Critique is not a cute word
There was an interesting article on critics and creative writing in a
Sinhala literary supplement. In fact writers have now started going to
town about their works being criticized. One writer who could covetously
win two awards had been making headlines over the last month. One
headline was interesting, because it went on to say that if she took
criticism seriously she would never be able to write.
Well it raises a question: why are writers so scared of critics? You
may need overlap my question with another: who are critics, actually?
When you write in a heavy language anyone hardly understands, you are
thought as a critic. When you have studied it somewhere, say university,
then you can be qualified for the position. Quite intrigue it becomes
when you would not tolerate others invading your forte. Why is criticism
so monopolized? In actual fact even a child can be a good critic. He
cannot be as experienced as an adult. When your mind is free of this and
that theory - without being an expert - you will be able to see through
any creative work like crystal clear water. Prove me wrong, it’s a deal.
If writers are to lay cards on table, they should say they are scared
of harsh criticism. No one would like their works to be badly criticized
no matter how genius they try to portray themselves in creative works.
They would like to be praised in heaps along with a word or two of
negative criticism. Writers are just human beings, and so this factor is
quite excusable. But you cannot take up this as the right approach.
What about critics on the other hand? Some critics do not seem to be
genuine in negative criticism. They have personal agenda behind harsh
criticism. This is actually a critic cult. Remember Aba? It was attacked
from all fronts, but hardly anyone pointed creative setbacks. It was
quite clear all those critics were against Jackson Anthony as a person -
they would have negative criticism on any Jackson Anthony work. Critics
should criticise the work. Better leave criticizing the person to a
psychologist.
Ven. Yakkaduwe Pagngnarama Thera was so aggressive in his criticism
against Martin Wickramasinghe’s Bava Tharanaya. The novel was only one
book, but Ven. Pagngnarama’s work was two volumes! Not only Ven.
Pagngnarama, but even an eight-year lad would be able to criticise
Wickramasinghe’s works. The difference is everyone takes it for granted
only when the learned monk does that.
‘Learned’ tag gives license. If that is so why do writers claim they
write to everyone. Everyone doesn’t have that tag ‘learned’! Then why do
they seek criticism only from learned ones?
By the bye, creative artistes, if they are true to themselves, should
ask their conscience: am I brave enough to weather harsh criticism on my
works? If you can do so, even though the critic belongs to a cult
against you, then you are a brave creative artiste. Listen to them and
take if they have anything on offer. Even harsh criticism has something
to offer. If they don’t have anything, then follow the Buddha who did
not accept the Brahmin’s bashing. Leave the unwanted harsh criticism to
themselves.
When our award-winning writer says she would never be able to write a
book if she listened to criticism, that shows her fragile personality.
Harsh criticism makes you feel down, but you should cultivate that
strength to take the crux and leave the rest alone.
Don’t ignore criticism, whether it’s genuine or not. Because
weathering harsh criticism whets the creative mind.
[email protected] |
