I agree. I think the real issue is how many people have received bad crit.
I also agree that all creative arts, whether writing, painting, performing, etc., are much bigger than the artist. The way that others interact with it is valid and important (and very interesting!).
And I can see your point about engagement. If you say you only offer engagement if it's positive, it's not a realistic relationship between writer, reader, and piece. All I can really say for my side is that that relationship can be so personal (read: vulnerable) when it comes to blogging. There is that immediate connection and feedback, which is powerful and interesting for many reasons. At the same time, it doesn't have the more impersonal level of removal an author might get reading a review of their book, or an analysis of it in a literary paper. Because we talk pretty directly to one another, without these buffers - and because in many cases, neither the writer nor the would-be editor is a hired professional - it can be harder to take.
I personally am open to receiving solid, quality concrit, but I prefer to receive it via PM. When I am having a one-on-one conversation, it's easier for me to hear what a person is saying, and evaluate it honestly. When it's in public, my first instinct is to defend myself and my work, and although I will do my best *not* to do so, just having to wrestle with those impulses makes it a much more unpleasant experience!
At the end of the day, I just handle giving concrit the way I would want people to do so with me: if I have something specific I want to share, I ask if the person is open to it. (When it comes to receiving concrit myself, it sometimes depends on the piece or my mood that day!)
Whether or not Idol is an environment that encourages concrit or real efforts at improvement doesn't concern me too much, honestly. I personally don't love the idea of everyone tiptoeing around, afraid to offer anything but compliments. But I do feel that the people who really want to improve can and should seek out feedback.
no subject
I also agree that all creative arts, whether writing, painting, performing, etc., are much bigger than the artist. The way that others interact with it is valid and important (and very interesting!).
And I can see your point about engagement. If you say you only offer engagement if it's positive, it's not a realistic relationship between writer, reader, and piece. All I can really say for my side is that that relationship can be so personal (read: vulnerable) when it comes to blogging. There is that immediate connection and feedback, which is powerful and interesting for many reasons. At the same time, it doesn't have the more impersonal level of removal an author might get reading a review of their book, or an analysis of it in a literary paper. Because we talk pretty directly to one another, without these buffers - and because in many cases, neither the writer nor the would-be editor is a hired professional - it can be harder to take.
I personally am open to receiving solid, quality concrit, but I prefer to receive it via PM. When I am having a one-on-one conversation, it's easier for me to hear what a person is saying, and evaluate it honestly. When it's in public, my first instinct is to defend myself and my work, and although I will do my best *not* to do so, just having to wrestle with those impulses makes it a much more unpleasant experience!
At the end of the day, I just handle giving concrit the way I would want people to do so with me: if I have something specific I want to share, I ask if the person is open to it. (When it comes to receiving concrit myself, it sometimes depends on the piece or my mood that day!)
Whether or not Idol is an environment that encourages concrit or real efforts at improvement doesn't concern me too much, honestly. I personally don't love the idea of everyone tiptoeing around, afraid to offer anything but compliments. But I do feel that the people who really want to improve can and should seek out feedback.