Criticism Writing

sunandaC

New member
All newspapers devote some space to the criticism of arts like films, books, music. theatre etc. The critic visits the theatres, cinemas, art galleries etc. and after seeing the shows writes the critical appreciation about them. Many people are very fond of reading the column of criticism regarding drama, film, art shows etc. These critics play a very important role by highlighting the good and weak points of the shows which are going on in the cities. Critics measure these shows on their standards of excel¬lence and give their opinions.

Sometimes, the very success of a theatre, film or art show depends upon the favourable or unfavourable criti¬cism which it receives in the press. A critic should be balanced in his approach and objective in his critical appreciation. He should not be vindictive or guided too much by his personal prejudices. A critic first of all should explain as to wbat a show is about, its contents or the story, and then he should point out its weak and good points. On the basis of his experiences he can highlight its excellent features or criticise its deficiencies.

Criticism of Theatre

Sometimes, it is said that a critic can make or break a new show on the day after it opens. The cast of every dramatic show want to know what comments they have received in the press. There is no doubt that the critic wields a considerable power as far as failure or success of a theatrical show is concerned.
A critic should remember the following points while writing the criticism.
(i) He must keep in mind the audience for whom he
is writing and what they are likely to enjoy.
(ii) He should not lowerhis standard of what is good
and what is bad.
(iii) He must explain the performance of a new show in clear terms, so that the readers can know whether they will enjoy it or not.
(iv) A critic should try to know not only the tastes of
high gentry but also the tastes of the masses.
(v) He should be able to highlight the good points of both a tragedy as well as a comedy, if it has been per¬formed properly.
(vi) He should always make a difference between the performances of professionals and amateurs, because the amateurs should not be judged by the same yardstick with which tbe professionals are to be judged.
(vii) A critic should not be swayed by his word spin¬ning power and personal prejudices. He should not try to destroy a play by adverse comments just to show his. power.
{viii} The criticism should be objective, well balanced and true.
The critics of national newspapers have to work very hard. They must see a number of performances, perhaps one every night of the week, in the height of the season. After seeing every performance, they have to rush to the typewriter to write their comments, so that the same appear in the next day's newspaper.

The FiJm Critic
Genera]]y, special press shows of new films are held' for the film critics. Every national newspaper has a special column for film criticism which is published once or twice a week and especially on weekends or Sundays. When a particularly note-worthy film is released, a critic may be asked to write a special criticism of that film.

There is a little difference between a theatre perform¬ance and a fiLm. The theatre is a live performance in which a different mood and effect may prevail in every performance. Sometimes, even the leading players may be replaced after sometime. On the other hand, the film remains the same for every show, as it is a completely finished product. A film show remains the same, even if it is seen after months or years.

A film critic should remember the following points;
(i) He must be able to assess the technique of film making like acting, direction, photography etc. .

(ii) The film critic should be conversant with the
production of the famous directors and producers.
(iii) He should also be conversant with the famous
actors and actresses.
(iv) He should give a true assessment of a film, which
should be objective and clear cut.
(v) He can also tell his readers whether a film is
average, below average, mediocre or excellent.
(vi) He should also tell something about the 'story of the film, its music and the acting of the individual actors and actresses.

The Book Critic
Many writers have the feeling that the book CTJUCS never read their books before writing the reviews. They believe that the critics write their reviews only by reading the blurb and the few descriptive words inside the dust jacket. But this is not always correct. Of course, the authors sometimes do get this impression that either due to the less space in the newspaper or due overworked, a very sketchy review of their published.

There are generally three types of book re¬views published in the newspapers.
(i) Firstly, there is the essay type. It is a review which is comparatively longer written by an authority on the subject.
(ii) The second is a short review which is given once a week in the review column by a reviewer who reviews a number of books.
(iii) The third is a sort of feature article which is put together from the contents of tbe book without giving any detailed judgement on it. This is generally written by a reporter in the manner of a news story.

. Now-a-days, hundreds of books are published every week. An author will be much happy even if a small mention of a book is made in the book review column which usually is published once a week. When a reviewer has been given more than one book on the same subject, he will usually review the most outstanding of the books in the begmnjng and comment upon others in the tail end. Usually, the books are sent to the newspaper offices a month or so before the official date of publication.

A slip is also sent alongwith the book on which the title of the book, the name of the author, the price and the publication date are also written. Before writing the re¬view of the book the reviewer should write the name of the book, the name of its publisher, the name of the writer, price of the book and the official date of the publication.

Book review should not be done in a superficial man¬ner, but the reviewer should read the book thoroughly and give his opinion frankly in an objective and responsible manner.

The Music and Art Critic

Generally musicians and artists regard their critics as their insensitive idiots. There is DO doubt that criticism of music and arts requires a lot of skill and experience,because here the critics have to find words to express something that is in its essence wordless. Such criticism should be done only by those who' possess some know¬ledge of the different branches of music and arts and who have a lot of interest in the same. Generally, the critics use a well worn and generally ambiguous termiQology to criticise music and art. Of course, the critic should be fair and accurate in his criticism. Musicians and artists are very sensitive persons, therefore, the critics should always use decent restraints when criticising their per¬formances.

Qualities of a Good Critic

To become a good critic a person must develop some qualities in his writing to make it distinct and readable. He.must always remember that his criticism will be read by both the readers who are interested in the subject as well as by those who are not.

Therefore, he should write in such a manner that even those who aTe not interested in the subject would enjoy reading his criticism. A good criticism is enjoyed by its readers as if they have them¬selves read the hook or seen the play. In fact, a good critic shares his personal experiences with his readers. He is in a way the interpreter and the introducer of the subject under review to the readers. There are many persons who simply enjoy reading the review of a book or a music concert or a film. There are many others who would buy the book or go to see the film after reading the reviews in the press.

Thus, good criticism is part of good journalism. The opinions of the popular critics are highly valued and respected. In the beginning a young journalist mz.y have to face some hinderances and problems to become a successful and popular critic. But fame cannot be achieved without doing hard work in any field. The same is true as far as journalism is concerned. The most essential quality of a critic is that he should be able to write something which is readable. Of course, he must also give a bird's eye view of the subject under review. The best critic is a person who can write the best readable prose.
 

aqeelfhr

New member
I personally think that criticism is unethical. Being a critic you decrease the writting power of some one. A person who himself is not writting in professional field and how he can criticize you??
 
All newspapers devote some space to the criticism of arts like films, books, music. theatre etc. The critic visits the theatres, cinemas, art galleries etc. and after seeing the shows writes the critical appreciation about them. Many people are very fond of reading the column of criticism regarding drama, film, art shows etc. These critics play a very important role by highlighting the good and weak points of the shows which are going on in the cities. Critics measure these shows on their standards of excel¬lence and give their opinions.

Sometimes, the very success of a theatre, film or art show depends upon the favourable or unfavourable criti¬cism which it receives in the press. A critic should be balanced in his approach and objective in his critical appreciation. He should not be vindictive or guided too much by his personal prejudices. A critic first of all should explain as to wbat a show is about, its contents or the story, and then he should point out its weak and good points. On the basis of his experiences he can highlight its excellent features or criticise its deficiencies.

Criticism of Theatre

Sometimes, it is said that a critic can make or break a new show on the day after it opens. The cast of every dramatic show want to know what comments they have received in the press. There is no doubt that the critic wields a considerable power as far as failure or success of a theatrical show is concerned.
A critic should remember the following points while writing the criticism.
(i) He must keep in mind the audience for whom he
is writing and what they are likely to enjoy.
(ii) He should not lowerhis standard of what is good
and what is bad.
(iii) He must explain the performance of a new show in clear terms, so that the readers can know whether they will enjoy it or not.
(iv) A critic should try to know not only the tastes of
high gentry but also the tastes of the masses.
(v) He should be able to highlight the good points of both a tragedy as well as a comedy, if it has been per¬formed properly.
(vi) He should always make a difference between the performances of professionals and amateurs, because the amateurs should not be judged by the same yardstick with which tbe professionals are to be judged.
(vii) A critic should not be swayed by his word spin¬ning power and personal prejudices. He should not try to destroy a play by adverse comments just to show his. power.
{viii} The criticism should be objective, well balanced and true.
The critics of national newspapers have to work very hard. They must see a number of performances, perhaps one every night of the week, in the height of the season. After seeing every performance, they have to rush to the typewriter to write their comments, so that the same appear in the next day's newspaper.

The FiJm Critic
Genera]]y, special press shows of new films are held' for the film critics. Every national newspaper has a special column for film criticism which is published once or twice a week and especially on weekends or Sundays. When a particularly note-worthy film is released, a critic may be asked to write a special criticism of that film.

There is a little difference between a theatre perform¬ance and a fiLm. The theatre is a live performance in which a different mood and effect may prevail in every performance. Sometimes, even the leading players may be replaced after sometime. On the other hand, the film remains the same for every show, as it is a completely finished product. A film show remains the same, even if it is seen after months or years.

A film critic should remember the following points;
(i) He must be able to assess the technique of film making like acting, direction, photography etc. .

(ii) The film critic should be conversant with the
production of the famous directors and producers.
(iii) He should also be conversant with the famous
actors and actresses.
(iv) He should give a true assessment of a film, which
should be objective and clear cut.
(v) He can also tell his readers whether a film is
average, below average, mediocre or excellent.
(vi) He should also tell something about the 'story of the film, its music and the acting of the individual actors and actresses.

The Book Critic
Many writers have the feeling that the book CTJUCS never read their books before writing the reviews. They believe that the critics write their reviews only by reading the blurb and the few descriptive words inside the dust jacket. But this is not always correct. Of course, the authors sometimes do get this impression that either due to the less space in the newspaper or due overworked, a very sketchy review of their published.

There are generally three types of book re¬views published in the newspapers.
(i) Firstly, there is the essay type. It is a review which is comparatively longer written by an authority on the subject.
(ii) The second is a short review which is given once a week in the review column by a reviewer who reviews a number of books.
(iii) The third is a sort of feature article which is put together from the contents of tbe book without giving any detailed judgement on it. This is generally written by a reporter in the manner of a news story.

. Now-a-days, hundreds of books are published every week. An author will be much happy even if a small mention of a book is made in the book review column which usually is published once a week. When a reviewer has been given more than one book on the same subject, he will usually review the most outstanding of the books in the begmnjng and comment upon others in the tail end. Usually, the books are sent to the newspaper offices a month or so before the official date of publication.

A slip is also sent alongwith the book on which the title of the book, the name of the author, the price and the publication date are also written. Before writing the re¬view of the book the reviewer should write the name of the book, the name of its publisher, the name of the writer, price of the book and the official date of the publication.

Book review should not be done in a superficial man¬ner, but the reviewer should read the book thoroughly and give his opinion frankly in an objective and responsible manner.

The Music and Art Critic

Generally musicians and artists regard their critics as their insensitive idiots. There is DO doubt that criticism of music and arts requires a lot of skill and experience,because here the critics have to find words to express something that is in its essence wordless. Such criticism should be done only by those who' possess some know¬ledge of the different branches of music and arts and who have a lot of interest in the same. Generally, the critics use a well worn and generally ambiguous termiQology to criticise music and art. Of course, the critic should be fair and accurate in his criticism. Musicians and artists are very sensitive persons, therefore, the critics should always use decent restraints when criticising their per¬formances.

Qualities of a Good Critic

To become a good critic a person must develop some qualities in his writing to make it distinct and readable. He.must always remember that his criticism will be read by both the readers who are interested in the subject as well as by those who are not.

Therefore, he should write in such a manner that even those who aTe not interested in the subject would enjoy reading his criticism. A good criticism is enjoyed by its readers as if they have them¬selves read the hook or seen the play. In fact, a good critic shares his personal experiences with his readers. He is in a way the interpreter and the introducer of the subject under review to the readers. There are many persons who simply enjoy reading the review of a book or a music concert or a film. There are many others who would buy the book or go to see the film after reading the reviews in the press.

Thus, good criticism is part of good journalism. The opinions of the popular critics are highly valued and respected. In the beginning a young journalist mz.y have to face some hinderances and problems to become a successful and popular critic. But fame cannot be achieved without doing hard work in any field. The same is true as far as journalism is concerned. The most essential quality of a critic is that he should be able to write something which is readable. Of course, he must also give a bird's eye view of the subject under review. The best critic is a person who can write the best readable prose.

Well sunanda, criticism articles are very interesting and i am one of them who like reading those articles. I am a big fan of reading criticism articles. Well i am also uploading a document where you would find more detailed information on the mentioned subject.
 

Attachments

  • Criticism Writing.pdf
    2.1 MB · Views: 0
Top