An age of darkness is upon us!
Shallow entertainment that panders to the lowest common denominator threatens to destroy
all of pop culture.
Yet in this darkness, there is hope.
There is only one way to save the entertainment industry from certain doom.
Only one way to stop artists and creators from walking the dark path.
By leaving a mean comment on the internet!
Giving criticism is a fine and delicate art-form that requires nuance and careful consideration
in order to effectively give feedback to a creator much like how a bulldozer demolishes
a house!
Fear not because giving criticism is not a skill so you don’t have to worry about honing
your ability to give feedback.
It’s not like a writer can learn anything by reading the works of others with a critical
eye as well as sharping their ability to workshop scenes in order to fix key problems.
I mean I can’t see how those could be applied to one’s own writing.
Instead, giving criticism should be seen as an opportunity to cut loose and put other
creators down in order to elevate a writer’s own position.
[uncomfortable silence]
Now the first thing to know about giving effective criticism is that this is personal!
When giving critique one cannot risk appearing weak so it is necessary to personally insult
the author of the work being critiqued.
This will make sure the author is paying attention.
A critic could make it impersonal in order to keep the focus on the work being critiqued
and thus allowing the original creator the look upon their own work without worrying
about personal attacks to distract them.
The problem with this approach is that it isn’t as much fun for the critic.
Tearing people down is good entertainment and an excellent way to stroke one’s own
ego.
Don’t forget to be snarky too!
Be sure to grind any confidence the author has into dust so you can laugh at the broken
remains of their creative ambitions.
Isn’t it great to be drunk on power?
Are you not a sadist who subsists entirely upon the tears of authors?
Is being mean to people too much?
That’s fine!
Instead, we can say nothing bad about the work being critiqued at all.
Is the story full of overpowered Mary Sues who endlessly preach about environmentalism
between long stretches of plot dedicated to a love triangle so convoluted that the reader
needs a flow chart?
Well a nice critic can always say the font choices are nice since at least the entire
thing isn’t written in comic sans.
And when the original author asks if it is okay that they have the good guys use a burning
cross as their symbol, one can always reply with “um…
I guess it could work?”
We don’t want to mean after all even if it is at the cost of letting a fellow creator
grow in skill and knowledge.
Fortunately, being nice is completely optional on the internet.
Instead, we can focus on what internet critique is really for: getting hung up on petty nitpicks
no one else cares about!
Hate scenes that place in a coffee shop?
Better spend the entire critique rambling about how awful coffee shop scenes are even
if the scene only went on a paragraph.
I mean there is the scene where Mary Sue preaches about animals rights for twelve pages straight
or the part where the antihero slaughters orphans for shock value, but no the mere inclusion
of a coffee shop scene is clearly the problem.
What about the part where the fast pace utterly evaporates at the coffee shop scene or that
the characters do nothing but sip coffee and partake in small-talk rather than advance
the plot or engage in meaningful conflict?
Nope.
Doesn’t matter.
Don’t bother to explain why it’s bad.
The mere fact that the scene takes place in a coffee shop is simply unforgivable, WORST
STORY EVER!
Oh hey!
Hyperbole!
Hyperbole is great when giving critiques.
The label of Worst Book Ever should be carelessly thrown about because clearly this story is
worse than a book that makes 50 Shades look like Sesame Street or a book that helped pave
the way for World War II.
Likewise the label of Best Book Ever is equally helpful when it comes helping an author improve
with feedback.
Got to help that author build an echo-chamber.
The label of Worst Book Ever can also be handy shorthand for, “I’m not the intended audience.”
Never should a critic take into account a writer's target audience.
I can’t believe this children’s book doesn’t try to tackle the easy subject of supply side
economics.
And I know this is a fantasy story with knights and dragons, but it would really be cool if
you added robots and spaceships and instead of a fantasy world it could be an alien planet
and instead of princesses there could be space marines who fight robotic precursor aliens
and instead of a quest to free the world from the clutches of the dark lord it could be
a high stakes political thriller between rival planetary governments!
Who cares that this is basically a completely different story.
Obviously the creator should completely change their story based on the subjective taste
of a single critic nor should a critic consider moving on to something better aligned with
their personal tastes and area of expertise.
If fact, the more one hates something the more time and energy they should dedicate
to bashing it.
Start entire blogs or even multiple YouTube channels dedicated to just how horrible this
story is and go over every minor error in excruciating detail.
Feed this obsession well past the point of rational critique.
Who cares that this obsession is creating content that is driving traffic to the very
thing it was made to hate.
Nothing should get in the way of this obsession especially not stuff like:
Learning a new skill.
Reading a book outside your usual comfort zone.
Pickup up a new hobby.
Dusting off an old forgotten hobby.
Going on a walk.
Writing your own story.
Adopting a pet.
Exercising.
Relaxing.
Or watching paint dry or just anything, just do anything else.
Clearly spending time obsessing over a crappy story is a great cause to dedicate your finite
amount of time to.
After all, only you can save pop culture from [insert ism here].
Don’t learn to break down a story to try to understand why it’s popular when one
can instead attack the story because it’s popular.
Telling die hard fans that they are stupid for liking something will definitely win them
over and I am sure the author will instantly give up their success when faced with a minority
of critical voices screaming obscenities and racial slurs at them.
If things get desperate, one can always compare the author to any number of authoritarian
leaders throughout history in order to draw a parallel no matter how tortured the logic
is.
This will certainly get the author to take the critic seriously.
It helps to remember that criticism should never be given with grace or empathy.
When has understanding had anything to do with critique?
Breaking down a story into strengths and weaknesses in order to let the original author decide
how best to fix or mitigate flaws while preserving the story’s strengths just isn’t as easy
as mindlessly praising it or mercilessly tearing it to pieces.
Those with creative aspirations should feel free to be as overwhelmingly negative as they
wish and should never worry that one day it might be their turn.