# The Worst Compliment You Can Tell A Writer



## len_ryuka (Feb 18, 2011)

This is something that I learned from my highschool Film teacher (who himself was mildly successful in the movie business) which I think should really be shared with all writers and film makers.

He said during one lecture that, the worst compliment you can say to a Film Maker, Writer, or any artist of any kind, is: *"It's good"*

Ironic huh? You'd think that "It's good" is a "good" compliment, but he elaborated that artists are attempting to evoke strong emotions from their audience, and "It's good" is not a strong emotion. He said that you need to make the audience feel at least _something_, disgusted if you have to, but if you're aspiring to be something more, then never, ever, settle for an under passionate "It's good". Because that means there was little emotion involved and that's not what you want. After all, if they wanted to experience something "good", then why not go eat a burger? play a video game? go fishing? Why do they have to go to your "art" to experience something "good" when there are so many other cheaper, more accessible "good" out there?

I wandered about the meaning of this as I tread through University, which I am even now, and always thought, well big time Harry Potter fans would say that JK Rowling's books were "good". So what about that? And I realized that any big fans of HP would say "I LOVED Harry Potter", and this lasts for a while after they've finished the series. And years later when they begin remembering little of the story of HP, the "LOVE" will degrade into a "Good". A book or a film should be graded on the impact it has on the reader, and this generally can be alluded directly to the length of time they can keep saying "I LOVED xxxx", and even further, begin discussing about the plot, characters, and etc.

With that in mind, if you ask your reader how they found your work, and they say "It's good" with little more to say right after they're done reading it, that most definitely means you didn't intrigue them any further than they would have enjoying anything else. However of course, this depends a lot on who's reading it as well, but if you keep getting a "It's good", then you know you're doing something wrong.

And this notion of passionless nod can be directly alluded to originality as well. You need to ask yourself this, "Why should someone read my work instead of Charles Dickens/Ernest Hemingway/JK Rowling, or even Stephenie Meyer?"

You need originality, and I don't just mean the premise of the story. People are reading/watching a fiction world so they can get away from their mundane real life and _actually experience some emotions_.

Say you're writing a Wizard story, then why should somebody pick up your story instead of Harry Potter? If you're writing a thriller, why not Tom Clancy? After all, thrillers have existed long before Tom Clancy and wizardry has been perfected thousands of times before JK Rowling, so what is it about these authors that make them stand out and etch their name on the reader's minds? It's originality, they were the first ones to do something that hasn't been done, JK Rowling popularized the idea of teenage magic with a fun atmosphere and epic-ness that hasn't been done before, and Tom Clancy was the first to write such detailed portrayal of Military in general. Even Stephenie Meyer, who herself isn't particularly a good writer, evoked strong lust from teenage girls with her passionate grasp of overt sexual desire. Ernest Hemingway had his matter-of-fact prose to distinguish him from every other writer that was out there at the time.

But don't be original for the sake of just being original. Be original in order to express yourself, be passionate and be vigorous.

One Japanese song lyrics I think sums it up the best, "There are big flowers and small flowers, but life isn't about being Number One, it's about being the *Only One*.


----------



## Edward G (Feb 18, 2011)

Great post. I was enlightened by reading it, and I love the song lyrics. All in all, your post was good...no...wait, I didn't mean it.:-# Come back...Len...LEN! 

Ah, don't go away mad. Really it was _very good_. Oh sh..#-oLen, I swear I didn't mean it. I thought it was a great post, a superb post, the most royal post I've ever read! Len...get back in the car--please!

:mrgreen:​ 
Seriously, though, that's sound advice.​ 
Ed​


----------



## JosephB (Feb 18, 2011)

I think it should fairly obvious that an assessment of "good" wouldn't be very satisfying to most people. I can't imagine that many people strive for "good." Seriously -- is this something you need to hear from a teacher?



len_ryuka said:


> I wandered about the meaning of this as I tread through University, which I am even now, and always thought, well big time Harry Potter fans would say that JK Rowling's books were "good". So what about that? And I realized that any big fans of HP would say "I LOVED Harry Potter", and this lasts for a while after they've finished the series. And years later when they begin remembering little of the story of HP, the "LOVE" will degrade into a "Good".



I would contend that most "big time Harry Potter fans" would not say that Harry Potter is just "good" -- otherwise they wouldn't be big time Harry Potter fans. Ask one and see what he or she says. 

People rarely say that something they love is just "good." I also don't think there is any reason to take it as a given that people won't maintian their original assesment of the books. I'm sure that some people might read them as adults and not have the same feelings -- but after all, they are primarily children's books. I'm no Harry Potter fan, but what you're saying here doesn't make a lot of sense to me.


----------



## len_ryuka (Feb 18, 2011)

fleamailman said:


> "..._the good_ is the enemy of _the best_..." went the goblin borrowing that french maxim there, adding "...but a lot depends upon who is making that compliment too, for some people actually mean it while others hide their true opinion behind it, where perhaps the worse compliment is "it's perfect" because then one get fooled into thinking that it might be so here, and then either stops correcting it or writing more then...", in fact, the goblin always preferred to look at the hitcount to gage a thread's readability anyway, saying "...compliments and heckles are just that, whereas a 20hits to 1post ratio does rather cut through the conjecture..."


 
haha yeah, well he meant most of what he said in the context of actual physical questioning, not over an internet forum. But yes you are correct, there are much more implied meaning behind a compliment, you do have to look at body language, etc, but for the most part I believe my teacher summarized the point pretty well. If you get an honest, under passionate response... well.



Edward G said:


> Great post. I was enlightened by reading it, and I love the song lyrics. All in all, your post was good...no...wait, I didn't mean it.:-# Come back...Len...LEN!
> 
> Ah, don't go away mad. Really it was _very good_. Oh sh..#-oLen, I swear I didn't mean it. I thought it was a great post, a superb post, the most royal post I've ever read! Len...get back in the car--please!



Hahaha, that's a "good" joke haha.



JosephB said:


> I would contend that most "big time Harry Potter fans" would not say that Harry Potter is just "good" -- otherwise they wouldn't be big time Harry Potter fans. Ask one and see what he or she says.
> 
> People rarely say that something they love is just "good." I also don't think there is any reason to take it as a given that people won't maintian their original assesment of the books. I'm sure that some people might read them as adults and not have the same feelings -- but after all, they are primarily children's books. I'm no Harry Potter fan, but what you're saying here doesn't make a lot of sense to me.



You missed my point, I elaborated that they do say they "Love" the book. The only time when they say HP was "good" was long after the immediate emotional impact of the piece had gone by, this could take months, or maybe years, all depends on how much the person "loved" the book of course. What I meant when I said "After all, Big time HP fan would say it's "good" right?" I meant it in a way that I asked them years and years after they were done with the series. I'm around 20, and most of them finished HP at around 16 or so.


----------



## garza (Feb 18, 2011)

When I was in the U.S. for the oil spill my son and I had dinner one night with my sister. She was married for 20 years to a Sicilian and his mother taught my sister to cook, and to cook magnificently. 

So after the grilled rock hen, spaghetti, roast, half a dozen vegetables, fresh baked bread, a fruit plate with homemade ice cream, all of which I knew had taken her about two days to get ready, she looks at David and I, smiles, and says, 'well, how was it?' 

'Okay', I said. 

'Yeah', said David. 'Okay.'

'You can both go to the Devil', she said. 

Should we have said, 'it was good'?


----------



## len_ryuka (Feb 18, 2011)

probably a big smile and a "good" would work better than a shrug and an "okay".

of course, as I've learnt, that there is a lot going on at the body language level as well. But the way he said "Good" was trying to make a point for the striving, not for the average joe.


----------



## Mike (Feb 18, 2011)

If you are being original to express yourself, and everyone is expressing themselves in an original way (discounting the fact that 'originality' is a lesson learned by comparing the differences in social mores and social think and applying a slanted and scrambled version of it to yourself), then does this mean that you are still original or does it mean that you're simply trying to hard?

This form of original expression is really a guise for attracting a mate. For getting laid. Can there be any other reason for it? Possibly. Perhaps we're expressing ourselves originally in order to do one over on one's neighbor. "Aha! Look how more original and how much more human I am, neighbor!" we say in our more-original-than-thou voices.

Can there be a reason to express myself in an original way to better my inner self, to hone my soul, regardless of who's watching? "Look, self, look how original I am right now! Yippee Skippee!" I say to myself in such a refreshing, original voice. My self replies, "Gee... I already know that. You're unique. Whoop-dee-f***ing do."

I really want to say "eff off" to someone who slaps me in the face with this 'be original' bullcrap, but that wouldn't be very original of me, now would it? Or sporting, for that matter. Hmm...


----------



## JosephB (Feb 18, 2011)

len_ryuka said:


> You missed my point, I elaborated that they do say they "Love" the book. The only time when they say HP was "good" was long after the immediate emotional impact of the piece had gone by, this could take months, or maybe years, all depends on how much the person "loved" the book of course. What I meant when I said "After all, Big time HP fan would say it's "good" right?" I meant it in a way that I asked them years and years after they were done with the series. I'm around 20, and most of them finished HP at around 16 or so.



What you're saying is based on some assumption that people will rethink the Harry Potter books some time after they've read them and have a different opinion. There's no basis for that assumption. Of course it could happen -- but so what? Many people will still love them based on their initial experience, regardless of whether or not the books might elicit the same response if they read them later from the perspective of an adult -- or if their tastes have otherwise changed. 

What difference does it make? What was your point -- good isn't good enough? Yeah -- OK. 

And don't be original for the sake of being original. Wow, keep 'em coming.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 18, 2011)

You also have to consider the fact that a fair-sized chunk of the general population are incapable of expressing emotion, even if they might feel it inside.


----------



## caelum (Feb 18, 2011)

Let's keep everything civil in here, folks.  You may not like someone's opinion, but that doesn't mean you can't address it in a respectful manner.


----------



## TheFuhrer02 (Feb 19, 2011)

fleamailman said:


> "..._the good_ is the enemy of _the best_..." went the goblin borrowing that french maxim there


 
I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 19, 2011)

This is such a good (now we will be paranoid to use this word at all) thread .  I guess it's really about how one let's people define them.   
Ox, amen!
Some people feel inadequate to comment honestly to a painting or a story or anything creative.  
Even if they love it, some people are conditioned not to show emotion, and I'm sorry if this offends anyone but men are conditioned that way most.  
Other folks are afraid that a very favorable comment will elevate the artist because somewhere in their head it puts them down in their own eyes... crazy but true.   
I guess I'm a gusher... I like to encourage people.  It does my soul good!


----------



## TheFuhrer02 (Feb 19, 2011)

^ True. The thing is, writing is supposed to be but a catharsis and a learning of sorts. I write because stories are a way for me to say what I feel of many things, plus it gives me a sort of escape from the real world. In my stories, I can do anything, and this gives me some sort of freedom, however short and unrealistic it may be.

Back to topic: I don't think telling a work is "good" is a bad thing in its entirety. After all, "good" is a word that exists whether or not we use it. The point is not in the compliment, but in the sincerity of it. While it is true that we have to give people a pat in the back sometimes, we are always to make sure that this pat is followed with a friendly reminder, or rather an encourager, saying, "This is really good. Now, we make it great."


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 19, 2011)

Great is good!   :roll:


----------



## len_ryuka (Feb 19, 2011)

JosephB said:


> What you're saying is based on some assumption that people will rethink the Harry Potter books some time after they've read them and have a different opinion. There's no basis for that assumption. Of course it could happen -- but so what? Many people will still love them based on their initial experience, regardless of whether or not the books might elicit the same response if they read them later from the perspective of an adult -- or if their tastes have otherwise changed.


 
Again, you're not getting my point. I'm making this quite clear, but I'll say it again so it's less parse-able . "Love" degrades(keyword here) in to a "good" after a long period of time when the reader begins forgetting about the emotional impact they felt back then. No, they did not "reconsider" or "re-assessed" their likings of a book, what they did do however, was attempt to remember the impact the book had on them.

If a reader REALLY loved a book, they can say they "Loved it!"(not exactly with those words of course) for a very long time. However when some people begin to forget about the book, they may begin to say "It's good" because they can't immediately pull out their emotional experience. It has nothing to do with reassessment of themselves.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 19, 2011)

Shirley S. Bracken said:


> some people are conditioned not to show emotion, and I'm sorry if this offends anyone but men are conditioned that way most.


 
Sligjht correction: approximately 60% of men are like that. The remainder become flight attendants, nurses, ladies' hairdressers, photographers or movie directors, and show lots of emotion.:|


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 19, 2011)

OK I should have said real men.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 19, 2011)

len_ryuka said:


> Again, you're not getting my point. I'm making this quite clear, but I'll say it again so it's less parse-able . "Love" degrades(keyword here) in to a "good" after a long period of time when the reader begins forgetting about the emotional impact they felt back then. No, they did not "reconsider" or "re-assessed" their likings of a book, what they did do however, was attempt to remember the impact the book had on them.
> 
> If a reader REALLY loved a book, they can say they "Loved it!"(not exactly with those words of course) for a very long time. However when some people begin to forget about the book, they may begin to say "It's good" because they can't immediately pull out their emotional experience. It has nothing to do with reassessment of themselves.



I can think of several books I read as child or teenager that I loved. My opinion of them hasn't "degraded" to some opinion, assessment or feeling of "good." I still feel and recall the emotional impact quite clearly. Go figure. Something like what you're describing might happen -- but so what? How is that a factor in evaluating the quality or value of the book?

There is no reason to assume that people who have read and loved Harry Potter or any other book, for that matter, wouldn't love them years later, based on their recollection of them. Memories of them very well might elicit the same emotions. You're guessing -- based on your own feelings, experience -- or who knows what. 

And I didn't say anything about people reassessing _themselves _-- I'm talking about reassessing the books.

Otherwise, I think we're talking past each other. Given the premise of the original post, which is kind of a no-brainer, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.


----------



## InsanityStrickenWriter (Feb 19, 2011)

I think one of the worst compliments would be to have someone say, "I loved how you represented the plight of the poor [insert plighted people here]", when you infact said absolutely nothing about them whatsoever. Or, "Fantastic how you drew a connection to WW2" when you said absolutely nothing about any wars at all. (Neither has happened to me yet, and if it has then I probably pretended that I did intend to represent what these people thought I was repesenting  )


----------



## Like a Fox (Feb 19, 2011)

The worst compliments I ever get about my writing are when I'm commended on how well I've created a troubled character who clearly has issues.
And then I realise those issues are mine and I've written them in subconsciously. Haha.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 19, 2011)

Like a Fox said:


> The worst compliments I ever get about my writing are when I'm commended on how well I've created a troubled character who clearly has issues.
> And then I realise those issues are mine and I've written them in subconsciously. Haha.


 
Perhaps you could have a read of this thread when you have the time. Foxee and Sigg raise some interesting points. As well, I'm sure there are others who might say much the same. Ignore Joe.:geek:

http://www.writingforums.com/debate...rs-reflections-writers-personalities.html#top


----------



## Sir Roberts (Feb 19, 2011)

Worst compliments? When some bugger said 'I especially like the recurring themes of Friendship and Loyalty." Friendship? Loyalty? It's a discourse taken from the mind of a madman, not an episode of the teletubbies.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Feb 19, 2011)

This a is a good thread.  And I say that after having read the OP.  Ideally, the OP would be correct.  But there's really nothing wrong with being good.  When I finish up a book, put it down, and say "That was a good book.", here's what I am really saying:

"I enjoyed this book.  There were some great moments in it.  I would pick up another book by this author."

What does that mean for the author?  More sales.  More books that they will be able to sell to a publisher.  More money they have made.  I can experience an enormous amount of emotion in response to a good book.  If I didn't have an emotional reaction, I would say it was a boring book, or a lame book.

The word "good" has a huge range to it.  Harry Potter to me was a good series.  Robin Hobb's "Liveship Traders" was also a good series.  I think Liveship Traders is way better than Harry Potter.

You have to look at the context.  If you asked me independently what I thought of each series, I might say anything from "meh" to "good" for HP, and anything from "good" to "fantastic" for LT.


----------



## Like a Fox (Feb 20, 2011)

It also implies that someone might say good, and not mean it. I can emphatically mean good.

So good. Good solid story line. Good character development here. I'm pretty into the word good, actually.

Now if I say 'okay'... that's a different matter. Okay to me tends to mean _just _okay. Like, it will suffice but it could be better.
I think that is kind of the same meaning as the 'good' in the OP. Which kinda makes sense via the following example.

When I had a french guy living with me, he leeched off me and my housemates, ate the food we cooked for him, didn't pay for much, and when we'd ask him how he liked his dinner he'd say "Iz okay." I had a chat with him at some point and said "You can't say it's okay. You have to say it's good. It's rude to say it's just okay."
He was like "What if is not good? What if is just okay?"
"Then you lie, dear Jerome, it's good manners."


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Feb 20, 2011)

lol, Fox.

Here's another way of looking at it: There are plenty of people whose work I think is terrible. They've never been published(mostly...), nor even been asked for a partial. Yet, here we are, debating how some poor published writer or gallery artist must weep when we say their work is _merely_ good. Folks, work that is called "good" is the cream of the crop already. It's in that top 5% of all the work out there. So what if it's the bottom 10% of that 5%? Buck up, already.

You can't make everyone happy, anyway. Books I think are terrible other praise as the greatest work since the Iliad. If everyone you've ever talked to says your work is just "good", then maybe you have a right to complain. But certainly not on the grounds that it wasn't complimentary enough.


Perhaps next time I shall just say it is bad.  Will that make you feel better?  At least I did not call it "good."


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 20, 2011)

This is really kind of funny.  I am a visual artist too.  I do watercolors.  I was always put off by the comments my husband didn't make.  I usually got an AH HUH from him.  I finally asked him why he didn't like my paintings.  He said he thought I was a good artist, he just didn't like the subject matter much.  I paint a bit freely and he is a realist.  I think most men want to see real.  Anyway, I was satisfied.  He also said that I paint so much, it was hard to be excited about them all.  Now he really looks at my paintings and tries to find something that can speak to him.  Good man!!!


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 20, 2011)

I feel that worse compliments are "Interesting" or "Fascinating". So are amoeba. Superlatives like those are nondescript, akin to telling a child something they have done or made is "very nice" in order avoid a brutally honest assessment and to spare their feelings. 

Most people are afraid of offering an honest critique for fear of hurting or offending, and few people want to hear an honest critique because to them it feels like a personal attack whether it is intended as such or no. As long as the criticism is honest and constructive, there's really nothing to fear. It is through the recognition and understanding of mistakes and shortcomings that we improve, isn't it? Shouldn't that be everyone's goal? And if the only way we can feel good about ourselves is by tearing into the efforts of others and denigrating their attempts, what does that say about us?

Oh yes. Just to be pedantic. One pays a compliment; one does not "tell" it.


----------



## spider8 (Feb 21, 2011)

I don't think there's anything wrong with saying something's good, if it's good. If an artist feels disappointed because he wants it to be great then that's just tough. Maybe the next viewer or reader will think it's great. Or maybe it'll push the artist to improve.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 21, 2011)

What's amazing is there's actually a thread devoted to what "good" really means.


----------



## Heid (Feb 21, 2011)

I would say that 'good' isn't such a bad thing to hear so long as the person who said it can elaborate. How was it good? What was good about it? Etc. The same would apply to something that's described as 'bad'.

I had a primary school teacher who used to HATE the word 'nice'. His impression of that adjective was that it was flat and meaningless. He would purposefully have lots of thesaurus' on hand in-class so we could use them when describing something.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 21, 2011)

Yes, an explanation can make all the difference. For example, someone might read your work and say, "I thought it was great." When what they really meant was, "it was great that I didn't fall asleep when I was reading it." Or -- "I thought it was great that it didn't blow as much as I thought it would."


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

I don't think you can expect an elaboration from the non artist person.  Especially family.  I am just a casual, emotional writer.  I just write, I haven't studied it.  I am a serious visual artist and I've learned the very first things out of someones mouth is a very telling thing.  If someone looked at a painting and said "Wow, it's colorful"  you will have an idea of what your painting says.  A "good" remark can be casual or it can be a wonderful compliment.  One really has to "hear" how it is said to know the degree.  Facial expressions, contemplation and interest all combine to form a true opinion. A "written" "good", is harder to feel.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

The problem is only saying "it's good" and not expanding. Why is it "good"? In what way? What makes it "good"? Also, how one says something is hugely important. Everything is about context and emotivity. A short and dismissive "That's good" with a vague nod and a glance away indicates a closed subject for instance, whereas widened eyes and a smile to accompany a slightly exagerated "that's _good_!" requires expansion. If one is keen to close the subject then "that's good" is likely to be a sop, and the truth is anything but. Those two words are a gateway, and expansion from them tells you whether that gateway is closed or open. It's all about veracity. If you can see the gateway is closed, then you know that person paying the compliment, whether to spare your feelings to avoid getting into a discussion, is lying.
That's hurtful, especially to someone who has put alot of themselves into something and so exposed elements of themselves that are vulnerable.

One does not have to have an artistic bent to elaborate, nor does one have to be creative to offer constructive comment. Pointing out the way a colour jumps from the canvas or a chord progression grasps one's heart or how a single phrase pinpoints exactly how the reader feels isn't beyond the wit of man and audience.
Besides, it's polite not to treat a grownup like a five year old who requires a pat on the head and a gentle ushering back to their playpen where they are out of the way and not really bothering anyone.


----------



## Sam (Feb 21, 2011)

This seems to be a recurring theme with writers I know personally and on sites like this. They aren't happy with 'good' because they feel they've put their heart and soul into a piece and think it deserves more. The problem is, readers don't see things through the writer's eyes. They don't know how much blood, sweat, and tears you've poured into your work -- and they don't care. All they want is a story which entertains them. I'm content with hearing someone tell me my work is good. It's a lot better than hearing, "Oh, it just wasn't my kind of book". _That's _the worst comment, in my opinion, a writer can receive. Thankfully, I haven't heard one of those yet.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

That's precisely why expansion is essential. "Oh, it just wasn't my kind of book" is fine. It means the subject or genre isn't of interest and therefore the reader is not qualified to comment. i can accept that and move on without rancour. We can't all be interested in the same things. some people who hate a genre call everything in that genre - writing, music, movies, painting or whatever - rubbish. That's not a reflection of the work in question so much as it is on the intelligence wisdom and most importantly the limitations of the person making the judgement. 
I had a lecturer some years ago - self important if charming fellow with a Shakespeare obsession - who dismissed The Lord of the Rings as "a comic". That stung. I recognise the limitations of the writing, but to dismiss a work out of hand like that seemed the worst kind of ignorant snobbery. At the end of my second year, when the time came to select writers and works for our major thesis, everyone was chosing Sylvia Plath and Stevie Smith as their subjects -  people and work they knew nothing about beyond the single works they had read in class - I wrote my dissertaion on thematic comparisons between Shakespeare's fantasy plays [A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Tempest, MacBeth] Tolkein, C.S. Lewis and Hans Christian Andersen.
I handed it into another lecturer to be marked since I knew the Shakespeare obsessed would fail it out of hand. It was the first thesis on that subject at that college to grade over 95% and is required reading still. One lecturer could see past the subject matter he derided and disliked to get to the matters in question. One - the head of department - could not and demanded instead that we all like and value what he did and conformed to his opinions. Who is the better teacher?

I don't mind someone telling me they thought something was shit as long as they can tell me why something is shit in order that I can learn and improve. The qualification of their point will tell me if their opinion has merit and will indicate how much of it I should take onboard. Dismissing something I have done whether politely or no indicates that my efforts are somehow beneath consideration. That's as firm a kick in the ego as it is possible to deliver.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

Why is that amazing?


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

"It isn't my kind of book"  is exactly what I meant with the analogy of my husbands' viewing of my work.  He just did not care for abstract work.  So I painted him a truck and he calls it his own.  He doesn't want me to sell it.  That was a good compliment.
Knowing something about the reader, viewer is also important.
You are an interesting Frog!  Is that insulting?


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Feb 21, 2011)

As long as people are honest and polite, I don't mind what they say, whether it was "It's good, I especially liked. . ." or "I wasn't too keen on the main character, and the plot was noticeably weaker towards the middle, because. . .". If it's an honest and well thought-out comment, I take it on board. Whether I agree with the comment or not, the fact someone took time out to say anything at all is good enough for me.

You don't need to be an "artist" to know why you liked or didn't like something and elaborate upon that. The world isn't made up of artists and non-artists, we all have artistry within. If "It's good" isn't a pleasant compliment, something's up. 

Also, I disagree that "Love" becomes "good". When I love something, I love it forever. You don't love something for a while and then suddenly think, "D'you know what. . .I only think this is good now." Nostalgia can be an incredibly powerful thing, too. I guess it depends who you are, obviously. Some can change their opinions abruptly.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

That depends...
Josef Mengele was "interesting" but I wouldn't have wanted to have a meal with him.

I love your annecdote because it hits the nail squarely. You have used your ability in a different way in order to connect with someone who is unable to appreciate your own vision.It's like learning to speak a language that someone else doesn't speak. The voice is the same, just used in a different way. Now they understand you and can appreciate what you do. However, this is not your language, so you can now go on satisfied that your ability isn't in question.

See?



Shirley S. Bracken said:


> "It isn't my kind of book"  is exactly  what I meant with the analogy of my husbands' viewing of my work.  He  just did not care for abstract work.  So I painted him a truck and he  calls it his own.  He doesn't want me to sell it.  That was a good  compliment.
> Knowing something about the reader, viewer is also important.
> You are an interesting Frog!  Is that insulting?


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

LOL!  In the reverse... my husband raises cattle, he sees them as his babies... I see them as steak!
Bruno, my opinion changes abruptly, especially about my own work!


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Feb 21, 2011)

The only opinions I have about my own work are "It could be better" and "this is shite", but it does switch pretty sporadically between the two. If I ever start thinking I'm a great writer, I'll give up. I'm at my peak when I think my own stuff is awful, because that's when I try my best. You are your own worst critic after all, never a truer word spoken.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

Exactly! Qualification and elaboration are everything. It's all in the why and the how.

I agree with the use of the word "love". Everyone loves everything now. Everything is "awesome" and "amazing".

Crap.

If one has ever truly been in awe of someone or something or amazed by  someone or something one would know it. Instead "awesome" has come to mean "fine". As in 
"I got the spam you wanted from the shop." 
"Awesome."
Like the overuse of expletives, the overemployment of hyperbole has denuded the power of certain words and expressions. That makes the job of a writer that much more difficult. 

The best thesaurus in the world will not help you to convey the true meaning or feeling of a situation or emotion if all the bullets in your arsenal have been rendered impotent.










Bruno Spatola said:


> As long as people are honest and polite, I don't mind what they say, whether it was "It's good, I especially liked. . ." or "I wasn't too keen on the main character, and the plot was noticeably weaker towards the middle, because. . .". If it's an honest and well thought-out comment, I take it on board. Whether I agree with the comment or not, the fact someone took time out to say anything at all is good enough for me.
> 
> You don't need to be an "artist" to know why you liked or didn't like something and elaborate upon that. The world isn't made up of artists and non-artists, we all have artistry within. If "It's good" isn't a pleasant compliment, something's up.
> 
> Also, I disagree that "Love" becomes "good". When I love something, I love it forever. You don't love something for a while and then suddenly think, "D'you know what. . .I only think this is good now." Nostalgia can be an incredibly powerful thing, too. I guess it depends who you are, obviously. Some can change their opinions abruptly.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

Ah! But if you understand the love and care he puts into his babies you can begin to grasp what makes a better steak!
In Japan I met a Wagyu farmer producing omi beef. he would feed his calves a bottle of beer a day each and when he arrived at the pens in his pick-up and began to unload the crates they would perk up at the sound of the rattling bottles and run to the fence in their anticipation.
I'd be less good at raising cattle that he, but I appreciated the dishes his wife served later all the more for understanding better the intimacies of his craft.
You found a way to reinterpret your painting for your husband and he grasped that with both hands. Perhaps the road could run both ways?

As artists it behooves us not only to grasp the intricacies of our media, but the intricacies  of life and all of its wonderful complexities.



Shirley S. Bracken said:


> LOL!  In the reverse... my husband raises cattle, he sees them as his babies... I see them as steak!
> Bruno, my opinion changes abruptly, especially about my own work!


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

Hollow point bullets make a bigger hole than solid ones.  
Though one may believe your own work is hollow, one never knows what others might feel about it.  
Sometimes others love what I did but I almost threw it away, not even showing it to anyone.  And vice versa, I loved it... no one else did.  Sigh...


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

There's a difference between self deprecation and self denigration. The latter equates to the flagelation emplyed by fanatical Catholics. The practice didn't improve their devotion or spirituality. It satisfied altogether different perversion.

Always  recognise the quality while searching for the means to improve. A plant  will never flourish if one constantly undermines the root.

The trick is to be honest and realistic and not delusional.



Bruno Spatola said:


> The only opinions I have about my own work are "It could be better" and "this is shite", but it does switch pretty sporadically between the two. If I ever start thinking I'm a great writer, I'll give up. I'm at my peak when I think my own stuff is awful, because that's when I try my best. You are your own worst critic after all, never a truer word spoken.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

Subjective/objective potato/potahto 

Your husband hated an abstract but loved a truck. The paint, brush and hands are the same as are they eyes and the mind behind them.

See?



Shirley S. Bracken said:


> Hollow point bullets make a bigger hole than solid ones.
> Though one may believe your own work is hollow, one never knows what others might feel about it.
> Sometimes others love what I did but I almost threw it away, not even showing it to anyone.  And vice versa, I loved it... no one else did.  Sigh...


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

He loves steak too as I love his cows too.

Delusional...  that's hard to get around sometimes.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

Oh indeed. It's common for aspiring artists to convince themselves of their own genius just as it is to dismiss their every effort as effluent. The harder path is the middle road of patience and calm and a recognition that we never stop learning.

And the possibility that even though Grandma says our voice is great, it may be better suited for the shower than for international television and the inevitable ridicule on YouTube...



Shirley S. Bracken said:


> Delusional...  that's hard to get around sometimes.


----------



## Hawke (Feb 21, 2011)

> He said during one lecture that, the worst compliment you can say to a Film Maker, Writer, or any artist of any kind, is: *"It's good"*



Oh, I dunno. I think it depends. I'd rather hear "It's good" from a writer I respect, than "OMG, I JUST LURVE THIS SOOOO MUCH!!!!" (yes, lurve—some folks use it as a word) from any one of a million so-called writing sites which shall remain nameless.


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

Hawke, I agree!  I have been on other writing forums and was not happy with the lack of substance.  This forum seems more mature.


----------



## White Chocolate Frog (Feb 21, 2011)

This is my first writing forum. So far I am quite happy. I once stumbled into a fan fiction forum by accident. Someone was begging for frank and honest critiques of a story they'd written based on Stargate SG1 characters and scenarios. I gave it. Things did not end well. that was some time ago and it put me off for a good long while. To paraphrase Rory Gilmore: "The internet is a scary place and people are freaks"

There's an awful lot of drivel out there, and just as much pretentious garbage written about literature, the nature of art, expressionism and so on ad nauseum. Bottom line for me is this one thing. If you are put off creating because someone is mean about what you are doing then God help you.
People are not nice and many of them "succeed" not by building themselves up but by tearing others down. You have two choices. judge what they say on qualification decide if it has merit and then what you are going to do with it, or fold up like a cheap suit and learn your new mantra
"Do you want fries with that?"


----------



## JosephB (Feb 21, 2011)

I think if I ask someone's opinion of something I've written, the chances that they'll issue a flat "good" with no elaboration, inflection or body language are close to zero. I try not to worry about things, that in all likelihood, will never happen.


----------



## Beginner's Mind (Feb 21, 2011)

I can be happy with good. It's good enough. It's better than bad. I think it's a good word, too, despite the fact that I remember school teachers saying not to use it.

Not everything in life can be wonderfulacious and fantabulous.


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken (Feb 21, 2011)

All anyone really wants is a response.


----------

