longer.blue

Buckle up, because this might be a longer one. Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about the difference between critique and contempt, and how often we confuse the two, especially when looking at recent reactions to the latest Magic: The Gathering Secrets of Strixhaven set and, more broadly, how we engage with art and the people who create it. Critique is essential - it’s part of how creative industries evolve. But what I’ve been seeing in some spaces is not critique - it’s hostility, dismissal, and at times, outright dehumanization. Online spaces make it very easy to forget that there are real people behind the work. That distance lowers the bar for how we speak, and things that would never be said in a professional or face-to-face setting suddenly become normalized. 👉That doesn’t make it acceptable. What has been especially striking is how much of the backlash is rooted in expectations of what characters are “supposed” to look like. There seems to be a very narrow idea of what is considered acceptable, attractive, or even “valid” to depict, and when a design steps outside of that, the reaction can shift from critique into rejection, or even hostility. But creative work, especially in fantasy, has never been about reinforcing a single standard of beauty or form. It thrives on variety, on the unfamiliar, on characters that are strange, imperfect, or simply different. Reducing those choices to “wrong” or “ugly” doesn’t engage with the work. It shuts the conversation down entirely. I’ve also noticed that many of these reactions come from people who genuinely care about Magic: The Gathering and its history - at least I choose to believe it. That passion is real, and it’s part of what makes this community so strong. But the thing is, passion doesn’t automatically translate into constructive engagement. At times, it turns into something more rigid, where certain interpretations, aesthetics, or directions are treated as the only “correct” ones, and anything outside of that is dismissed outright. That kind of thinking doesn’t protect the identity of a game, it simply confines it. There are valid conversations to be had about what defines the core of Magic and what resonates with players. And we’ve seen clear examples of that - when something aligns strongly with that core, people respond with real enthusiasm. The reception of returning to Lorwyn is a good example of how powerful that connection can be. But reducing those conversations to blanket rejection of anything unfamiliar, or expressing them through hostility, doesn’t contribute to that discussion in any meaningful way. Not liking a piece of art is completely valid. Disagreement is part of the process. But there is a clear difference between critique and contempt. Critique engages. It’s a learned skill, one that requires curiosity, discipline, and the ability to move beyond immediate reaction. It requires effort to understand intent, context, and execution, and to separate personal preference from constructive observation. Even when the outcome is disagreement, it still operates within a framework of thought and contributes to a shared conversation. Contempt dismisses. It bypasses that process entirely, replacing understanding with assumption and reaction. It reduces the work to a surface-level judgment, without engaging with the reasoning behind it. In doing so, it doesn’t just reject the work - it removes the possibility of dialogue altogether. One creates space for discussion, interpretation, and growth. The other shuts that space down before it can even exist. And while I don’t expect every online space to operate at that level, it’s worth noting that without a baseline of thoughtfulness, conversations stop being useful altogether. In creative fields, the ability to separate personal taste from constructive feedback and to communicate that clearly is what makes collaboration possible. Without that, discussion stops being dialogue and turns into noise. As professionals and as a community, the way we communicate matters. It shapes not only the quality of discussion, but also the environment in which people create. We can, and should, do better than this.