 |
[RC] It could have been done better <> I could have done it better - kathy swigartCarrie said:
> But . . . your statements do fall into line with hiring
> someone to do a specific job and money passes
> hands in good faith.
My comments were directed entirely at Bruce's assertion that the only people who are dissatisfied with a performance are those who think they just how to do it better themselves. I provide his comment again below.
Bruce Weary said:
> When someone complains about another's performance,
> insisting that it ought to be better, this implies,
> at least to me, that they think they have knowledge
> of just how that should be done, and that drives
> their dissatisfaction.
And this is simply not true. A goodly number of people are capable of determining the quality of a performance and being dissatisfied with it without necessarily thinking that they know better how to do it.
Ability to evaluate and ability to perform are not neccessarily the same thing, and it is wrong to dismiss somebody's ability to evaluate a performance simply because they couldn't do it any better themselves, or don't have any ideas about how it could be done better.
I think it worthwhile to note that I did not make ANY comment about the performance of the US team at the WEC (in fact, I did not make any comment about the US team at all, and was careful not to).
I merely wished to point out that it is possible to evaluate the quality of a performance without having a clue as to how to do it any better yourself.
And this is not confined solely to the realm of hiring somebody to do it. I can evaluate the quality of the acting in amateur theatrics as easily as I can in a professional production even if I am not a skilled actor myself. In an amateur production, my expectations of seeing good acting might be lower, but it doesn't change the fact that I can know good or bad acting if I see it. Telling the audience that they can't be dissatisfied with the performance because they couldn't do it any better themselves, or that they are only dissatisfied with the performance because they think they know a better way to do it, it patently false. Telling the audience that they shouldn't be dissatisfied by bad acting because it is, after all, an amateur performance and they shouldn't have had too high of expectations is a different matter. Dismissing the comments of a critic because the critic
couldn't do it any better themselves is invalid. Dismissing the comments of a critic because the critic chooses to apply professional standards to an amateur production is perfectly valid.
Please note that I have not, and am not now making ANY comment on the performance of the US Team at the WEC. I am merely commenting on the validity of the comments that have been made in rebuttal to those that have expressed dissatisfaction with the performance of the US Team at the WEC.
kat
Orange County, Calif.
:)
|