Do you agree?

[cipherdecoy]

The artist doesn't have time to listen to the critics. The ones who want to be writers read the reviews, the ones who want to write don't have the time to read reviews.

- Faulkner

[waryan]

if an artist listens to critics then i somewhat feel he fails to be an artist anymore, so id say that i agree

[cipherdecoy]

But an artist may read reviews and selectively choose to listen to the critics, should s/he deem them constructive and useful for his/her own progress. Rightio? :)

[aeroport]

I think it could be useful (and how much time does it really take to read reviews?), but I mostly agree with WF.

[kelby_lake]

it could be useful. you need both discipline and vision to be a good writer.

[Nossa]

Someone once told me 'write for yourself, not for the audience who might read your stuff'. I agree that sometimes reading and listening to critics can make you lose your own way. Not everyone will think you're good, and by listening to people and comparing their words to your work, you'll only be trying to supposedly 'improve' your works, but in reality you'll only be changing them into what's originally not yours but theirs. I agree with Faulkner. Having said that, I think that it depends on what the critic is discussing in a work of art. If it's something that has to do with the style, the choice of words...anything other than the vision of the author in the work, I think it'd useful for the most part. I love to get feedbacks for my writings, but this doesn't mean that I'll just write about what people want. I can try to improve 'how' I write it, but I won't change 'what' I write, if you know what I mean.

[PeterL]

I agree.

[Whifflingpin]

Presumably any writer would want to improve, and critics do well for money what family and friends do badly for love - that is give a professional judgement of a book.

Ok, that may not be true eight out of ten times. Maybe you should reject all the critics who are also "writers," since the circle of writer-critics tends to be a self admiration society.

Perhaps the answer would be to read criticisms of other writers' work, until you find a critic or two whose judgement you agree with. Then read those critics' opinions of your own work.

[Rakthor]

How do I put this...
Well, part of me agrees, and at the same time, part of me doesn't. On one hand, you should write for yourself, and forget public opinion and criticism. You shouldn't have to pander to people's desires. That's the way most writers become hacks or sell-outs. This is a purely hedonistic way of writing. You write to please only yourself, and disregard all others. This view is appealing, but doesn't really fulfill your duty to society. Questioning whether or not one has a duty to society should be left to the philosophy board. For the purpose of this piece, let's assume we do.

On the other hand, writing shouldn't just be a form of mental masturbation. You shouldn't just do it to pleasure yourself. A writer's purpose is to inspire and teach others. Constructive criticism can help to realize that purpose. If everyone wrote just for themselves, then not much would get published.

Ah, to be divided so...

[JBI]

I agree, but it is inevitable. Even he found out that statement may lead to bad results, as seen with his lesser read novel Fable, which he regarded as his masterpiece, and to most critics is seen as a flop. One needs to keep in mind that things are written to be read by others, I think the context is a little shaken here. He was talking about snobby critics who look for things wrong, rather than the general public.

[Rakthor]

I agree, but it is inevitable. Even he found out that statement may lead to bad results, as seen with his lesser read novel Fable, which he regarded as his masterpiece, and to most critics is seen as a flop. One needs to keep in mind that things are written to be read by others, I think the context is a little shaken here. He was talking about snobby critics who look for things wrong, rather than the general public.

Well, when you put it that way, I completely agree. :D

[Dark Muse]

Ultimately I agree, I think the artist should be true to their vision and trust themselves above all else, and should not change their art to appease the tastes of others. But on the other hand, I think that sometimes it can be useful to see another perspective, and one might point something out, that you actually agree with. But one should not make a change simply because someone else thinks they should. Because ultimately, though Critics might have studied art, and might be "qualified" and be looking for specific things when they give reviews, when it comes right down to it, they are just a guy, giving their personal opinion.

And personally I never allow critics to dictate to me something I am going to read or see. I always prefer to be my own personal judge. If something gets rave reviews but does not sound like something I would be interested in, I am not going to look into it, and if something really gets torn apart, but I am interested in it, than I will go ahead and look into it anyway.

[cipherdecoy]

Ultimately I agree, I think the artist should be true to their vision and trust themselves above all else, and should not change their art to appease the tastes of others. But on the other hand, I think that sometimes it can be useful to see another perspective, and one might point something out, that you actually agree with. But one should not make a change simply because someone else thinks they should. Because ultimately, though Critics might have studied art, and might be "qualified" and be looking for specific things when they give reviews, when it comes right down to it, they are just a guy, giving their personal opinion.

And personally I never allow critics to dictate to me something I am going to read or sea. I always prefer to be my own personal judge. If something gets rave reviews but does not sound like something I would be interested in, I am not going to look into it, and if something really gets torn apart, but I am interested in it, than I will go ahead and look into it anyway.


Agreed.