Constructive Criticism Where does one draw the line?

I definitely know the problem is not just the internet...the way society has changed when it has now become acceptable to slam human beings for their physical appearance and genetic "flaws" as they walk down the street show that these attitudes have a very nasty real world place in western culture. As a GenX'r working with a large number of GenY's I see this attitude in people a lot now where nasty comments and the more sly undermining of colleagues form of bullying has become almost a sport amongst "pretty young things" (and older colleagues who should know better tend to then follow this behaviour now too)... and frankly it scares the crap outta me.
I think there has to be a careful line drawn in the sand between an honest critique and just being plain nasty... but the issue with comments on the internet is they can be very easily perceived the wrong way when you don't see the attitude of the person trying to comment. Yes, we've tried to overcome this in some way with emoticons...but they tend to be used more as a fun gimmick rather than an honest representation of intended emotional content. I think, if anything, this is why when it comes to the internet, especially here when it comes to peoples modifications and customisations I know I tend to follow the Disney's Thumper principal of "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all". If anything, this kind of goes hand in hand with "let you who is without sin cast the first stone"... knowing I to am far from perfect in such areas so I am definitely not going to attack someone over imperfect work when I have my own big issues over my own lack of skills (that's why as an art college graduate I am working a crappy soul-sucking job to feed my family rather than continuing to express myself creatively.)

 

I do believe that the internet has opened the door, however.

If you look at the people commenting, they've said that in the past 10-20 years there's been an attitude shift. I know that my family has had the internet for at least 15 years, and in my neighbourhood we were one of the last families to get it. I can remember looking up pictures of Zachary Hanson when I was eight (yes, embarrasing first crush is embarrasing. >_>), and I'm now 23. Although correlation doesn't indicate causation, the internet has created a space where sometimes the normal rules of human decency go out the window, and this does filter through sometimes to real life.

A lot of it is also the media that we are presented with as well - Mass media just wasn't a thing fifty years ago the way it is now. Audio-visual media has made news not only more accessible, but less time intensive, and and thus people place less value on it because it's easier to get. Thus, Media has had to become more sensationalist to compensate and has created an industry where anything goes to get the sale. This filters through to the viewer as a demonstration of the way that people behave and they interpret it as the way they 'should' behave to fit in, and the cycle repeats itself.

And thus, people are getting nastier and nastier towards each other, imo.

 

But not only the internet happened the past twenty years, but also individualism. Simply put, fifty years ago, the most important thing was the community (or family). If the community fared well, society did too.
Now, the emphasis is on the individual, his choices, his achievements. It's given us a lot of freedom, but the downside is an egocentric point of view. It's all about me. My job, my success, my happiness. And I don't think that in a society where so much emphasis is placed on personal success, people in that society will have the same level of connection with their neighbours as they did when the community the centre of everything.

At its core, I think we don't behave or think differently on the internet than we would in real life. I mean, it's not like we could just simply plug in a new set of morals whenever we sit behind the computer. The internet only mirrors the way we think and behave in the real world. It might be a bit harsher, but that is mostly because the veil of 'civility' is pulled up a little bit and is showing us what's underneath.

 

True, the 'me' culture is quite disturbing. My teacher at uni presented it really well to the class when he was talking about generational differences. He said that in general, the generations could be summarised as:

Baby boomers: What can I do for my community? How does my job aid the community?
Gen X: How can I improve my job and standard of living for my children?
Gen Y: What does my job give me? How does this improve my position in Society?
Gen Z: What can Society give me?

Also, advertising constantly tells us that we should focus on ourselves, on our wants and needs. It encourages us to be self minded and selfish, because people who are self-minded and selfish are more likely to purchase whatever it is that the company is selling. It's much easier to convince a selfish person to buy something they want than to convince someone who is not as selfish.

 

Because there is such a thing called "tact." Herman Melville might have a thing or two to teach you about obsession.

This is why I tend to admire those who actually try, as opposed to those who'd prefer to spend money to have the company do it all for them. So I wouldn't be inclined to to judge harshly anyone who tried, even if they failed.

Just so! Because they know it's highly unlikely they will ever meet the person most likely to knock them on their butt. At least over the internet. In person, I suppose, they think they can hide behind witnesses.

This makes me think of something I see in the galleries. People post expecting praise for, essentially, spending a lot of money. On limited outfits, company face ups, whatever. The only thing they have done, other than maybe dress the doll and stand it up, is hit the shutter button. I know it's not in the critique forum but I can't help but think of it as being the same as jumping up and down, waving their arms, and shouting, "Look at me!" And I can't help but think, "Why? You haven't done anything." No artful poses, no interesting lighting, no unusual angles. They may not want critique, but I'm not going to give them praise for nothing, either.

This is true also. The internet can't wave a magic wand and turn a mouse into a raving lunatic. The lunatic has to be there, somewhere under the fur, in the first place. On the other hand, I thing the 'net just gives the vocal minority a venue to show off what idiots they are. The "mob mentality" can have a few dictate the actions of many and try to burn down London. On the other hand, why isn't the reverse true? Why can't good people band together and squash the bad behavior? I'd hate to think it's because people can't take the initiative on their own, even when they outnumber the jerks. It's a stupid example, but the only one I can think of. Once I was shopping and some woman was throwing a fit at the checkout because this guy "cut" in front of her. She had left her cart as a placeholder while she kept shopping, apparently. She could be heard all over the store, cursing out this guy. He wasn't behaving any better, but that was beside the point. There was half a dozen other people nearby, but no one said a thing. I finally had to come from halfway across the store to bellow, "SHUT UP!!"

I do think good people outnumber the jerks, it's just a case of. . . I don't know, fatigue in having to deal with jerks on a day to day basis. Or at least, I hope so. Ignoring bad behavior can seem to be the same as condoning or even endorsing it.

 

That's bystander mentality - it's an observed phenomenon where the more people who are present at the scene of an altercation or accident, the less likely they are to help. This is because the onus falls on 'someone else' and people feel they don't have to act because someone else will. A child who is being bullied in front of a whole peer group is less likely to recieve help than a child bullied only in front of one or two children. This is partially because the person who would normally stand up for the victim of the altercation/accident is either awed into silence by the percieved group focus, or believes that because there are so many others around, they won't have to act because someone else will.

It takes guts to stand up for someone when no one else is.

This, incidentally, is also why I love being on DoA - if someone is a jerk, the overall reaction of the community is to call them on it and point out that they're being a jerk. Usually by using clever and well phrased arguments which critically analyse and go into depth about the misconceptions that the person in question has.

Back to the topic of critique, though (Well, sort of. I'm still a bit OT). There are places where the la creme de la creme are placed and people can view the wonderful works of arts that the community is producing, and also places where the average shutterbug can post snaps of their favourite dolly. There are also places where people can seek improvement by asking the advice of more experienced members. There's a little something for everyone, and the people on here are generally intelligent, lovely individuals who respect the boundaries of DoA and respect the other members as well.

 

First, criticism should only be given if asked for. Second, it should only be directed towards the work and not the character of the person.

 

The unjust side effect is that if someone does step forward, often the bystanders are angry at them for making an embarrassing scene.

 

But you could also look at those posts as more of a consumer information service rather than an artistic display. When it comes to expensive items, I certainly prefer to see examples of what they look like in non-promo shots! I think a generic "Oh, beautiful!"-type post doesn't need to be about the talent of the poster - sometimes it's just a thank you message to the first person to post a particular doll (or outfit, or the work of a specific artist and so on).

 

And sometimes, people want to just share pictures of their dolls. I can tell you, my photography is not great and I have not done a single bit of aesthetic, sewing or construction work on any of my dolls. But you know, I like taking pictures of them and occasionally sharing them with others. I have as much right to post a thread in the gallery as someone who sculpted and cast their doll from scratch, raised sheep to spin wool to knit entire outfits for, hand wefted wigs from their own hair, and created their own paints to faceup said doll with before taking award winning photography. Why the need to knock people for not being into DIY stuff?

 

Kim, I completely agree. I'm another one who doesn't have special skills with a camera but I still love to take those pics and share them.

And besides, shopping and spending money are a significant part of the hobby. Most people are not making their own dolls or every part of it. And some of those expensive LEs actually require perseverance and a knowledge of the industry to acquire. Simply owning something amazing IS an admirable thing in any collecting-type hobby. And I have to say, I rarely see an LE presented in exactly the outfit, wig, eyes, and angles as it was in promo pics, so the owner is contributing a different perspective.

 

I'd also definately agree with what Kim and timid are saying! I come from an Applied Arts (ie Crafts Arts / Designer Maker) background and particularly admire well-made ABJDs for the amazing skills and parts engineering knowledge (especially looking in the direction of Soom, Fairyland & Dollshe's direction when looking at brilliantly engineered jointing systems) involved in their production. However, you don't have to be artist / designer / maker to admire well-made and well crafted objects of beauty. I cringe when I hear negative comments made about people on this forum who don't customise their dolls from the ground up and buy their dolls with default face-ups, body blushing etc (which would describe most of my dolls, too)...limited or not! My initial impression was that this forum was a place for people who share a love of ABJDs to be able to share that love with others and not limited by a person's customisation skills, sewing skills or photographic skills, but sadly you do encounter forum members who do not share this sentiment.

 

I kind of knew I'd be opening a can of worms with that part of my comment. It was only after I hit "reply" that I thought I should have clarified the remarks, hindsight and all.

But I can't help but notice the personality behind some of the posts I'm talking about, tends to fall into the "look at me" category. I never said "everyone" at any point. Certainly I harbor no illusions about being the Ansel Adams of doll photography myself. Nor do I think anything I could sew would be mistaken for an LE outfit. I'm well aware of my shortcomings and I have no illusions of my place in the scheme of things at all.

Do I appreciate it when someone does take photos of their dolls, expensive fullset or not, and they have made an effort to pose them in front of a non-distracting background? Yes. Probably I should have made that part clear in the first place.

I do feel I should point out I was replying to Silk as an example of an "egocentric point of view."

 

Effort is so hard to quantify as an observer though - even something like the presence or absence of distracting backgrounds that xtal mentioned can be a matter of perception: what one person considers added visual interest is another man's random clutter. And that's aside from things like brilliant accidents versus trying to hard!

Are they really? When it comes to anonymous comments on forums that allow that I totally agree, but when people have to own their own words isn't it usually more the feistiness of passion rather than some rage of belligerence?