![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hesJust some quick thoughts on recs, con-crit, and comments in general:
Just yesterday, I was thinking about![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
metafandom's latest collection of meta thoughts (on fandom) in general - especially with the brouhaha going on about ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
oulangi's reviews on the Snarry (Snape/Harry) fics via the Prophet and whether her comments/reviews constituted con-crit/empty vitriol/any content? at all [depending on the position, the reader can make their own judgements on what purpose (if any) her reviews serve.
My own caveats:
I don't write fic, I read fic.
I've written some L&O drabbles, not enough to even get up to 400 words.
I've written poetry.
My own history with fandom and fanfic isn't part of the caveats - the end point is that I like to read fic, and I'll traverse fandoms and fora [plural of forum?] to find good fic...
Thoughts on recs:
Always a dangerous thing, regardless of fandom, and regardless of who's writing the rec's. They're too personal to be anything but a selection of 'stories that I like to read and would love to suggest to you for reading'. I mean, recs within fandom are not like 'a list of books per [some subject]'. I mean, you want books to cover some academic subject; that list will be comprised of both the comprehensive as well as the in-depth texts, with various opinions skewing which ever way.
Any person (whether reader OR writer) worth their own salt would be recommending stories that they themselves enjoyed, and would be happy to explain why they liked the story. The reality is that any recommendation that doesn't mention what the reader found attractive to the story doesn't serve a function.
A rec-reader is looking for why the rec-maker is saying: "read this story" as opposed to "read those other stories". Why say that story A is recommended while story B is left unspoken for. Who knows, maybe I'll talk about story B somewhere down the line, but right now, the recommendation is on A. :)
How much emphasis is on the recommendation, and how much importance is placed upon the rec-maker? By knowing the rec-maker and their past history and biases, the reader can reach their conclusions about whether a recommendation from rec-maker A (or B or C or D) will be something that is of interest to the reader.
Thoughts on con-crit and comments:
Context. It's all about the context by the time I start thinking about constructive criticism. To me, it's a matter of being able to say: I don't think (aspect X, Y, or Z) worked because of (factors A, B, and C), and you might want to look at it again through the perspective of (1, 2, or 3). The emphasis sits on constructive criticism. As in, saying something's bad isn't enough, you have to be able to make a suggestion that would help improve/change the situation as is.
For those that don't want concrit, that's fine by me. I won't be joining in the fangirl-squeeing, nor will I sit back and type out long diatribes and then post them as comments. A reader's silence can mean ten thousand things. Most times, my own silence within comments might be a result from several factors:
- I was squeeing and doing so loudly. But that's not something I'd want to type into a comment box immediately. So I might wait until my head comes down from the squee-age induced high, and try to write something more coherent.
- I read it, but I didn't have any additional comments to make. So I was silent in the comment box.
- I didn't read it. So no comments.
One of the difficulties of any electronic or even print fora - whether ff.net or LJ or any archive mechanism is that the writer has no true mechanism to determine the reactions of the readers.
I mean, looking at the 'viewpage' results of ff.net, one might see 100 page views, but no comments. I certainly would be guilty of that. I'll read someone's LJ, as well as their ff.net fiction but only comment on their LJ. Even worse? If I like the fic very much, I will definitely go back and read, which increases the page views count even more...
In my view, con-crit is a both a measure of respect, and a mechanism for conversation. It's a measure of respect that the reader has for both the story as well as the writer.
1) I liked the story enough to say things (beyond: Squee!!).
2) The story made me think enough to have more things to say beyond: Squee!!
3) There were things within the story that made me think, and they are (x, y, and z and squee!). ;)
Sometimes the con-crit might be as small as a question - I wasn't sure why (a, b, and c) were happening here... or I liked how (X, Y, and Z) worked - it was the 'hook' for me...
As a mechanism for conversation - sometimes the comment might elicit a reply which then becomes a conversation - which is an added benefit. :D
I'll hush now; never thought that I'd be so babbley after a heatwave.
Just yesterday, I was thinking about
metafandom's latest collection of meta thoughts (on fandom) in general - especially with the brouhaha going on about oulangi's reviews on the Snarry (Snape/Harry) fics via the Prophet and whether her comments/reviews constituted con-crit/empty vitriol/any content? at all [depending on the position, the reader can make their own judgements on what purpose (if any) her reviews serve.My own caveats:
I don't write fic, I read fic.
I've written some L&O drabbles, not enough to even get up to 400 words.
I've written poetry.
My own history with fandom and fanfic isn't part of the caveats - the end point is that I like to read fic, and I'll traverse fandoms and fora [plural of forum?] to find good fic...
Thoughts on recs:
Always a dangerous thing, regardless of fandom, and regardless of who's writing the rec's. They're too personal to be anything but a selection of 'stories that I like to read and would love to suggest to you for reading'. I mean, recs within fandom are not like 'a list of books per [some subject]'. I mean, you want books to cover some academic subject; that list will be comprised of both the comprehensive as well as the in-depth texts, with various opinions skewing which ever way.
Any person (whether reader OR writer) worth their own salt would be recommending stories that they themselves enjoyed, and would be happy to explain why they liked the story. The reality is that any recommendation that doesn't mention what the reader found attractive to the story doesn't serve a function.
A rec-reader is looking for why the rec-maker is saying: "read this story" as opposed to "read those other stories". Why say that story A is recommended while story B is left unspoken for. Who knows, maybe I'll talk about story B somewhere down the line, but right now, the recommendation is on A. :)
How much emphasis is on the recommendation, and how much importance is placed upon the rec-maker? By knowing the rec-maker and their past history and biases, the reader can reach their conclusions about whether a recommendation from rec-maker A (or B or C or D) will be something that is of interest to the reader.
Thoughts on con-crit and comments:
Context. It's all about the context by the time I start thinking about constructive criticism. To me, it's a matter of being able to say: I don't think (aspect X, Y, or Z) worked because of (factors A, B, and C), and you might want to look at it again through the perspective of (1, 2, or 3). The emphasis sits on constructive criticism. As in, saying something's bad isn't enough, you have to be able to make a suggestion that would help improve/change the situation as is.
For those that don't want concrit, that's fine by me. I won't be joining in the fangirl-squeeing, nor will I sit back and type out long diatribes and then post them as comments. A reader's silence can mean ten thousand things. Most times, my own silence within comments might be a result from several factors:
- I was squeeing and doing so loudly. But that's not something I'd want to type into a comment box immediately. So I might wait until my head comes down from the squee-age induced high, and try to write something more coherent.
- I read it, but I didn't have any additional comments to make. So I was silent in the comment box.
- I didn't read it. So no comments.
One of the difficulties of any electronic or even print fora - whether ff.net or LJ or any archive mechanism is that the writer has no true mechanism to determine the reactions of the readers.
I mean, looking at the 'viewpage' results of ff.net, one might see 100 page views, but no comments. I certainly would be guilty of that. I'll read someone's LJ, as well as their ff.net fiction but only comment on their LJ. Even worse? If I like the fic very much, I will definitely go back and read, which increases the page views count even more...
In my view, con-crit is a both a measure of respect, and a mechanism for conversation. It's a measure of respect that the reader has for both the story as well as the writer.
1) I liked the story enough to say things (beyond: Squee!!).
2) The story made me think enough to have more things to say beyond: Squee!!
3) There were things within the story that made me think, and they are (x, y, and z and squee!). ;)
Sometimes the con-crit might be as small as a question - I wasn't sure why (a, b, and c) were happening here... or I liked how (X, Y, and Z) worked - it was the 'hook' for me...
As a mechanism for conversation - sometimes the comment might elicit a reply which then becomes a conversation - which is an added benefit. :D
I'll hush now; never thought that I'd be so babbley after a heatwave.