Hey /lit/, have the critique threads improved your writing?
I get that there's a lot of talk about how the writing posted is shit and the critique is even worse. However, do you think there's something to be gained from analyzing poor-quality writing or poorly-constructed critique for the sake of improving your own writing?
Sometimes I feel like I learn how to write better from seeing what doesn't work than what does (i.e. reading canonical literature).
>>7800800
No critique threads are terrible. Most of the "critics" are themselves awful writers and, much of the time, the dumbest anons on this board. I've posted various sections from Ulysses, The Recognitions, and poems by Pound and Crane, and they call it pretentious or nonsensical.
everyone knows they're all shit, but i still post in them from time to time
I just use them because it's the only place I can post my English writings and hope to get some kind of feedback - and every once in a while you stumble on something amazing, like that Portuguese dude who was translating his (already published) poem-ish thing. He was incredible.
Some anon are a little over-assertive concerning what amounts to their own aesthetic tastes. Few know how a plot actually works and its mostly just nitpicking at word choice.
>>7800826
Is it possibly because those excerpts were pretentious and nonsensical? It's not unheard of for writers with unique styles to become famous, but not before they're harshly judged for that same style.
there are occasionally good writers and good critiquers
but the vast majority of posters are shit (like... probably 95% are pure shit)--they just write whatever, don't proofread it, and expect others to spoonfeed them
I'm sure those posters are just posting for validation and have no real interest in writing or improving
the better critique threads are the ones with rules (ie review someone else before posting yours, proofread your work) but eventually those threads also devolve to shit
>>7800951
>rules like proofread ur work
do wannabe readers seriously need to b told to proofread their shit? god u dudes are ridiculous
>>7800891
Nope. They were genuinely well-crafted.
>>7800885
Plots in the critique threads? What?
>>7801002
Most stories usually involve plots m8, and most of /lit/ knows shit about them.
i agree the critiques can be bad. a lot of times posting critique isn't worth the effort:
>a lot of the material isn't worth critiquing. there's so much wrong that the whole piece should be scrapped.
>when i've given critique, sometimes the op gets defensive and doubles down on their flaws.
occasionally an actual conversation does happen. i know critiquing is one of my actual skills so i'll continue to post every now and then.
>>7801016
So you haven't looked at a critique thread is what you're getting at? And that you're a boring asshole? And that people give subtle hints to you that, hey, maybe be a little less of an asshole and maybe find some interests that will really let your talents erupt in a blooming fountain of creativity, this writing thing isn't really YOU, you know...?
>>7801053
lol I was in the critique threads last week and actually the best advice I could give at the time.
I don't know what else you're on about so I'm guessing you're really just talking to yourself.
>>7800800
They're a total waste of time and as a rule, I wouldn't trust anyone's opinion in them. 4chan especially, is a spiteful and bitter place, so most reactions to anything you put up here are going to be informed by that more than anything else.
>>7800874
link?
As with everything on 4chab it needs to be taken with a grain if salt. I have definitely recieved good advice though
/lit/ helped me finish my last novel through the feedback both positive and negative I got here. It's very motivational to have someone take the time to read what you've written, even if it's just to get the same thing in return.
