Huh.
Now, I'm a person of strong opinions. I know what I like and I tend to be explicit about my reasoning for same. I'm also a working artist who makes my living putting things out there that people are free to take a crap on... or not. If there is any artist on this earth who hasn't had a critical drubbing, then they haven't been doing it for very long. Goes with the territory.
I have a policy when I go to see any friend's show here in the city (theatre, dance, gallery, film, etc), I say two things: "thank you for inviting me," and "I had so much fun." If it's a performer I will add, "You looked handome/pretty/amazing up there," because they tend to be vain. I also have a rule about only being friends with talented people because I won't lie about that stuff. But with this policy goes a codicil, all of my friends know that if they actually want notes, they must call/meet me later, privately, and I'll give them, at length and in specific concrete examples. There is NO reason to bombard people with notes at emotional moments. It serves nothing. Unasked criticism is less than useless. Often, there's little use in offering criticism even
when it's requested. I take notes very seriously and I am ALWAYS specific, because anything else is useless and damaging. When pressed, I tend to pick a single overall note that I think is critical, with supporting examples and then leave the artist to do their job. Because it is THEIR job, not mine.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I think that public "notes" are a pointless, poisonous nightmare, being a combination of unqualified "expertise" and artistic cowardice, because the person hasn't actually created anything but feels no compunction about helping you improve your work. Weird, no? Everyone knows how to "fix" something, but almost no one knows how to create something. Notes are inevitably someone else's vision... so the artist's hunger for notes becomes a kind of frantic grasping for driftwood when you feel like you're going under... But why would I want a stranger's handprints all over my work? Why ask for public notes? Ummm, maybe because approval is addictive and making bold choices is scary? The funny thing is I love notes, but any artist will tell you that you must cultivate a small group of people whose input is actually of some value and the hide of a rhinoceros so you can ignore everyone else until you know what you're doing.
I have to confess that for many years I have given the Tarot Creation subforum a wide berth. Truthfully, I don't think most people who post their work want criticism and no matter how many times people insist that they want "constructive" notes, in my experience that's a load of shite. They want to be encouraged and embraced. Um, duh? It took me years to figure out that the Tarot Creation subforum is actually more of a sketching club, with some obvious exceptions. That's fantastic, but it doesn't interest me at all. While qualifying art may be subjective, in fact most amateur art is, uh, amateurish. The word Art is used far too indiscriminately these days. I respect the subforum's presence, but it's not something in which I need to participate . Besides, the friends I have on AT who create decks deserve more from me than a public posting. If/when Karen or Ciro or whoever asks me for notes, I handle it the way I'd want to be handled: I look at the work and respond specifically and privately. Unless you are a patron paying the bills, public declarations during someone's creative process are best restricted to expectant enthusiasm or silence.
Now, I imagine loads of people are going to pop in and disagree that yes-yes-yes ALL notes are useful and general feedback can powerful. Bullshit. I think those exceptions prove the rule. The idea of taking blanket communal notes from a random audience is bizarre. Just my belief, but I think part of being an artist is acting with authority. If I need 15 strangers to come hold my hand to decide on a word choice I'm in deep doo-doo. People make helpful suggestions, and I have had good comments from passers-by, but frankly I can count those instances over the past 20 years on 2 hands. Nonartists can only respond to what you have done, not what you were trying to do, so comments on unfinished work are inevitably destructive... and on finished work serve only as a kind of helpful tombstone. When I take input it's from my keep-it-real crew; those notes carry major weight with me because those few friends have earned my respect and gratitude. It is my job to know what the hell I'm doing, and if I don't, then it's my job to take the bollocking. Art does not happen by committee.
Censorship gives me the heebs on principle, but this is a private forum. Not to put words in his mouth, but I don't think Ciro means "censorship" as much as "politesse" or "mindfulness." Still, so long as people are abiding by the rules of conduct, I think they should be able to post their thoughts. That doesn't mean I have to think their thoughts are thoughtful! If someone says something awful about my work on here, bummer, but then the reason I write is because I believe that more people like my stuff than hate it. If I don't believe that, then I might as well lump it. Writing is a bit different, but I wouldn't in a million years show something half-finished to my producers or my audience because it would be silly and disruptive. I get better because I want to say things more clearly and people pay me to learn from my own mistakes. Now, a primary reason to share art before it's finished is to excite interest and feel your way through a challenge that you haven't quite solved. Ciro's and Karen's and poor Ric's patience with input is oceanic! I could never be as gracious as they are. And all of them have a line at which they say, "Enough! This is my art; it's my decision." I think that
their "Enough" is actually the thing that makes them artists. Art is choices. Maybe I'm a hardass or a mule, but I just don't think anyone signs on to AT expecting some random member to "crack" an artistic problem for them in passing. If they do, I'm not sure what that says about their ability, confidence, or sanity. And in case anyone posting a helpful criticism believes they're "fixing" someone else's work, they should know that they're not. At best, they're reminding the artist to find
their own solutions. Art by committee always winds up looking like a bus station.
Secondarily, everything isn't always sunshine and orchids. I KNOW that there's a lot of tiptoeing and mushmouthing around topics on AT because everyone would rather walk on eggshells than hurt feelings. I'm not an eggshell person, but neither do I need to stomp on people who aren't asking for it. I recently stomped hard on Arrien's Thoth book because I think it is a worthless, reckless piece of twaddle that misleads the unwary. But I supported that informal "review" with citations. For all my critical ire, it wasn't personal, and I bent over backwards to support all my points. That didn't stop emotions running high. But if we all only say nice things then eventually we're all actually smiling and lying to each other, because sometimes things suck and people are rotten.
Listen, criticism hurts... Rejection sucks. Word! But they are the artist's oxygen. We don't have to love it, but we have to live with it. And frankly, if we ask for it than we have to take our lumps. The obvious answer is to not invite criticism until you want it, and not ask people whose opinion you don't respect. The idea that artists lurk at the edges of a forum afraid to talk to people about ANY topic because their work might be criticized seems... extreme. Mostly, I imagine people are busy and the internet plays different roles in different lives. Ciro and Ric and Karen and Kat (and many others) have let us behind the curtain, to our pleasure and edification, but that's their choice. Each has found a way to balance any unfair criticism with the positive experience on AT. If there are artists not participating in the forum because they are leery of criticism, then I'd ask what they were planning on posting that would have compromised their creation. Can they not have a conversation outside of their creative output? And if not, why are they compelled to post the blow-by-blow of their process? There's no law that says anyone MUST report on a project. And there's certainly no requirement that they listen to "helpful" input from complete strangers.
Anyways, obvious a personally resonant topic and one that I've thought about, oh, constantly since I was about 12. Sorry to go on, but I wanted to raise a couple of other points...
Scion
rather well known 