|
Attila Soos
Join Date: Jan-2002
Location: Los Angeles, California
Country: USA
Posts: 2,003
|
Very wise points on the subject, I can't help but admire Walter's experience.
I like to look at a critique as providing a service to the owner and to the audience. The same way as an expert consultant is hired to provide a service to a client. The success of the critique depends on how the client (who may be an audience or just the owner, or both) perceives it. It is not a self-serving exercise to please the master himself.
Before the critique takes place, the rules of the game need to be addressed. If the client has conditions and expectations, he needs to put them on the table. The master also needs to tell the client his own conditions and things that the client should expect. After both parties come to a common agreement, the critique can take place.
The same should apply to a critique on internet forums. In Walter's case, he has his own page where we submit our trees, and he sets his own conditions. When we put our tree there, we implicitly accept his conditions. So both sides have agreed on the terms.
When someone posts a tree for the members to critique, he should tell us what he expects from our critique. He coud say, "shoot away, I will take hard punches", but I think it is implied that the rules of common courtesy are used and we wouldn't try to publicly ridicule him.
A good critique is when both the owner/audience and the master leave with a sense of accomplishment. If any of them is unhappy at the end, the critique failed. It's not about who is right. It has to be a win/win.
|