Do people realize what criticism is? And the difference between that and a diss?

This is an interesting question that I've pondered a couple times in various situations. It's also interesting because there is currently a very funny review in the New York Times about a famous poetry "diss" critic, the link is in my sources.

While I agree with your statements for the most part, I would like to define "Criticism" a little.

Literary criticism, in it's most advantageous state, comes from an impartial party and is rooted in solid literary/narrative theory. It's not enough to say, "Twilight is atrocious because it sucks." It's also not enough to say, "Twilight is awful because it's written poorly." And furthermore it's not enough to say, "Twilight is terrible because it's full of purple prose."

There we have the three most common levels of criticism seen in B&A, and, unfortunately, even at a collegiate level. Those three statements amount to little more than an opinion. Literary criticism, be it harsh or favorable, must be clear and accurate to be a valid critique. If one wanted to attack Meyer's poor use of syntax and cliche language, they would have to identify the weakness, demonstrate why it is a weakness, and then be able to prove that there was a better way to write it.

Then we encounter another critiquing quandary: Is it fair to pit one novel against another? The answer, in most cases (because there are specific exceptions used regularly), is, "No."

Twilight can only be judged on Twilight's inherent flaws and strengths. To say that Meyer doesn't write on level with Rowling means nothing, because they wrote two entirely different works.

So what, as would-be literature critics, are we to do?

First, identify the source of our critique: "This is primarily a reader/response critique on the novel Twilight," for instance, would signal that the critic is judging the work based on their perception of talent, taste, and merit. (This, in most situations, would lead the audience to wonder why the heck they should care what you think, but in an open forum I think it is more than acceptable for everyone to voice their views regardless of background or qualification.)

Second, define our terms thoroughly: "The following quotation is one of many examples of purple prose, the use of overly ornate language that distracts from and adds nothing to the narrative: ...."

Third, and this is often hard, try to, at all costs, avoid the first person. Personalizing a critique is generally offensive regardless of the context of that critique.

And there are several more steps, and different considerations I would suggest in more academic, literary environments for this topic. But I think using those three steps in B&A may help clear up the critique/diss misunderstandings.

Finally, let's take a look at what I believe to constitute a "diss": Any comment made with the aim of offending the readers (of the critique, or work being critiqued) or writers (of the book, question, or other comments), or baseless comments made with an air of authority. I think that's a diss, and I see those types of comments more often than I see legit criticism in B&A.

I have a quote in my profile from Mark Twain that I think we would all be better to ponder before speaking: "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

Very interesting question.

Gah, they really don't! I understand if people call comments like, 'that book was crap' a diss, because frankly, it is. But people who bother to actually give constructive criticism or an indepth review of a book definitely aren't dissing. The amount of times I've given multiple, fairly-well thought out reasons why Twilight is not a good book (understatement of the century) and been told my a Twi fan that if I can't be nice about the book, I should **** off is ridiculous.

Glad there's a few people with sense on this planet. XD Sorry for the over-heated rant.

Sarah

xxx

Yes that's how I feel too. One of my teachers tell me I'm extremely negative because I criticize everything; however, at least she recognize that it's criticism. One thing that I've found is that people who aren't use to literary criticism assume that I'm being mean. You've already brought up Twilight. I feel indifferent to that series, but because I write criticisms of it apparently I'm 1. a hater 2. jealous of Meyer 3. really do like it but being mean and 4. never read it (the last one gets me because you have to have read something to give constructive criticism on it). Okay sometimes I get really negative with Twilight but that's because they've just asked me what's wrong with the book. Also I don't always give the full backup for literary critism (would they even care?) However, I don't always give glowing reviews to some of my favorite books either. Heck if Twilight fans actually read what I write about Harry Potter, they would assume I hated it too (which I don't). Also I sometimes give positive criticisms to books I hate. I can't stand Old Man and the Sea but it's fun to research.

I think that you actually can diss a book. The way I see it is that criticism is/should be respectful, even if you're saying that the book is terrible. I think those who can't manage to be respectful while criticizing are really just dissing the book. For example, if you have a problem with a book, if you don't even attempt to find some good quality about it (I'm not saying that you have to find a good quality, it's the attempt that matters), than you can't truly criticize the book.

The same thing rings true when someone is asking for criticism/critiques on their writing. They view anything that doesn't kiss the writer's butt as being dissed. It's plain ignorance.

I hate to point a finger but I see a lot of it from teens and young adults (the over 18 and under 25 crowd) who have yet to understand the difference. It's just aggravating to say the least.

Whether it's a book or someone's writing, someone is always going to feel like they're being dissed even when the intention is strictly criticism or critique.

Well. dissing is normally, in my opinion, an opinion... saying you don't like something because of its genre, i.e. vampire romance for example XD is kind of a diss. But saying you don't like it because the story is lacking, the writing is terrible and the plot is flawed, thats more criticism... lol, I don't like twilight at all, I tried to read it and got through the first chapter then didn't even want to read anymore. Just my opinion. But yeah... it's kind of stupid IMO to just diss a book, cause its your opinion, Im mean its fine you have your opinion, but if you say it out loud then you should be prepared to meet with some other opinions, some probably not agreeing with you :) but if you say critisim then... that's fine too, but its probably better than just dissing.. :)

I don't think that many people know the difference. Or, if they do, they ignore it. Either because they are SO emotionally attached to a work that hearing criticism is painful to THEM, or because someone wants to classify a diss as a criticism. If you can pass it off as a criticism, then you don't have to necessarily worry about repercussions, because YOU are RIGHT and JUSTIFIED in your opinions.

Really, I think it comes down to the emotional attachment. Are you willing to let something you love be criticized? Or are you so adamant about being right that when you insult something, it must be classified as a criticism? Either way, most of the people here on B&A are here because they like books. People get a little too upset about things.

(And Twilight is HUGE about this. *eyeroll* I think it's how the readers are attached to it- it's an incredibly emotional story, as opposed to HP, which appealed to logical ideas and made you think as well as feel Twilight hooks people through their teenage girl emotions. Sorry Twilight lovers- I love the books, but it's wish fulfillment, and not much more.)

EDIT

I think you can diss a book, actually. People who haven't read it and "criticize" it anyway are dissing said book- accusing without backing up their thoughts. Anyone who similarly states, without backing up their reasoning, that something sucks, it's trolling or dissing, not criticizing.

Examples- (Assume this is the whole answer.)

"Twilight SUCKS. It's trash, and no one with any sort of taste would be caught dead reading it."

This is not criticism. It's baiting fans, for one, and secondly, it's only an opinion with nothing to back it up. Similarly, a review writing "I loved it, and it's amazing" is not worth anything.

"Twilight is a disgusting excuse for literature."

Again, no reasoning behind it, just opinion.

"Twilight might have been enjoyable, were it not for the fact that the purple prose, the repetitive wording, and misused vocabulary turned it from a book into an editor's nightmare."

At last- criticism! This is something I would respect.

I agree with you. People who dislike a book have a right to voice their criticism. But when people insult the fans and the author of a book, they cross the line. Fans should be able to tell the difference between an insult and just plain criticism. You can't have a book that's popular, without having the criticism that goes with it.

And I assume you're talking about Twilight right? :)

You tell 'em!

I completely agree with you here. If the person is giving reasons on why they dislike a book, it is their opinion, and most likely truthful. This is in no way insulting to the book, as books don't have feelings. Perhaps the fans take it as an insult directed at them, but that's generally a false assumption.

You're right, not very many people do--but you shouldn't get too riled up over something like this. No matter how firm your argument that a certain book is a piece of sh1t may be, it'll never get through to everybody. You can't change their minds.

What I also dislike is when critics frustrate over people who don't accept their opinions. That's just the way things are. If you can't handle the backlash, then maybe you should just keep your opinions to yourself.