticism is by asking ourselves: What is good literature? What is good art?

I have plenty of people coming to me, often times describing that my works are meritorious quality and presentation. While I do consider their point as duly valid and understandable, I do feel that it is mandatory to understand the basic nature of all literary works:

They're human.

Which is why critique / literary criticism is important - citing, again, (Pickering, 2004), it helps in evaluating the work through basic questions asked to highlight why we loved that particular work in question, who would be benefiting from that work itself, what is the nature of the work, and why it is mandatory to emphasize upon this nature.

In essence, it is the questions you ask yourself after reading that said work. It is your opinion over whether the time and energy spent in reading or viewing that said work of art aided you, or it simply resulted in you wasting your time watching chibis.

Let me elucidate with a comparison:

I've been on dA since 2010/2011. So understandably, many of the people I am addressing are familiar with the King James Bible, works by... Dickens, Poe, maybe Lovecraft, and even historical fiction to name a few. But because you're on dA, you are familiar with UntamedUnwanted, PoetryOD, HugQueen, raspil, Farand, Jade-Pandora, LadyLincoln, the Pirates of dA (you know who I'm talking about), and people who have been awarded DDs such as brokengod--veins, and your-methamphetamine, and nosedivve, and chromeantennae, and DorianHarper.

Now, suppose, for the sake of this essay, you read... UntamedUnwanted's work. Its not that hard to miss out - I admit to starting my dAREADING with her works. And honestly, I liked them.

and even a aside, you stopped for a moment after you finished reading her work (whichever it may be: Obsession, Seeking Solace, Why I Hate Romantic Comedies), you thought about it. What did it try to portray? What was the overall message? Where could she have derived her experience from? Was the plot clearly defined, and if it was, could you relate with it?

You ask these questions invariably. These questions are classified as "literary criticism". Unfortunately you simply decide on writing "beautiful", not realizing that by sharing your experience with that work, you are doing not only yourself a favour, but are giving that work a reason to be read and even be appreciated. Remember, fellow reader, works of greatness are not measured by the number of people who them, or pass them around - they're measure by how many times you quote them, use them for comparison's sake, talk about them with friends, revere them, even seek to learn from them.

I mention UntamedUnwanted because I pursued short stories and poetry after I read her works. Although I've met plenty of people along the way, she's someone I consider the first person I followed while on deviantART.

Unlike scientific and literature research papers, a critique here on dA may be emotionally linked with the person's work. The key is how you balance your emotional love for that work, with the work's justification of itself: too much emotional investment could mean you were truly moved by the said work; too little or too negligible an amount, could possibly indicate that in your opinion, it did not stand out.

Again, the work should justify itself. It shouldn't be a stick-in-the-mud and your praise was purely to satiate the person's ego.

Which is now where, this essay, and its subsequent series, will begin.

Critique Methods

I mentioned once in the group PoetrynProseWatchers about writing critiques, but here, I'll put down some baseline critiques I've found (and which I, as a critic, have used) that can be useful should any of you decide in writing critiques.

The Tommy Wiseau critique. Its literally, the most basic form of critique you can go for. Essentially pointless in the long run, this type of critique has the advantage of being rapid, technically counting as a critique, and getting the point through that you read the work. Its something like this:

This work is good. I love the environment. The hero is awesome. The story is nicely written. You have a way with words, I liked the description of the people and the places in this work. Keep writing.

Why not just copy and paste that critique - its bland and pointless .__.

The objective critique. Here, you are not concerned with the work as a painting or a picture dictated by words. You, therefore, are playing the role of the protagonist/antagonist of the poem. thus the work itself is the environment in which you are going to play out the role of the characters. This is most effective with novel writing, short stories, fantasy stories, slice-of-life poems and flash fiction, and narrative poems because of the elements involved - researching the characters, allegories, any indicative symbolism, plausibility of events, character consistency and plot consistency, among the notable few elements - and hence, is one which you'll be going for rarely. Unless you're writing novels and short stories and narrative poems yourself, in which case you should be prepared for such an approach. In such a critique, the points to remember are plot, character, theme, symbolism, and any moral message involved. Think of it as five sentences (if you plan on writing a short critique based on this same approach):

First sentence is plot and whether it made sense to you or not. Second sentence is characters and whether they were balanced, and the hero/villain nexus was identifiable. Third sentence is theme and whether it manages to keep its environment intact with the theme, and whether the atmosphere suited the work or not. Fourth sentence is symbolism, and whether the use of symbols and ideas were used to good effect in the work, or if they were meaningless and it would be better to remove or alter them. Fifth sentence is any moral message involved, and whether you were educated from it, and you felt it was original, or it recycled ideas and was generic.

Sample critique:

Your plot was well written, especially the way the climax brings the characters together for the final fight and conclusion. The hero and villain were well defined, and their supporting characters showed the subtle changes that are indicated in their development; the villain's motivation is also intriguing and well handled. The environment matches the plot - I like how you've used the seasons to match the changing cues of the plot progression. The symbolism in this work is nicely done, particularly the way you've shown the transitions of the plot with the symbolic changes as the story progresses. I personally am enlightened by this work, especially how it portrays interesting themes and ideas and merged them together for a better compilation

. Here, however, you'll need to make specific quotes from the text to justify your critique. Also, you'll need to emphasize placed where you felt confusion.

The Subjective critique. This is the usual critique option commonplace on dA. Simply put, 100 words, 25 words each for Vision, Originality, Impact, and Technique. Its easily handled, because now you only need to write down your emotions with a plot based portrayal (Vision being plot, Originality being themes, Technique being writer style and grammar, and Impact being your own opinion about it). Basically, its a mix of the Tommy Wiseau critique, merged with the Objective critique. I've added some references which you can use to understand what I am implicating.

How does one critique

Press the critique button.

No really, I'm serious - that critique button that premium members show: its for everybody. I used to make that assumption myself once upon a time much like the new members here, but honestly speaking, its worth it. One critique like that, can change your perspective to a significant extent.

That, or just start writing a comment five sentences long. The bare minimum is five sentences to be considered a critique here on dA.

Conclusion

That's about it really - I'm looking forward to questions from people on what I have left out, and I'm hopeful that you'll have questions you'd like to ask. Cheers.

For reference sake, consult the following:

Pickering, J.H., "Reader's Guide to the Short Story", 2004, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 0-13-140952-2

comments.deviantart.com/1/3608…

comments.deviantart.com/1/3608…

shehrozeameen.deviantart.com/c…

comments.deviantart.com/1/4173…

comments.deviantart.com/1/3504…

comments.deviantart.com/1/3643…

laeneris.deviantart.com/critiq…

laeneris.deviantart.com/critiq…

jackgunski.deviantart.com/crit…

jackgunski.deviantart.com/crit…

parsat.deviantart.com/critique…