26 June, 2010
The advantage for critics is the acknowledgement they receive from the audience, or i might well concur this alone to be their talent: To make people believe in their highfalutin hypocrisy.
Let us try to analyze the purpose and credibility of Criticism. Yet again, I would project my perception of this betterment tool.
As I mentioned, Criticism is a betterment tool. There is no criticism which can be categorized as positive or negative. I haven't been able to fathom the concept of "Positive Criticism" till date. Let us not digress into this debate, as yet.
Coming to another essential aspect, the source of criticism is the point of most import.
A person who hasn't tread the path has NO right, whatsoever, to speculate of its terrains!
Simple,and this is what I believe in,with respect to criticism.
When a person is criticizing my actions, or my efforts, or my creations, the first and foremost requirement, for me to give heed to those words is: Only if that person has at least tried and failed in the context of scrutiny. If not, that would be treated as ambient noise, and filtered off my mind.
But, at the same time, when someone who has had experience in the matter of discussion, is criticizing me, I would not mind taking even harsh reviews. Nevertheless,the levels of incorporation of these views into myself is a function of my perception of the source.And, this alone must be the standard for tackling Criticism and Critics.
Any softhead, with a hollow mind, a false ego and a bucket full of vocabulary can chew out creative commentaries on - An act of creation - A mind's product - A lifetime's efforts; But, to even give heed to such ridiculousness, brings down the authority of the creator.
Unfortunate though is, in today's media frenzy world, people appreciate a megalomaniac critic,instead of the humble geniuses within the creators.
Posted by Raghavendra S at 10:01 PM