Public Critique and Fan Fiction Writers: one writer's blunt opinion
| Meta | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Public Critique and Fan Fiction Writers: one writer's blunt opinion (also has the alternate title: "Fanfic writers and public critique") |
| Creator: | Destina Fortunato |
| Date(s): | August 2003; edited and posted to website March, 2004 |
| Medium: | online |
| Fandom: | multi |
| Topic: | fic discussion, fic readers |
| External Links: | Fanfic Writers and Public Critique by Destina, Archived version Fanfic writers and public critique page 1; page 1 archive link; page 2; page 2 archive link; page 3; page 3 archive link , at LiveJournal, includes 89 comments |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
Public Critique and Fan Fiction Writers: one writer's blunt opinion ("Fanfic writers and public critique") is an essay by Destina Fortunato.
It is a list of thirteen points to consider when dealing with public discussion, review and/or critique of one's work.
For additional context, see Timeline of Concrit & Feedback Meta.
Introduction
There seems to be a plethora of defensive, thin-skinned writers in fandom. I used to be one of that breed, so I recognize the warning signs. And some of these writers become rather self-righteous and indignant when their stories are publicly reviewed. I've been thinking about some things I see popping up over...and over...and over where public critique/reviews/story discussion are concerned, and so I'm just going to lay it out as I see it. Venting, y'know. Gettin' it off my chest. I will henceforth use the generic 'you'. I'm not really talking to 'you'. No, really.
Excerpts from the Essay's Thirteen Points
1. It doesn't matter at all what you intended to convey with your story, or how well you think you wrote it, because in the end you cannot control the interpretation each individual reader will make of your efforts. A writer's perception of her own story is not objective; you may think you've done a bang-up job, but in reality, many readers may think your story sucks. It's also possible you have written a particular story to the best of your ability, but your abilities may still be catching up with your imagination. Trying to defend a story on the basis of 'but you've missed the point!' only tells the world that you are most likely a writer in search of a clue. It's also possible the reader really did miss the point. It's not the first time; it won't be the last.
4. Reviews and critique are not about the writer. They are not for the writer. They are not feedback. They are not designed to praise the writer, or encourage her, or make her a better writer. They serve many other purposes - entertainment, advertisement, education - none of which have anything to do with the writer.
5. Stop personalizing. People are talking about your story, whether you want them to or not. They do it in email, on lists, on message boards, on LJ, and on websites. Somewhere, someone really hates your beautiful creation. I guarantee it. They probably won't tell you, because they are kind and polite. The only thing that distinguishes public critique from private dissection of your work is the forum. Public, private, it's all the same. It's simply easier to pretend everyone likes your work when you don't actually hear criticism of it. And a merciless critique isn't the final word on your story, either. Sometimes, the reviewer has his or her head up their ass. It's all very subjective.
11. Many grammar rules are not really flexible. Nope. Not really. You can break them, but first you need to understand them, and you need to break them in a way that makes *sense*. Especially the rules about punctuation. Don't wade into the deep water of 'this isn't really a rule' or 'but XYZ does this in her stories all the time' unless you know what you're talking about.
Comments
A Link Roundup Collated by the Post's Author
"saffronhouse offers some wise advice for the thin-skinned, including the perspective that some critiques really are wrongheaded and quite personal: Advice for the thin-skinned - said a person not in the story
minisinoo talks about the definitions/purposes of 'review' and 'critique'. (journal purged and deleted)
lexcorp_hope sensibly talks about The Dance With Those What Brung You school of criticism. (journal purged and deleted)
musesfool gathers many threads/posts together and does some lovely analysis in the process: no clever title. just on critique, etc. in response to destina and others - frail and bedazzled
Sarah T. points out the simple truth that it's okay to be bothered by crit of your work: Somebody Else's Nimrod:, Archived version
ingridmatthews points out that critics and reviewers should practice what they preach. (login required)
bethbethbeth muses about who gets to critique: Who gets to critique? - Like a Human Wikipedia
darthneko and others made good points about the reciprocal responsibility of those who critique and review, and I tend to agree. I am a big believer in honesty tempered by tact. Usually. *g* But especially in critique meant for and targeted to the writer."
At the LiveJournal Post
All of these comments below were posted to the author's LiveJournal in August 2003.
[sockkpuppett]:
BRAVA! BRAVA! --standing up and stomping feet and whistling-- Very well said, and I'm applying it to vidding as well. Especially #'s 1 and 11. I'm so sick of giving an honest, usually requested, critique of a vid, only to have my criticism thrown back in my face as "well, you don't like *me*..." Which probably wasn't true until that moment. And.. AND.. You have to know the rules before you can break them with impunity. This applies to design and composition as well. If you don't know them, then you usually just look like an idiot when you break them, and that cool thing you did really *is* a fluke because you can't explain why it's cool, in order to do it again.
[maygra]:
This should absolutely be handed out to all new fan writers at orientation, and a reminder sent quarterly. Brava!
[tracy rowan]:
I'd offer a companion piece of advice to anyone who even thinks of offering a real critique of a story on the strength of a writer saying "I really want to know what you think": No one really wants to know what you think. (Been there, been burned, now silent on the subject of most fanfic.) Thank you for an extremely good, extremely blunt primer on dealing with feedback/critiques.
[lexcorp hope]:
Hee, you wanna know what's funny about #1? Quite some time ago, I was talking in my journal about exactly that thing- I had failed to get my particular point across in a story. Natch, I didn't realize that until I got feedback about it- and people were saying the same thing over and over, and I'm thinking, whoa, that's not what I meant at all! So it wasn't an isolated case of "one person didn't get it," a whole bunch didn't, and re-reading the story with the feedback in mind, I saw exactly where I'd screwed up. So, I wrote an entry about it because what I'd screwed up was an unreliable narrator, which was a fairly popular topic at the time, and I figured I could share what I had done wrong and maybe people would be able to pick up on the same kinds of things in their stories, right?Dude, folks argued with me. It wasn't a case of pity me nobody liked my story- lots of people liked it, I just failed to make my actual point. I have no idea why critical examination of fiction is anathema in fandom, but it's so ingrained, you can't even do it to your own work.
Which is my very long way of saying, word. *nod*
[copracat]:
I always feel vaguely out of place agreeing with points like these because it's not like I've ever been publicly criticised. So yeah, go public criticism - but it's all theoretical from here. *g*
[darthfox]:
[grovels before destina] rule #11 is my most favorite, but it's all gold. all of it.
[shayheyred]:
Wow. Spot on, and incredibly timely. Have just had the unfortunate experience of being asked for my opinion on a story, and when I actually gave it, privately, mind you, not to mention respectfully but honestly, was raked over the coals for "ruining everything" and sending the writer into a depression. And this was in the beta stages. Your "rant" seems to me to be less of a rant and more simple common sense. Since I started out as an actress, I've had ample opportunity to receive the good, the bad and the ugly in reviews and criticism, and yeah, it smarts when they don't like you (or your work). But if you have a modicum of sense and an ounce of appreciation for your own worth, you can survive.
[ranalore]:
Very well-stated. I'd also add that jealousy is not, in fact, the driving reason for most critiques, no matter how brilliant a writer you think you are. Critics tend to either be fellow fans of the source material, or fans of the English language, and like you, they're rather protective of their fannish source. If they feel you've done something that goes against that fannish source, they're inclined to say so.
[eliade]:
Jealousy per se may not be, but I think that lingering, free-floating resentment can be. I don't know how many times I've seen this happen: writer X gets a story or two raked over the coals, obviously smarts about it, then pounces on the next available story and claws it up in a fit of pique--not lashing out against the people who critiqued her stuff, but against someone perceived to be lower on a fan-fictional hierarchy, someone vulnerable and safe to attack. It can be amazingly transparent. I think it's a very human reflex, and some part of me understands and sympathizes with those emotional defenses, but it also makes me want to slap people. I always hope that my own behaviors--the ones I can't twist around to see, as if they were on the back of my head--aren't so egregious.
[tanacawyr]:
Excellent post. I think a lot of problems with most fics can be solved in review (or more properly, beta) by having people that the writer respects offering their opinion. If someone I don't know or whose work I don't particularly care for has feedback, I'll read it and see if it makes sense to me ... but if I like the reviewer's work, I'll pay much more attention to their feedback. There are times when people have given me feedback that I've nodded over and done nothing about, and then there are the writers/reviewers who, when they give me comments, I will literally go through my story and implement EVERY nitpick they catch, because they are so damned good that I trust their judgment implicitly.Find a good beta, one that you trust. Not everyone is a good beta, and not everyone is a good beta for every story. (Anyone who wants me to beta a Jack/Paul or a Horatio/Pellew is just barking up the wrong tree, They aren't bad pairings, but they aren't my cup of tea, and as a result, I can't judge them well.)
Find a beta whose work you respect, and listen to them. Listen to all betas, though -- and you don't have to implement all the feedback you get. The story ultimately resides with you, and yours is the final judgment.
Of course, all of this assumes that the writer wants feedback to become a better writer or discover problems in the story that she's too close to catch, and not to get ego-boo ...
Interestingly, I've discovered that I need beta-ing on vidding more than writing at this point. I'm an experienced writer, but I'm a newbie vidder. Changing media makes you a beginner again. I've been writing long enough that I can usually tell what the trouble spots are in a story of mine, even if I can't figure out WTF the do about them. But vidding? I have a much harder time being objective (partly because music always sucks me in and renders me completely subjective), and hence I can use beta feedback a lot more -- again, when it comes from someone whose work I respect. (I know that you commented, probably rightly, that one doesn't have to DO something to be able to critique it, but I do prefer feedback that comes from other writers or vidders, as I can use their work to judge for myself how much I value their advice.)
[gloriana]:
Destina, can I worship at your feet?I think the one I feel strongest about is no. 4. I can't count how many times I've been in a conversation (or sat on a panel or debated by email) the value of critique for the *reader*, only to have the whole conversation drift back to the question of whether crit helps the writer.
We were all readers, long before we were writers. The lists are full of readers. In fact, on average only one person per story counts as a writer, and all the rest - gosh, they are readers. Why should they always be given the short end of the stick?
Even more do I loathe that horrible argument which crops up again and again whenever public critique hits a list (and rarely from the author in question, mark you; it's just made on principle). 'You're going to scare away our wonderful writer X, and spoil our fun'. Or worse, because it is completely unprovable, and equally undisprovable, 'you're going to scare away all the baby new writers who haven't posted anything at all yet'. And of course, the favourite, 'We're all just having fun with our hobby. Why are you trying to spoil it for us?'
If you're allowed just to have fun, why am not I allowed to be serious?
And I can't help but think that non-bitchy debate about how stories are perceived by readers might just help writers rather than hinder them.
[tzikeh]:
And of course, the favourite, 'We're all just having fun with our hobby. Why are you trying to spoil it for us?'If you're allowed just to have fun, why am not I allowed to be serious?
This is the point I try to make so often - and it doesn't seem to work. The part that never, ever, *ever* penetrates their thick skulls (and they have awfully thick skulls for people with such thin skins) is that being serious is how I have *my fun*. It's different from how they have their fun. In the same way that some people like baseball and some people like ice skating and some people like, you know, writing stories about fictional characters from tv. You'd think the parallel would be a simple one.
[musesfool]:
Logic and critical thinking are often not part of the thought process for a lot of fans. In fact, I think critical thinking of any sort is more and more becoming a lost art across US society at least, and for some reason, many people can't get beyond the idea that disliking a story does not equal hating the author (or, in some cases, vice versa. There are wonderful stories out there by people I really, really don't like. I'll probably never send them feedback, but they'll get recced.).There's a lot of binary thinking in fandom, either X or Y, but never ever some combination of the two, or something along the lines of a continuum. I've seen it in discussion-only groups as well (e.g.,If you like Angel you must hate Xander or v.v.).
Fannish mindset is an interesting thing, and the way it filters out and around and somehow becomes accepted in more than one fandom (or not) is fascinating...
[tzikeh]:
While it's true we can't ever be 100% objective about the success or failure of any artistic endeavor, there are still rules, guidelines, what-you-will, in each and every art form. These rules must be played within (or broken with intent and objective) in order for the work to have any relation to the value of "Good".It is *very* common for folks to enjoy something that isn't, by artistic standards, "Good". With very few exceptions, I think we all do. Crap movies can provide amusement, especially when accessorized by good friends and popcorn {g}. Lots of people like the Dogs Playing Poker paintings. Poorly written fanfiction can be enjoyed purely on the button-pushing level. There is nothing wrong with enjoying any of these things .
But in a critique or a review (if it's written well), enjoyment on a purely visceral level, or a shallow level, is not the topic. The topic is "how well did this particular piece of work play in its milieu?" And for many people, there's great enjoyment in that discussion.
As for reviewers who talk about how an author should or shouldn't do a particular thing to suit the reviewer's *taste*, they are not worth anything as reviewers because they aren't playing within the strictures of *their* art form.
[ane]:
To your last thought you can add the ever amusing 'what stories have you written?' or 'since you're not a fiction writer, you obviously don't know what you're talking about' type of reaction that you often see in fandom. *sarcasm alert* Because everyone knows that unless you're a fanfiction writer your opinion doesn't matter. Some authors just seem not able to comprehend that those of us who write reviews/recs/commentary really don't care what the author thinks. It has nothing to do with them. For me, it's partially for other readers, and partially just for myself to help me understand what I liked or disliked about a story.
[oceana]:
... it still doesn't change the fact that I feel bad about criticizing other people's works, simply because I am not a writer. I think I don't have the right to tell other people how to make it better if I don't even make the effort.And as long as someone spend some time on his story and tries to do the best he can, I don't feel comfortable with analysing the story too much, and to tell that writer, even in a nice, constructive way: You suck.
Because that's what it comes down to, no matter how nice and constructive feedback is, it is always about something that the writer did wrong, maybe only wrong for me, so it would be "I think you suck though I understand why other would love your story". Still, there's the sucking. So I think you are right: people can criticize others even if their own stories aren't better, as long as they try and accept criticism themselves.
But for someone like me, who doesn't write, and doesn't contribute to fandom in any other creative way, it just feels wrong to give negative feedback to someone who does so much more.
[barkley]:
But you don't need to write fanfic in order to contribute to fandom. I absolutely love discussions about fanfic stories, and I will trade a thousand "Oh, that was great" posts on lists for one good meaty discussion about what worked and what didn't. Some of my favorite reviewers/critiquers never wrote one word of fanfic. However, they had interesting things to say about it. That's what they brought to fandom, and I loved them for it.
[justacat]:
As a non-writer I usually feel either that my views lack legitimacy or that I'm being presumptuous, or ungrateful, since I don't, as you say, "contribute to the fandom in any creative way." Is it possible to meaningfully contribute to fandom in non-creative ways? And even if it is, even if I do, would that give me the "right" to take a position when I have no first-hand familiarity with the creative process? And would that position have any validity whatsoever? It might not be an entirely rational, but the feeling of illegitimacy, or unworthiness, or unwillingness-to-bite-the-hand-that-feeds-me, is definitely there.
[solo]:
I know so many people who won't even send feedback anymore because they've had too many bad experiences with writers who take even the most gentle constructive criticism as a flame.
[ex svendra317]:
I totally agree with what you said, but I'm guessing I wouldn't have about a year ago when I thought I was a fab writer. Then it occurred to me, what if this precious little fic I like, and some people seem to like actually really really sucks? What if it's crap and some people just happen to like this crap? Yes, it is all down to personal taste.But then scarily, I feel I can't lump Jammie fics, HarlequinGate and Baby Daniel fics in together as shite, because maybe they're not shite. They just don't appeal to me.
You see, you made too much sense in your post ;-)
*off to write some diaphanous shirted Daniel*
[widget285]:
Somewhere, someone really hates your beautiful creation.I think there would be far fewer bruised egos in fandom if more people embraced this simple fact. No matter what you do, no matter how talented a writer you are, the old axiom is true: you can't please all of the people all of the time. If you're serious about your writing you'll take what you can from the thoughtful critiques, ignore the ones that are just piss and vineagar and try to become a better writer. And if you're not serious about this, well, why are you getting so bent out of shape in the first place?
I think this is another case in which the nature of certain fandoms really is detrimental. We all know how the SG-1 fandom is excessively polite and worse, actively encourages and praises crap from some strange and frankly misguided notion that we should nurture every writer no matter how bad her work is. Um...no. Empty praise generously given to bad writers does nothing but convince them that they are good writers and have no need for improvement. Consequently, when they actually are confronted with an honest critique they are stunned because fandom at large has erroneously convinced them that they are all that. It's a hell of a wake up call, but then again, in a lot of ways fandom itself has set them up for the big hurt by stroking their egos in the first place.
As you said, once you put the fic out there, it is out there to be read, judged and critiqued. The only way to control people's reactions and avoid potentially less than flattering response is to keep it private. You can't have it both ways. If you want the praise, you also have to be willing to accept the criticism. Ah well, I guess this is one of those things that makes fandom so piquant!
[spikewriter]:
*stands and applauds*A wonderful post (which I'm going to link to in my journal) -- and so absolutely true. I came back to fan fic to recharge batteries after burning out on my attempts to sell professionally and everything you said above are things I had to accept in that arena.
Was I surprised when I discovered there were fannish writers who didn't accept that not everyone like their stories? No, because I'd also run into writers trying to sell who reacted the exact same way. Some of them are actually published and don't accept it.
What you said is true for any writing which escapes beyond the confines of your hard drive and your closest friends.
[darthneko]:
Good article. Many fine points. Though, having seen both sides of the coin too many times to count, I do wish somebody would write something similar for critiquers about how to *keep* it about the story and not about the writer personally. O.o There's sometimes a fine line between the thin skinned author and the critiquer who's one step away from a flame troll.
[wistful fever]:
I agree with you, in theory, but I'm also aware that a public critique, for any writer, can hurt. Some people, including myself, might know these things in their brain... but it's an entirely different situation when you actually try to apply it. I think a writer has to find their comfort level before they can take a public critique without having their heart burned... and sometimes that's a very slow process. I'm working my way there myself.
[darkmark]:
This is a good one and I'm glad I got the chance to read it. To all the above, I'd add the fanfic writer's version of the Twinkie Defense: "It's just a hobby."Well, it may be just a hobby if you leave it on your hard drive. When you post it to a public forum or website or whatever, it becomes a work to be read (maybe), evaluated, and, if someone desires, to be publicly criticized. You can't have the fame without risking the flame.
So much for that.
[iamrosilita]:
:bows three times toward destina: Girl! Right on with the right on. Especially #2 and 11. And may I add one thing: Those of you who can't handle constructive criticism have pretty much ruined things for those of us who want it and can handle it. I would love for someone to critique my stories and point out what's wrong with them, but hardly anyone does. And the reason? They're too wary because of your histrionics every time someone doesn't tell you your story ranks right up there with Shakespeare.
[destina]:
It is an unfortunate fact of fandom that experience really is a tough teacher on the subject of criticism. I think it also impacts the way people send feedback, the way they discuss stories...it is pervasive throughout fandom, this notion that nothing can be said if it's not nice. Nowadays there seems to be a backlash of a sort, where people feel they can say anything they wish without any tact at all. I hate to see things swing that far over. Maybe there will eventually be a happy medium.
[amorettea]:
Oh, boy have I had trouble with this. #2 especially. It honestly never dawned on me to ask someone's permission before discussing a story that was posted on several public web sites. The author threw a conniption fit worthy of a six year old and posted a very long, very detailed critique of one of my stories, saying it basically sucked from the title to the ending line. Which wouldn't have hurt my feelings even before I criticized her because I figure if anyone takes the time to read almost 20,000 words of mine, they must have liked something about it to make that much of an effort. And since it came after she was mad, I knew she was just trying to upset me. And failed.Funny thing was, those of us discussing the story all said we liked it with certain reservations and all six of the people discussing it had the same reservations but the idea that we even had the right to discuss the story was beyond this person.
I mean. . .if someone takes the time to actually read something I've written carefully enough to offer a legitimate critique, I take that as a compliment!
For the record. Anyone can discuss anything I have ever written any where any time and can say anything including that I can't write a grocery list and should never be allowed to post so much as a card every again.
In other words. . .I CONCUR COMPLETELY!!!! Every fan fiction web site in the world should have this posted on it!!! Well said, etc.