The virtues of informed criticism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lorien said:
I agree that 'discussion' in this case is what is required. 'Critique', not so much. Keeping in mind, of course, the context of this thread as it started out.
Click to expand...

Lorien - I don't know how you can have a discussion that excludes critique. If you are going to discuss a knife - or a car - or a movie - or whatever, you will naturally address both what you like about it and what you don't. Saying what you don't like about something is inherently a critique.
 
Lorien said:
well, this actually brings up a good point when it comes to critique. As a rule;

-if a collector posts up a knife they just got and are obviously proud of, keep your comments positive or none existent.
Click to expand...

RogerP said:
This is a knife discussion forum. There is a gallery for posting and looking pics. At least I think there is. I never go there, because as much as I like looking at pics, I enjoy talking knives with an informed and highly experienced forum community of makers, collectors and general enthusiasts far more.

Posting a pic on a knife discussion forum by definition invites, well, discussion of the knife posted. Artificially limiting that discussion to only positive comments doesn't make much sense to me in this context. Of course one should offer any criticism in a polite, respectful and constructive manner - which I expect we can all recognize without outside help.
Click to expand...

I think these posts exemplify two different opinions I see expressed on this thread.

I started a thread a year or two ago to raise this issue here. I was hoping that there would be either: (1) a consensus, or (2) a "pronouncement from on high" by the owner of this website, as to the propriety of critical feedback or comments on knives posted here. Neither happened. Neither is happening now. I do not believe that either is going to happen anytime soon. I happen to think that clear rules are a good thing, but it might be some time until we have them. Until then, I believe that the vast majority will follow Lorien's post the vast majprity of the time. As a result, on the very rare occasions when someone actually makes a critical comment here, no matter how polite, it will stand out like a sore thumb and therefore lead to harsher reactions than really might be warranted.
 
RogerP said:
Saying what you don't like about something is inherently a critique.
Click to expand...

Actually, I see that more as a criticism than critique, but it can be argued either way. My knowledge of critique centers largely around what I learned about it from art school, and we all know how useful art school is in understanding the world (lol).

Now, I don't presume to question your knowledge of the subject, Roger, as I hold you in high regard for your intellectuality, so this link isn't for you. But for others who may be a little unclear on critique and what it can mean, wikipedia has a pretty decent account of it; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique
 
I'm trying to think of ways the community is served by being strictly critical of work posted by enthusiastic collectors instead of by makers. I'm largely drawing a blank. How is the community bettered when X thinks the hamon on Y's knife, purchased and showcased by collector Z, is superfluous or detracts from the aesthetic?

From the prospective of makers, the knife was purchased and appreciated. Knowing that one can't please all people at all times, and that at least a great number of people like the work, how would a prospective maker use that criticism to better their own knives in the future? When Coop or Buddy posts a picture from another maker, people don't say, "man that handle material is all wrong for that knife."

For prospective buyers, don't like it don't buy it.

For enthusiasts at large, is the cost of voicing the criticism greater or lesser than the cost of collectors not posting at all?

Seth
 
I'm a maker, not a collector. If I want "That's a great knife", then I'll post on a few of the hunting forums, where anything "custom" is cool and the standards of knife-as-art are fairly low. If I want the perspective of other makers and collectors, whose standards are appreciably higher, then I'll post the knife in this forum. Simple as that, IMO. As an academic, I consider the source. If somebody I've never heard of with 10 posts says "your handle is all wonky on that one," I tend to blow it off. On the other hand, if Coop, Kevin, Lorien etc. say the handle is wonky, I ask a few followup questions and try to make the next one better. Honestly, that's why I come here. It's the best place I've found for informed critical views. I don't see any need to change anything.
 
Different forums have different purposes.

Blade Forums defines this forum as being for knife discussion.

IMO, if a knife is posted in this forum by maker, collector, enthusiast, whomever it’s up for discussion (including what posters like, dislike and critique) as long as presented in a constructive and courteous manner. Everyone learns from this type discussion.
 
Kevin Jones said:
Different forums have different purposes.

Blade Forums defines this forum as being for knife discussion.

IMO, if a knife is posted in this forum by maker, collector, enthusiast, whomever it’s up for discussion (including what posters like, dislike and critique) as long as presented in a constructive and courteous manner. Everyone learns from this type discussion.
Click to expand...

Succinct and clear - in total agreement with the above.
 
Bladeplay74 said:
I'm trying to think of ways the community is served by being strictly critical of work posted by enthusiastic collectors instead of by makers. I'm largely drawing a blank. How is the community bettered when X thinks the hamon on Y's knife, purchased and showcased by collector Z, is superfluous or detracts from the aesthetic?
Click to expand...

Good post. I understand what you are saying and I am sympathetic.

But what about when five or six experienced collectors chime in and all say the same thing? Perhaps that might be to the benefit of a novice collector to help him or her notice and understand things they did not appreciate before? Perhaps collector Z maybe someday want to sell said knife, and maybe collector Z will be confused by the fact that NO ONE wants his knife . . . even at a much reduced price . . . and he will never understand that it is because the knife has hamon that detracts from the entire piece in the view of most or all experienced collectors who might otherwise be potential buyers for said knife?


Bladeplay74 said:
From the prospective of makers, the knife was purchased and appreciated. Knowing that one can't please all people at all times, and that at least a great number of people like the work, how would a prospective maker use that criticism to better their own knives in the future?
Click to expand...

Because limiting comments to only those which are positive distorts reality and is ultimately not helpful. Maybe a lot of folks post that they like it, but maybe 99% of those folks would never buy it. Maybe those who WOULD buy it if some changes were made or things were "fixed" never articulate those things and they are never addressed in the maker's future knives.

So some guy manages to find some novice to buy his Loveless style knife which he posts here with the really crappy solder work. Is that the end of it? Maybe if it is pointed out politely by several collectors that it is a nice knife but that they would not buy it only because of the soldering of the guard might cause the maker to really think about improving that, and thereby increase future sales and prices. And maybe it will also help novices learn some of the differences bstween top drawer Loveless style knives, and others that may be difficult or impossible for them to to resell later. I understand the risks of this, and that folks are going to be upset or feel like their "investment" is damaged by such critiques, so maybe folks will stop posting knives at all - as per the final question in your post. That IMO is what makes this issue so difficult. I do not think it is all one-sided.


Bladeplay74 said:
When Coop or Buddy posts a picture from another maker, people don't say, "man that handle material is all wrong for that knife."
Click to expand...

Why do you think that is?

I think that is kind of the point of this discussion.


Bladeplay74 said:
For prospective buyers, don't like it don't buy it.
Click to expand...

Sure. One could also say (in fact, many have essentially said on this thread): Don't like critical feedback; don't post a thread which is open for comments.


Bladeplay74 said:
For enthusiasts at large, is the cost of voicing the criticism greater or lesser than the cost of collectors not posting at all?

Seth
Click to expand...

An excellent question. I wish I knew the answer.
 
Is there really a lack of the desired discussion here?


Are there threads with knives that you're aching to unload on?


Is there a lack of "give and take" in regard to knives that collectors are posting, makers, or ???



FWIW- I think Mark's posts about critique are extremely well written and make perfect sense. Thanks Mark. :)
 
This was an interesting & informative read. Thanks to all that posted, I especially enjoyed Mark Farley and Mark Knapp's posts. :)

Cheers,
Kirby
 
Lorien said:
Actually, I see that more as a criticism than critique, but it can be argued either way. My knowledge of critique centers largely around what I learned about it from art school, and we all know how useful art school is in understanding the world (lol).

Now, I don't presume to question your knowledge of the subject, Roger, as I hold you in high regard for your intellectuality, so this link isn't for you. But for others who may be a little unclear on critique and what it can mean, wikipedia has a pretty decent account of it; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique
Click to expand...

Lorien, that is a valid distinction in the context of the literal definition of the terms. But I would suggest that it is a distinction without a difference within the context of what constitutes acceptable knife discussion. The issue here is whether it is / should be permissible, as part of the normal functioning of custom knife discussion forum, for a forum member to state what he or she doesn't like abut a knife and to suggest how it might be improved. Whether one wants to call that critique or criticism is of little moment. Some feel that such is a natural - perhaps even an essential - element of knife discussion forum. Others feel it should be actively discouraged, or else limited to only those instances where the OP clearly and specifically requests candid feedback.

You know where I stand.
 
absolutely my friend :)

and this brings us back to the point that people more often than not avoid giving feedback, even when someone asks for it. Seen it lots of times.

So what's the problem here? Seems the solution is simple and that is for people to voice their opinions more regularly. How they do that is a non issue, if the voicing of those opinions never occurs. If they can't figure out how to voice their ideas eloquently, there's nothing a moderator can do other than slap them. We certainly shouldn't be leaning on moderators to tell us how to conduct ourselves, and in fact, there is no moderator that is active in this forum. I guess that's because people generally are mature. Which brings us back to what is the problem? If any?

I haven't experienced much in the way of an overarching concern about people being butthurt by comments made, so I think the problem is more that people don't give a crap about giving feedback but they sure enjoy it when someone else does, especially if drama is involved. But such are the times we live in.

Here's a suggestion; If you want more discussion, then make more of it.
 
It takes a lot of time to thoughtfully comment on a knife. A lot of what I see posted up is not worth the tsuris and time it takes to do that.

I can give a perfect example.

John White makes a lot of knives that do not appeal to me because of the way he rounds his choils/ricassos. There are other aspects of his knives that I could constructively critique that might result in "improvements", but John is advanced enough in his vision that it just might not make a difference. I did comment on a damascus fighter he did recently that I liked very much, so it is possible that a maker may change some small areas to accomodate a more generally "accepted" or "attractive" style.

When I critique, the attempt is to see what the maker is trying to accomplish, and respond to that. It should be accepted that sometimes makers are so close to their work that they cannot see the forest through the trees. In other words, they cannot see the overall finished product CLEARLY because they are so stuck on/consumed by the details.

Anyway, we are bound to discuss this again, as we all have very different opinions about how the Forums should function and what we wish to accomplish. I do think it is good to discuss, as I have seen the ebb and flow here, and while I still think Kumbaya is anathema to serious discussion, I have seen the sea change from bloodsport and that is good, imo.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
"this brings us back to the point that people more often than not avoid giving feedback, even when someone asks for it."

That's because they are gutless.

There is nothing in the forum rules that stops criticism of any knife, be it a collector's new "precious" or a maker's new "baby." The only exception is on "For sale" threads. For all the other forums, the forum rules don't even say you have to be polite when supplying criticism, you just can't attack the person, religion, sex, race, nationality, political affiliation, handicap status or hair color. Last time I looked, the rule "don't criticize a collector's new purchase or maker's work unless asked" is not written down.

What stops people from talking is fear of the pack. When it comes to public opinion on this forum, it's easier to criticize the critic than it is the crappy knife. If you want more criticism of knives, start it yourself... There are certainly plenty of poorly designed and built knives on this subforum.

If you want to see true criticism, go to the custom knives for sale section and see what happens when crappy custom knives are sold on the aftermarket...the exception though is "what's hot" is always "hot" no matter how bad it is...until the heat dies out :)
 
Last edited:
I don't know where some of you are getting the idea that anyone wants to restrict this forum to positive commentary/critique only.
No one has ever stated such, except those arguing against it.

What is being argued for is common courtesy and respect.
Something that is sometimes severely lacking in this forum, especially when it comes to commentary or critiques of others work.
Many reviews from certain members are not actual objective commentary or critique, but opinionated commentary on the preferences of the critic. Added to them is enough tactlessness that the critique becomes more of a show of the reviewers knowledge (or lack thereof) and these things are of no real benefit to the person being critiqued. In fact they do more harm than good. It's no wonder at all that such a small percentage of the knifemakers on this forum actually post anything here.

I don't think anyone has a problem with honest OBJECTIVE commentary or critique.
What should be discouraged though is flippant commentary and critique done more for the benefit of the critic and their self/forum image than for the knifemaker and the piece.

All need to remember that what is being commented on/critiqued is another persons hard work and product of their business. Something which can be affected by such commentary/critique and something in which the one being critiqued has much more a stake that the on doing the critiquing.
The commentor/critic owes it to the one being critiqued the common courtesy and respectfulness to do no/as little harm as possible.
 
Last edited:
Karda said:
What is being argued for is common courtesy and respect.
Something that is sometimes severely lacking in this forum, especially when it comes to commentary or critiques of others work.
Many reviews from certain members are not actual objective commentary or critique, but opinionated commentary on the preferences of the critic. Added to them is enough tactlessness that the critique becomes more of a show of the reviewers knowledge (or lack thereof) and these things are of no real benefit to the person being critiqued. In fact they do more harm than good. It's no wonder at all that such a small percentage of the knifemakers on this forum actually post anything here.
Click to expand...

I really don't see much of that at all around here, but when I do and the blood gets into the water, sometimes the sharks attack. Sometimes happens when someone makes a critical comment as well; someone disagrees with the point, then others jump in all emboldened and stuff and lay the smack down on the supplier of said criticism. Both of these things, though, are pretty rare since most folk in this forum are generally quite civil.
 
Karda, I gather you are expressing your opinion as a person and not a rule for this forum. This is because what you state is not in the rules; not in the specific rules or in the general rule. The general rule is "first & foremost, remember the golden rule: Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself, in other words, BE NICE."

As Miss Manners can demonstrate you can be very courteous and still tell someone their knives are crap.

I also don't think you understand what criticism is due to your statement "I don't think anyone has a problem with honest OBJECTIVE commentary or critique. What should be discouraged though is flippant commentary and critique done more for the benefit of the critic and their self/forum image than for the knifemaker and the piece."

By its very nature criticism is not objective. This is knifemaking not a science. A critique is an opinion; it is not objective nor would we want it to be.

"Flippant commentary" is a matter of personal taste, whose personal taste should be the "rule" for this forum? In addition, we are all human and all critique is done for the benefit of recipient, but also for the benefit of the critic and their image in whatever venue the critic works in. Do you read movie criticism? That is for the benefit of the movie goers and the critic, as well as the producers, directors, actors etc..
 
Well, as those of you that have followed this thread know, I posted here and in retrospect, feel very badly about the way I treated Bob. I can't help being blunt, it's just the way I am, but I should have been more tactful; or failing that, kept my durn mouth shut. My hearfelt apologies, Bob. It is, indeed, a masterpice, and my comments mean nothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top