> sorry Bob, but I took *aim* at no one..... sorry Jimmy, your words were "... with the exception of the few who use criticism to inflate their own sense of limited self worth. " That's referring to reviewers motives not to the effect of thier reviews. [And that's what got me thinking "I don't know anyone who that applies to". > she writes about critics who think > they can improve people by telling them where they are wrong which > results in putting them in strait jackets of hesitancy and self > conciousness. The sort of criticism that is a *murderer of talent*. > She further observes that because the most modest and sensitive > people are the most talented, they are the first to get killed > off........to my mind, all criticism is biased by the critics life > experience.......some just have the capacity to consider the feelings > of those they are criticizing....... OK: first, it's debatable if the most creative are indeed the most modest/sensitive. But taking it as read: the pressure your paragraph puts on reviewers. For me it's hard enough to actually comment on 12 images. To have to agonise on whether it will hurt feelings or not, whether things could be misread etc may indeed place me in "strait jackets of hesitancy and self conciousness" ;o) The question of course is whether harsh comments are better than no comments. Oh well, you can never please all the people ... Bob
