Criticism - as it is (eaten)

And again our stories are on the air on Thursdays, which means it's time to talk about something ambiguous. For example, about the most burning topic of the entire litprocess - about criticism.

Criticism! Reviews! There is probably no topic as complex and causing so many stormy verbal battles as criticism of creativity.

What does any person of a creative orientation know - it doesn't even matter if he is a writer or an artist, a musician or even, say, an actor. What -criticism -needs-to-be-able-to-accept, and for some reason no one wonders that you also need to be able to give it out, that's the thing!

It's not enough to say - these texts of yours are natural nonsense, don't write any more!

After all, even the notes of a madman have a right to exist, don't they?)

No, Eirik Godvirdson has long outgrown the stage when criticism is really capable of hurting, and more than that, we sincerely believe. that each opinion is curious in its own way and at least interesting from a variety of points of view, including those from which the authors of reviews and critics may not even have looked.

Just about the ability to issue criticism - like any review - it is impossible not to mention for one simple reason: this is also the ability to handle the meaning, the word, and the image no less than that. what is required for, well, let's say. writing a small literary text. Therefore, not every review is criticism. Most often it's just an opinion. As, of course, not every text is a work of art, we are well aware of this.

And yet, real criticism is not always an abusive rout. There are, of course, masters of destruction in such exquisite literary techniques that you read their articles as separate works - for example, the writer Alexander Kuzmenkov ("Wakizasi", "Exhumation", "1924, or the Red Hutuktu") Here are his articles - it's just a separate genre, as it seems to us: this is not even a criticism or a review of the result, but a detailed - independent - literary work. Satirical, as a rule. It is read with delight and horror, to be honest - it's probably scary for anyone to get on the tooth of such a mature dissector of other people's works. Well, purely humanly. and in the framework of the litprocess - it's like a pick on the defense of scientific work. Without it, there is no way and nowhere. Such things.

Well, finally, I just wanted to tell you a few funny and not so funny moments related to criticism and reviews.

Once, a year or so in 2005, 1/2 of Eirik Godvirdson, not yet being this one second, wrote stories. Their first, short texts - between pairs or instead of particularly boring lectures. And with trepidation and slight fear, she showed these stories - by hand, in a notebook - to her closest friend at that time.

And their closest friend, oddly enough, appreciated them very highly. Why "oddly enough"? Yes, because often such stories abound with the same plot twist: and I was criticized.

No, the first texts were not criticized - but they said something very funny - even now, after years, funny. A friend of one second of the future writer - the same nineteen-year-old dumbass as the future writer - took a deep breath and thoughtfully said: "Calling the horse of an elven warrior "sleek" is wrong!"

The future half of Eirik Godvirdson, scratching her head, was puzzled - why else?

And do you know what turned out after about forty minutes of conversation in expressive terms, with a raised tone and offended misunderstanding? The fact that a friend believed that the word "sleek" automatically implies "pampered and spoiled."

That the meaning of this word is still somewhat different, it was not immediately possible to convey.

But how they both laughed afterwards - both a friend and a future writer!

And even if the quality of youth art studies was absolutely at the level of school essays, this is not very important in this story. The important thing is that it is worth listening to criticism, accepting it, listening to it, of course. But only on one condition: you and the critic speak the same language.

To issue critical remarks, we note, too - only when you are convinced that you are understood, and understood correctly.

And yes - listening does not mean "running to do as you were told." It means to draw your own conclusions, gentlemen. The most diverse at the same time.

This story is the shortest and most visual illustration for our taste: before you go to extremes, figure out whether you are speaking the same language with your opponent right now.

And as for the opinions - flattering or not - we are most impressed by the position of writers Oleg Ladyzhensky and Dmitry Gromov, known as the duo-writer Henry Lyon Oldie: every opinion is interesting in its own way. You can draw a variety of conclusions from it and read all the reviews and opinions in completely different ways. Actually, we have already stated this position in the post above.

The second funny moment was connected with a mutual misunderstanding that "being interested" in any topic does not mean "promoting this topic as the right point of view", and here, of course, there was no happy consensus, as in the previous story: for some reason, a common language has not been developed, alas. But still yes: Eirik Godvirdson is sure that negative characters can and should be written in such expressions so that they look both human and at the same time remain villains, and any interesting topic can and should be able to be presented in colors both light and deliberately black. Not at the same time - but from different points of view. And yes, of course, in the topic of criticism, one cannot help but remember this: the focal point of the character's point of view is not equal to the author's, but it takes a lot from her. It's inevitable. It is not necessary to separate the author from the work, contrary to school requirements, but remember that the character is also a person, even if fictional, it is necessary. We firmly believe that all our characters are quite human, and we will also need to talk about this, but another time.

Here is such a controversial topic, this is yours - and ours! - criticism. But there is nothing unambiguous in the literary process at all, and that's why literature is loved.

And we'll talk about reviews in general and their importance in creative life next Thursday, perhaps. And at the same time - about the news of the cool prairie project and alternative history.

PS: Take care of yourself - it's a cold and troubled time this end of October, may you have light and warmth in your soul when it's getting darker and colder outside!