Criticism:

->"Okay, I've read your script, and I have a few things to say about it. It needs work, but you've got something going here. I wasn't impressed by the car chases, but those aren't my thing. But I do know that [[BondOneLiner cheesy one-liners]] aren't really done anymore, unless you're [[AffectionateParody spoofing those kinds of movies]], and this isn't a parody. I did like the romance scenes. You should probably expand that relationship. These kind of movies [[RomanticPlotTumor don't do relationships well]], and this would help your movie stand out."

Flaming:

->"Okay, I've read your script, and it's retarded. You should just use it for toilet paper. [[OpinionMyopia Nobody likes car chases anymore]], and your crappy jokes make [[Creator/ArnoldSchwarzenegger Arnold]] look like [[Creator/WilliamShakespeare Shakespeare]]. You thought that shit was funny? Oh, the love scenes were good. I always knew you were gay."

While flames are designed to [[KickTheDog put people down]], constructive criticism is meant to help an artist improve his/her work. It's rarely shown in fiction, but it is vital to the growth of an artist or writer.

This kind of criticism is about being honest, clear, and considerate in your comments. In particular, a respectful tone is crucial in proper constructive criticism. [[GoodIsNotSoft There is no handholding]], and this does not mean making only positive comments: it is not constructive to say a bad work is good. Proper critique, however, also avoids unmitigated BrutalHonesty. The ideal Constructive Critic is a master of VerbalJudo: honestly and directly pointing out flaws while simultaneously highlighting strengths and unexplored avenues of a work, all while maintaining a neutral to positive tone. In short, you are trying to help the artist improve both ''positively'' and ''honestly'', not shame them into improving.

This is very, very hard to do. For one thing, you have to be aware of your biases, and admit them. There are times when you are asked for criticism, but are probably not the best person to be asked about something. For another, you could make claims that turn out to be wrong, even if you thought otherwise at the time. Finally, some simply CantTakeCriticism anyway- beware those showing signs of being [[SunnySunflowerDisposition Sunny Sunflowers]] or {{Wide Eyed Idealist}}s in particular.

Yet it's still the form of criticism most likely to actually get results. In fact, most good artists even give this to themselves, hence the phrase "I'm my own worst critic."

Things an aspiring Constructive Critic should avoid:

* [[OhGreatASnarkIndex Snark]], {{Cluster F Bomb}}s, {{Caustic Critic}}ism, and [[ItSucks any use of the work "sucks" outside of the context of describing particle movement]] automatically transform even the most well intentioned critique into a ReasonWhyYouSuckSpeech. And perhaps the most important thing: ''Don't mock the work OR the author''. A critique is not a [[TheRoast comedy roast]]. When you start doing any of these things, most people will think you are {{troll}}ing them- ''[[TomatoInTheMirror because you are trolling them]]''.

* On the opposing spectrum, [[DamnedByFaintPraise framing criticism as compliment]], [[PassiveAggressiveKombat feigned politeness]], and CondescendingCompassion are the hallmarks of the equally bad CompassionateCritic. The envelope is different, but the [[NotSoDifferent message is the same]].



You'll notice that most people don't actually ''understand'' the concept of Constructive Criticism. As you'll probably learn if you take a college-level creative writing course, one of the most ''important'' things about Constructive Criticism is don't rewrite the work to [[OpinionMyopia suit your own desires]]. The point is to make it into something that ''[[TargetAudience the intended audience]]'' will like. This is actually one of the ''biggest'' things that people need to learn about being constructive, because it is not very constructive to try to suggest the author to write a work into something that ''you'' want to enjoy. You will notice this as a trend in people who are members of the PeripheryHatedom, especially if they have a BiasSteamroller, and those with extreme FanMyopia.


Unfortunately; finding criticism is rather hard in the internet age. It's easy to ''get'' criticism on the internet, but when it's mixed with the {{GIFT}}, people will often take that as an opportunity to act like a complete dick and call it criticism. If someone walked up to you and asked you for critique and you gave a very rude-sounding critique, then they won't ask you again and you won't get to critique anything. On the internet, there's loads ''loads'' more random people and works to critique, especially since you can find it anytime you want.

Now you might be wondering if Constructive Criticism is appropriate for this site. Of course it's better than Administrivia/ComplainingAboutShowsYouDontLike, but describing tropes and listing examples doesn't actually call for criticism. There are some places where it can fit, particularly in {{YKTTW}}. You can help a new trope a lot more with this kind of criticism than insulting the new trope, the troper that posted it, or [[YourMom that troper's mother]].

'''No examples, please. We're just defining the term. But any wicks must be [[Administrivia/InUniverseExamplesOnly In-Universe Only]].'''
----