Cross-Talk #5: 'Radical Candor'; Some Thoughts on Criticism from the Archinect Sessions Podcast
2018.04.18 17:03
quondam
Ken, when you say...
"Early on in my involvement on Archinect I was much more passionate and much more raw in terms of how criticism came at me and it was much less considered in my responses. There's one particular individual who really stopped me dead in my tracks about something I had been working on because he said every premise that I had about the thing that I was writing about was wrong. Even today it bothers me because I think about what is right and what is wrong. It's your interpretation. It's my interpretation. It's this other architects particular interpretation."
...you omit the fact that the particular individual that stopped you dead in you tracks was not at all addressing your work--the particular individual was unaware of your 2002 work until 2009, and the 2003 and 2005 statements by the particular individual that stopped you dead in your tracks were reiterations of statements already publicly made elsewhere online in 1997. Thus what stopped you dead in your tracks was never actually a criticism of your work, rather it was criticism of the 1976-1987 work and 1993 work of two completely other individuals.
It is also somewhat ironic that the only time the particular individual did critically address your 2002 work, the particular individual was actually complimentary
2018.04.24 23:22
b3tadine[sutures]
q, i'm not even really sure i was entirely referring to you. however, i still find your work genius, and still have your three books. if you did find my work interesting, perhaps i was not able to hear you, i was younger and confused.
2018.04.24 23:22
quondam
So then all the things you accused me of and blamed me for in the emails you sent to me on 20 March 2015 where "not even really . . . entirely" about me? Do you really think "i'm not even really sure i was entirely referring to you" is acceptable as radical candor?
| |
|