The "L" Word (Lazy) and Armchair Quarterbacking

[pemerton]

To me, “lazy” is a personal comment about somebody’s work ethic. It’s not a critique of the material.

I guess that depends in part on what the critic is intending to convey. Describing writing as "lazy" is not uncommon.

Eg often when listening to a pop song, one can anticipate a rhyme. That is lazy composition. The use of cliches, or of stereotypes, can be described as lazy writing. Etc.

These aren't judgments that the author didn't try hard - some people try really hard but can't come up with anything but cliches and obvious rhymes. They are judgments about the ingenuity and quality of the work against some notional standard of what can be expected in new works.

I've got no idea what the other threads were, and what was being judged as "lazy design" in those threads. But the notion itself is pretty common in criticism.

 

[Shasarak]

So I'm legitimately curious about this phenomenon. I'm not trying to start an argument or get people triggered. I genuinely would like to know people's thoughts. At what point is criticism legitimate, and at what point does it cross a line? When is it ok for a person to vent their frustration with a product (regardless if they use the "L" word or not), and when does it really become an attack?

Because if someone thinks a product is bad and I think that it is good then therefore that someone must think I am bad. Just simple logic really.

 

[KahlessNestor]

I guess that depends in part on what the critic is intending to convey. Describing writing as "lazy" is not uncommon.

Eg often when listening to a pop song, one can anticipate a rhyme. That is lazy composition. The use of cliches, or of stereotypes, can be described as lazy writing. Etc.

These aren't judgments that the author didn't try hard - some people try really hard but can't come up with anything but cliches and obvious rhymes. They are judgments about the ingenuity and quality of the work against some notional standard of what can be expected in new works.

I've got no idea what the other threads were, and what was being judged as "lazy design" in those threads. But the notion itself is pretty common in criticism.

But nothing of this was actually what was being criticized. The thread of which I am aware, there was a missed word removal in the Arcane Archer write up because an ability of the subclass was moved to a higher class level, but the third level ability was did not remove the word "magic" from in front of arrow (magic that had come from the removed ability), thereby nullifying the 3rd level ability (since one would conceivably not have magic arrows). The mistake was caught quickly, an errata was put out quickly, both by WOTC and the AL, and the print runs even interrupted to fix the error, none of which the OP bothered to check for when he made the "lazy" charge. You can find the thread if interested.

 

[pemerton]

But nothing of this was actually what was being criticized. The thread of which I am aware, there was a missed word removal in the Arcane Archer write up

Errors in editing aren't what would normally be conveyed by "lazy writing" or "lazy design" - but the issue there isn't that the critic is calling something lazy, but that s/he is calling something lazy which is in fact just an editing error.

 

[Sunseeker]

I guess that depends in part on what the critic is intending to convey. Describing writing as "lazy" is not uncommon.

Eg often when listening to a pop song, one can anticipate a rhyme. That is lazy composition. The use of cliches, or of stereotypes, can be described as lazy writing. Etc.

These aren't judgments that the author didn't try hard - some people try really hard but can't come up with anything but cliches and obvious rhymes. They are judgments about the ingenuity and quality of the work against some notional standard of what can be expected in new works.

I've got no idea what the other threads were, and what was being judged as "lazy design" in those threads. But the notion itself is pretty common in criticism.

This post annoys me greatly. Mostly because it's false. There are only so many words (especially when rhyming) and in writing it is often better to use common words or expected words rather than attempt to use "creative" or "inventive" words. The latter comes across sounding pretentious and generally disturbs a reader (or in music, listeners) focus. Secondly this post annoys me because it demonstrates a clear ignorance of classic poetry and songwriting. Poetry, prose and by extension, songs, are not judged on the words they use, but the sentiments they express with those words. Many of the most famous poems (and songs) in history make very simple common-word rhymes.

EX:

There is a place where the sidewalk ends
And before the street begins,
And there the grass grows soft and white,
And there the sun burns crimson bright,
And there the moon-bird rests from his flight
To cool in the peppermint wind.

Let us leave this place where the smoke blows black
And the dark street winds and bends.
Past the pits where the asphalt flowers grow
We shall walk with a walk that is measured and slow,
And watch where the chalk-white arrows go
To the place where the sidewalk ends.

Yes we'll walk with a walk that is measured and slow,
And we'll go where the chalk-white arrows go,
For the children, they mark, and the children, they know
The place where the sidewalk ends.

 

[pemerton]

This post annoys me greatly.

I'm sorry to have annoyed you.

I think the correlation between lazy composition and common or uncommon words is probably negligible. But the correlation between words used and sentiment expressed is not negilbile. Triteness (another word that might turn up in the general neighbourhood of "lazy") can be a result of cliched rhymes expressing cliched sentiments.

Just sticking to popular music, contrast

I once loved a girl, her skin it was bronze
With the innocence of a lamb, she was gentle like a fawn
I courted her proudly but now she is gone
Gone as the season she’s taken​

with

Shout out to my ex, you're really quite the man
You made my heart break and that made me who I am​

I think one of these can fairly be described as lazy composition.

 

[Morrus]

The "L" Word (Lazy) and Armchair Quarterbacking

I'm sorry to have annoyed you.

I think the correlation between lazy composition and common or uncommon words is probably negligible. But the correlation between words used and sentiment expressed is not negilbile. Triteness (another word that might turn up in the general neighbourhood of "lazy") can be a result of cliched rhymes expressing cliched sentiments.

Just sticking to popular music, contrast

I once loved a girl, her skin it was bronze
With the innocence of a lamb, she was gentle like a fawn
I courted her proudly but now she is gone
Gone as the season she’s taken​

with

Shout out to my ex, you're really quite the man
You made my heart break and that made me who I am​

I think one of these can fairly be described as lazy composition.

Again, you’re calling the creator lazy, not the work. The semantic argument is just a distraction. Work has no ability to be lazy.

And the lazy creator label may often be true in many creative endeavours, perhaps including those song lyrics you quoted (I don’t know them, or the context, so I couldn’t possibly tell).

But it’s not relevant when folks are talking about a creative choice they didn’t like, which is the common use of the word regarding D&D designers.

I don’t personally have much connection with some of what WotC does these days, but I don’t think Jeremy Crawford is lazy. I’m sure he is a very hard working man.

 

[pemerton]

Again, you’re calling the creator lazy, not the work. The semantic argument is just a distraction. Work has no ability to be lazy.

I don't agree. I suspect the people who write top 20 pop songs, jingles etc are working pretty hard. And in some cases, maybe, working at the limits of their talent. I still think "Shout Out to My Ex" is lazy composition.

As for Jeremy Crawford, I'm sure he works hard and I've expressed no opinion on his design.

 

[Sunseeker]

I'm sorry to have annoyed you.

I think the correlation between lazy composition and common or uncommon words is probably negligible. But the correlation between words used and sentiment expressed is not negilbile. Triteness (another word that might turn up in the general neighbourhood of "lazy") can be a result of cliched rhymes expressing cliched sentiments.

Just sticking to popular music, contrast

I once loved a girl, her skin it was bronze
With the innocence of a lamb, she was gentle like a fawn
I courted her proudly but now she is gone
Gone as the season she’s taken​

with

Shout out to my ex, you're really quite the man
You made my heart break and that made me who I am​

I think one of these can fairly be described as lazy composition.

Why? Because the "good one" uses tropey arcane visual symbology? That's not totally subjective.

 

[Morrus]

The "L" Word (Lazy) and Armchair Quarterbacking

I don't agree. I suspect the people who write top 20 pop songs, jingles etc are working pretty hard. And in some cases, maybe, working at the limits of their talent. I still think "Shout Out to My Ex" is lazy composition.

Or maybe it’s very clever composition designed to appeal to a demographic which is not you.

You may be conflating “simple” with “lazy” and “complex” with “hardworking”. A simple effective thing can take a lot of hard work.

As for Jeremy Crawford, I'm sure he works hard and I've expressed no opinion on his design.

Eh. D&D forum. We’re talking about D&D. If we don’t bring it back to D&D it doesn’t belong here.