why you should ignore online literary critics
Do they have anything worthwhile to say or have they become literary trolls now?
Can your life as a writer benefit from what critics online have to say, or are they wasting your time? Was there ever a time when critics had anything worth saying or was it always a waste of time. Is there a “good” critic compared to a “bad” one?
In this blog, we will look at why you should ignore online literary critics..
WHY YOU SHOULD IGNORE ONLINE LITERARY CRITICS
Table of Contents
Look back to the first books ever written and you’ll notice critics were not far behind. Either liking the novel or not and explaining how they felt.
Just like today, everyone has an opinion. However, things have changed with the internet. We’re now seeing the rise of amateur online critics who have no problem being direct and rude with their “reviews”.
There was a time before the internet when someone had an opinion they had to keep it to themselves.
For the longest time before the internet, literary critics were these mysterious voices whose reviews would appear in columns in black and white in the Sunday edition of a newspaper.
Every up-and-coming writer with a new book would live in fear of a review of their debut novel appearing in the column for the world to see. Worrying whether the review would be positive or harsh.
AS THOUGH THE REVIEWS WERE ALIVE
They’d open up a newspaper and quickly turn to the “arts and entertainment section” to see the latest reviews all there in black and white staring back at them.
As though the review were alive and could see you. Words cutting right to the point, giving a positive review, or negative. All those years of writing a novel summed up a few paragraphs, knowing it would affect sales.
There’s something cold and menacing about a critic’s review.
You could not see their face or hear their voice. You were forced to read the review in your head using your own voice. As though the review was written by you. Cold black words in a newspaper column.
Paragraph after paragraph breaking down why a book didn’t work.
THE REVIEWS COULD DESTROY SOMEONE’S NOVEL
Their review could destroy someone’s novel before it was even released. And critics didn’t hold back with novels only, they would review everything. from movies, TV shows, to restaurants and art.
A restaurant opening on a Monday would be closed by Friday if it had a bad review.
Movie producers would fear a negative review of a movie knowing it would hurt box office numbers. A big-budget movie could lose a lot of money with a bad review.
These critics were respected and well-written explaining how they felt and what was wrong with the book. It wasn’t just their own personal review, but the overall idea of the novel.
HE WOULD TAKE THE TIME TO EXPLAIN HIS REVIEW
But critics no matter how harsh would explain themselves, why they felt the way they did. There was a time when Roger Ebert would give a bad review to a movie but would explain why he judged it so badly.
He did not say it was horrible and moved on. He would explain why he felt the movie didn’t work and what could have been done to make it better.
But something new has happened recently that has changed the world of literary critics. Youtube has come along. Which has opened the door for countless critics to come forward.
We are now seeing the faces of the critics as they judge a new book. No longer are the critics’ faceless individuals whose words appear black and white in columns in a newspaper.
WE ARE NOW SEEING THEM AS AVERAGE PEOPLE
This has opened a new world for artists for the first time. They can now see the faces and eyes of the critics who are belittling their book. And what we’re seeing are average people in their living rooms rambling away.
They are not mean, faceless monsters as we thought of them decades ago. Just regular everyday people sitting in front of a camera with their opinion.
Somehow this takes away their mystic. The sense of mystery within them is now gone. We no longer fear them or care as much as we used to.
They’re nothing more than everyday people with thoughts running through their mind.
THEY’RE MAKING IT UP AS THEY GO ALONG
It’s been said you can judge someone by looking into their eyes. Now with Youtube, you can see their eyes and realizes they really have nothing important to say.
They’re just everyday people rambling on with their opinion. The professional powerful review is missing. Replaced with dull unthought-out opinions. You can tell they’re making up their opinion on the spot. With a lot of ahhhs and humms thrown in.
Somehow the world of being a critic has lost all its meaning.
Now that we can see their faces, gone are the days when a critic with their review can destroy a novel.
THEY ARE WATERING DOWN THE MARKET NOW
Back in the old day’s words were in black and white within a newspaper. They haunted you. You couldn’t place a face to the words. It made them mysterious.
But seeing their faces on Youtube rambling away makes them human. Just regular people, like everyone else.
The literary critic market has been watered down greatly with so many critics on Youtube.
A few decades ago there were a few well-known critics working for well-known newspapers.
Today it seems they’re a dime a dozen. If you go onto “Youtube” and type in literary critic you’ll get countless, endless responses. Everyone is trying to corner the market on something new to criticize in their own unique way.
EVERYONE HAS A BASIC OPINION
As you watch the videos on Youtube you realize it’s just their opinion on how the novel didn’t pan out the way “they wanted it to”. Or they didn’t like the direction.
It’s not really a well-thought-out review. Giving insight as a well-known critic would give. Just an average opinion. But it proves one thing, everyone has a basic opinion.
The majority of online literary critics have not written their own novels. If they did, they’d know how difficult it is to tell a story. Writers have respect for other writers because all writers know how difficult it is to write a novel.
But critics who have never written anything fail to understand the difficult process.
NOW THEY FAIL TO EXPLAIN THEIR OPINION
There’s a good way to criticize and a bad way. It seems too many people like taking the easy way out and saying a book is “bad” and leaving it at that.
They don’t go into detail as to “why” it’s bad. They give it a negative review and fail to explain what’s wrong with the novel.
But lately, with these online amateur critics, we’re seeing a rise in “critics” who have nothing positive to say, in fact, it seems they are setting out to be rude on purpose.
As though it’s their “ticket to fame”. They’re not explaining their opinion, just saying something horrible about a novel and moving on.
BEING A CRITIC BACK IN THE DAY WAS DIFFICULT
We need to ask ourselves who are they? Can they even be called a critic? Why do they feel they need to judge? Are they being mean just to make a name for themselves? Are they wanting to be famous like the artist themselves, but since they lack talent they become a critic?
Do these online critics enjoy destroying the hard work a writer put into their novels?
There was a time getting a job as a critic was limited and difficult. You had to be good at what you did. Write well, capture a powerful review in a few lines.
Explain the novel and its themes. Explain the character’s motivations and the overall impression the novel leaves the reader. Not what the critic felt personally, but how the world would feel.
NOW WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF CRITICS ONLINE
However, nowadays it seems online critics give a bad review if they personally didn’t like the ending. It’s more of a personal review than a professional review.
The world has changed with critics appearing online.
Now there are thousands of them. But are they any good?
THEY TRY TOO HARD TO STAND OUT FROM THE REST
Anyone with a computer can now be a critic. The sad thing with so many critics cluttering the internet each one feels they have to do something to “stand out” from the rest.
Each one wants to be the “greatest.” and what that means is each one has to “one-up” the other. And they’re doing so by trying to be more direct and blunt than the other.
But with each review getting more blunt they’re no longer being respectful towards the author. They are crossing into being rude and mean with their review. No longer explaining their review in a respectful way, but flat out being mean.
Hoping this will lead to “higher views on their website.” But in the process trashing the world of being a literary critic. Turning the idea of reviewing a book into a joke.
THEY ONLY WANT ATTENTION
They do this not because they want to be respected as a critic, but they just want attention. The shock value. They feel since everyone else gives “nice reviews” they’ll have to be a bully, believing it will make them stand out. Hoping it will lead to fame and money, by trashing books in the process.
But it’s done in an immature way. Which lives them looking silly.
Sadly a lot of amateur online critics enjoy being bullies. They like making people feel bad. Getting a rush out of bringing others down.
They like saying mean things to new writers because it gives them strength.
IT IS NOW IMPOSSIBLE TO RESPECT THEM
Sadly we have taken the world of internet trolls and merged them with literary critics. What we’re left with is mean cruel critics who target amateur writers. They have taken the idea of being a critic who has something to say and ruined it. All upcoming writers have to ignore the critics as of now.
There’s nothing respectful about it, they don’t respect the craft of criticism, so it’s impossible to respect them.
Remember, the old saying, …..”There has never been a statue erected to honor a critic”
you might be interested in these blogs…
SEEING THINGS THROUGH A LITERARY AGENT’S EYES
THE RISKY SIDE OF SELF-PUBLISHING YOUR NOVEL
HOW TO EDIT AFTER YOUR FIRST DRAFT
