Discussion What is your definition of criticism?

Criticism is when you find flaws within a person's work and try to point it out objectively as possible. Which maybe hard because being objective is not what everyone can do. When you try to describe something, you put it out there in terms of what are you feeling from it, and that is emotions, yet to be objective requires the absence of the obstruction of emotion. So personally I define it as "pointing flaws and merits in a person's work objectively by analyzing your own arrived conclusion and removing it of any bias before presenting it"

 

A badly-written novel is still a novel.
A badly-written criticism is still a criticism (with the exception of Really troll-ish comments like 'u fag').

In fact, it is not a reader's job to deliver 'well-written' criticism that will help the writer improve: that is an editor's job. And just like an editor's job, writing a good, constructive criticism is something that requires effort and skill. If a reader decides to provide criticism that's constructive, that is entirely the goodwill of the reader. If the author receives 10 comments such as 'ur character s*ck', then at the very least, the author would note that the characters need more effort.

The truth is writing, like construction a building, is not something that can be perfected just from fixing some holes. If someone points out 'Ur toilets smell', there may be a more fundamental issue regarding the whole plumbing system. Someone experienced may be able to point out the exact flaw and even give advice on how to fix it, but most people can only notice the obvious, such as that something is leaking, that the building is wobbly and other such obvious issues.

Take Reincarnator as an example. Several reviews have complained that the story is 'hard to read', though few explain why exactly. In fact, it is because the series has a bad habit of cutting up sentences in the middle and moving the second half to a new line, and of switching between sfx/talk/3rd person focused/3rd person omniscient at an excessively fast pace (often at the rate of 1 per line), thus cutting off any sense of continuity. However, not all reviewers would be able to analyze this point. They would just be able to tell that they are getting headaches, without understanding why.

 

the heck, you dont even know whats the meaning of criticism? dont tell me you dont even go to school? are you poor? or something like that,. people who gives shitty comment about someone they dont even know,. people who criticize someone just to prove that they're smart or something,. or maybe, im wrong,.

 

I somewhat disagree with your view, this seems like a criticism to me, not a constructive one, but it seems like criticism nonetheless.

The one I would consider to be simple negative feedback would be more like...

"This character is horrible and retarded, the author is just a pussy and should be trying to get some girls instead of writing this shit"

Or anything of the sort... The example you provided is of someone giving their opinion and why they have that opinion, the person didn't delve much into why they have that opinion, but they still gave the why.

They also did not try badmouthing the author or the translator because of that, they just pointed out what they believed, it seems like criticism to me, even if not the best form of it that could be done.

That is the main issue I have with the "supposed criticism", using your opinion of the work to go against the one providing it to you is not something I would recommend to anyone, nor do I think is very wise.



My own opinion on the matter is that any form of opinion, as long as it is backed by some sort of reasonably acceptable argument can be considered criticism, it should never be used just for the sake of giving a negative feedback to the author/translator however, but instead to try and help them in improving in their work, or simply for the sake of wanting to discuss the topic at hand.

 

Are you kidding? that example is for well reasoned criticism that, while not suger coated (constructive), it is not negative either, it is simply neutral in tone.

Now that would be a highly negative form of the same criticism. It drops the reasoned explanation as to why the character is bad, and replaces it with unrelated insults towards the author.

Although that doesn't necessarily make it baseless or wrong. (the criticism part not the insults at the end).

NU is absolutely full of LNs where the MC is horrible and retarded. This is a perfectly legitimate complaint (that the character is retarded, not the part where they throw insults at the author, that part is just negativity without critique)

If you wanted plain trolling without even an actual criticism it would be

without actually stating a single point of critique about the work itself

 

I disagree a bit with you, that does not look like criticism to me.

On the example provided by the OP, the person says that the action done by the character should not be done, due to being illogical and unreal.

On the example I provided, the person would've just said that the character has flaws, but isn't really saying what is the cause of they believing the character has flaws, that is not criticism for me, just a complaint.

Even if the person kept on being rude and insulting the author, I could consider it criticism if there was any sort of reason as to why the person believes something about the character.

Of course, nobody thinks that this kind of behavior towards the author/translator is justified, but this kind of feedback isn't even criticism in my opinion, since it doesn't have any slight attempt to reason why the person's opinion make sense, on the OP's example, it was an analysis of a specific action instead of a character, it was easier to see that complaint as a valid one, instead of a baseless negative feedback.

 

the internet is a cesspool of horrible people, where the vocal majority will just nag and bitch. *cough* i feel like you're mixing a few sorts of criticism into one, which misrepresents things a bit. there's one's TL ability, the story, or the TL themselves which may be criticized, and each of these should be examined individually.

pointing out errors made in the translation will either be ignored, fixed, or the corrector will get bitched at and told to TL it themselves if they're so much better at it. depending on the amount of errors, or if it's simply a copy/paste MTL, it's not even a matter of how the reader should be grateful, but if it's even worth reading in the first place. there's a certain level of quality that people want, even if they're dealin with MTL. if it makes the reader's eyes bleed worse than just reading it via google, it's not shocking if the "service" provided is attacked. if sombody mentions that it has a phrase or two wrong in the translation and the first reaction is something like below, then perhaps the problem isn't the comments...



nagging the author for their "work ethic" or punctuality rarely goes over well, but can and should be ignored in most cases, although if a large number of people start complaining, then it may be time to consider whether they may have a point buried under all the saltiness. this is usually a losing battle for both sides, and rarely improves. my advice is to disable comments before things get out of hand.

as for the story, it's rather unnecessary to complain at the translator about the story itself. they just TL it, they're not the actual author. but these comments should not be construed as if they were insulting the TL, but merely venting their frustration on the story. now, if the TL starts interjecting things that don't belong, (adding baka, and the like in a chinese/korean novel) because they think it sounds more *kawaii*, or adding their own comments and thoughts inside the story itself instead of at the bottom of the page, these ought to be criticized and are an abomination.

in regards to realism, it should be based on the world. people are people, animals are animals, and physics function as expected until stated otherwise. if there's a winged tiger, i'm gonna think that it should be able to fly. there's no need to question its existence until it swims through land like Chuck Norris. i'm going to expect that if a person falls out of a window on the 15th floor of a castle, they're going to die. if they turn into an emu and starting farting the national anthem of a country they should have no knowledge of, this is not normal and goes beyond what one could ever possibly believe. if the story decides 400 chapters through that now gravity is made of pudding, and the MC's hair contains the power a thousand pikachu, then the story is no longer in a good place. it's important to establish the rules of the world and abide by them. leaving some things unexplained is fine, such as the process with which some creatures may evolve, (like a goblin to hobgoblin), but once the story acknowledges that they're capable of said growth it sets a precedence in the rule set. expecting such a thing to happen eventually would be normal. getting halfway through the story and revealing that the method to evolve is winning a game of stratego deep within the bowels of an elder dragon's ass before devouring a thousand sandwiches with no mayo... that's not a twist, that's a twit.

 

Based on the dictionary definitions people have posted so far I believe that a baseless complaint is still a criticism.

In fact I explicitly noted that this example suffers from being "a criticism which lacks a reasoned explanation". This makes it a much weaker argument, but doesn't automatically mean that it is wrong.

Yes, just because something is rude and negative doesn't automatically mean they are wrong. It just means they are rude, negative, and shouldn't be associated with. It is entirely legitimate to ban someone for hurling insults alongside their criticism.

 

Yea, there are several "translations" I came across on NU which I swear are MTL. Or manually translated by someone whose english is so bad that the result is actually worse than MTL.

I have zero gratefulness towards those. Although I am not going to be rude and insulting either.

Just because they haven't don't anything to be worth being grateful for doesn't mean it is suddenly ok to insult them

Unless those are privately emailed to the translator, then they are probably not meant for the translator or the author. But rather just for the other readers/commenters.

The word you are looking for is internal consistency.

A lot of people use the word realism because when discussing a work set in reality then those become synonymous.

In a fictional world though the two become decoupled. Realism stops applying and instead we are only looking at internal consistency and plausibility

 

I see, perhaps my definition of criticism is at fault then, or maybe the definition is a loose one that can be interpreted in many ways, I am unsure.

Agreed, one that gives criticism in this kind of manner should not be associated with, a ban to that kind of person would be greatly appreciated.