Oh, and technically reviews do constitute criticism. Which other folks have already mentioned. That doesn’t mean that Jeff’s trying to do critical work, per se. He’s not doing literary analysis or interpretation most days, and he may not be interested in anyone following up on what he says.

But, reviews do fall into the critic’s purview, and as a result get sucked into the discourse along with all the rest.

I did the “every day, rain or shine” thing on ‘Snark for something like three hundred consecutive days.

Looking back, I’m thinking I’d have done myself and my readers alike more good if I’d taken some days off.

I respect what you’re trying to do — but if you find yourself pushing the limits of quality this early on in an effort to produce quantity… you may want to rethink the mission.

Remember, you’re running a marathon, not a dash. Pacing is a good thing.

Eric Burns made a comment on the Webcomics Examiner recently that webcomics were all about authorial intent (to the chagrin of the post-structuralists among us).

No, Eric sodding well did not.

Eric made a statement that though he disdains the concept of Authorial Intent, there was no other lens to look at Experimental webcomics through much of the time, because Authorial Intent is the medium being worked in.

Eric is a New Critic, and thinks Authorial Intent and six-ninty-five will buy an overpriced cup of coffee, but that literary interpretation doesn’t need to even let it in the room if it doesn’t want to, so long as the interpretation is supportable by the text.

For the record.

(Also, the death of Authorial Intent is Modernist, two revolutions or so before Post-Structuralism. Also for the record. )

(Man, Jeff’s got to hate these asides.)

I think commenting on as many webcomics as possible, good or bad, is helpful. And some posts are going to be short. And not always “nice”. Aren’t you supposed to say what you think? Personally, I like having completely different styles of writing available. Short, with a “here’s what I think” and a “move along”, is just fine by me.

Just like with movie reviews if I read a few by the same author I can usually guess whether I’ll like the movie or not. And it has nothing to do with whether they like it or not. Just a thumbs up or thumbs down is enough most of the time.

Plus, I’m busy. Capsule reviews are a Good Thing(tm). Less can be more.

1. “Ad hominem”. This post is not an ad hominem attack. It’s not a “bitch-slap”. Whatever your opinion of the review, it’s clearly slamming the comic itself, not the author.

2. “Constructive criticism”. This post is a review. Constructive criticism is an entirely different phenomenon which is intended specifically for the artist’s ears. A reviewer has absolutely no obligation to offer advice to creators.

As a general rule, I don’t give people constructive criticism unless they specifically ask for it. Reviewing their work for the benefit of others, however, is fair game.

Does anyone know which strip was Penny Arcade’s 214th?