![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaI think I've figured it out. Well, nothing much, really. I've figured out why I look at someone's writing in gestalt moreso than not. I was going to like, 'cause some outcry and make a list of fics I considered Really Really Bad (or maybe just one really... or just bad).... But well. I think most fics out there are just... bad. They are! My god! I'm not excluding myself. I'm just saying. Coming from the supposition that 90% of everything is crap, what's the point?
The question arises: why is it all crap?
I'm not talking characterization or pacing or plot-- I'm just saying that most people can't seem to write, that's all. It's either overwrought or awkward or completely unbelievable juvenilia or entirely mired in some sort of fluffy-or-depressive ouvre where the author bias overwhelms everything the characters can possibly do. As soon as I want to make my oh-so-shocking List of Doom, I can't, because it's not that I hate everything, it's that I can't honestly single out certain fics and imply that there's not another 100 fics just like it out there.
That said, I actually enjoy most things I read by judicious use of suspension of disbelief, desire to have my kinks worked and a certain amount of blind obsession with certain tropes.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
chresimos said that maybe reccing is a pointless endeavor because emotional-impact works will of necessity not be able to be guarranteed success and a brilliantly-done piece will do nothing for the reader without some sort of emotional connection involved. Personally, I don't rec in order to set up some sort of... er... elite club(?) I just rec to keep track of things. It's compulsive. My dislike for hyperbole in others' recs is simply a part of my dislike for hyperbole in general.
But anyway. I realized that the thing that makes writing -work- for me is the basic competence of the writer-- which is why I tend to like writers in general more than any particular work. Competence is a stable thing, generally. I might even call it talent. Any particular work is iffy, whether it's effective for any particular person at any particular moment-- but you can still separate the ff.net-style clunky wooden shoes of literature and the more soft eel-skin boots which feel soft and nice even if they're not "your thing".
I think the problem is that in fanfiction, there's an even wider range of writing ability than in what's studied and recommended in terms of "real literature". There's a lot less of a divide between Dickens and Maupassant and Tolstoy and Fitzgerald than between... say... Hpgryffin and Rhysenn or Olympia, even if you really really dislike IP and `The Tale of the Shining Prince' (both of which I consider beautiful but have severe problems with also). You still see how they're worlds better than "Artificial Passion", right. Or, to be blunt and antagonistic, than oh... "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables" (heh) or Resolution. Bleh. Though Resolution is in its beginning stages whereas IP is done, so I can't really judge entirely... even so... as fiction, the writing itself is much tighter (even though not to everyone's taste) and more vivid in IP. Both of their characterizations are questionable of course, which brings me to my other point. (That said, I don't "hate" Resolution simply 'cause nothing about it emotionally pings me one way or the other. I like some of the smut though, and it's readable, certainly, and enjoyable on a surface level.)
The other thing is that you can more easily take "original" fiction on its own merits (style and writing talent is thus considered more important, I guess), whereas fanfiction has to also work as fanfiction, which is a tricky, tricky bitch of a standard 'cause unlike basic writing quality, it's so dependent on subjective reader judgement of canon.
A lot of the fanfics that annoyed me or got a strong negative reaction ("Perfect Imperfection", "Ruses", "All Torn Down", "Checkmate", the Weather trilogy) aren't so much badly written (indeed, Shalott's writing is brilliant) as er... questionably characterized without back-up, based on my admittedly biased judgement. I realize a lot of people dislike some fics I like based on characterization reasons (it ranges from `Lustre' to the Draco Trilogy). I get to feel a bit smug because I realize the characterization issues being referenced are real, it's just that in my estimation, the other factors outweigh any harm incurred. Those factors are almost always: 1) the writing itself is stellar; 2) I -like- and was convinced of this Draco and/or Harry, Ginny, Ron, etc. for the duration of the fic, whether they're "canonically likely" versions or not. So basically, those fics-- `Checkmate', say-- make no headway in the conviction department. Of course, this `conviction' is just painfully subjective by definition.
So it seems that while bad writing is everywhere, it's much more painful as a fanfic reader to read acceptably-written awful rapes of the characters. And I'm rather liberal, especially since I started with fanon before canon. In the end, I -will- take the writing itself over characterization because I've found good writing (in all its multiple facets) lends itself to psychologically interesting characters that I can respond to as Harry or whomever if I felt like it.
This is a tricky subject; while seemingly, "canon" should be more of an objectively-present entity than "talent", people's desires and interpretations of canon are -so- wide-ranging that it's hard to use "canonicity" as a predictor of whether people will like it. And in fact, I didn't dislike those fics because they were uncanonical, per se. I disliked them because an inexplicably fluffy or dark characterization of a character I'd like to see as complex (I get annoyed at both) sort of rubs me the wrong way, personally. But it's not enough to say that I dislike those fics because their characterizations are too blatantly skewed-- no, I also have a personal bias against abusive!Harry or abusive!Draco or crying!Draco or sweet-fluffy-gentle!H/D. I like funny, cute fluff which is ridiculous and bouncy and doesn't take itself seriously and hopefully contains liberal doses of smut (mmmm, Dahlia, Silvia, Eddy, etc). Serious fluff ("Checkmate" and a horde of others which make me retch awfully) is just... an offense of some sort. A lie, basically.
So yeah, I tend to hate the fics that I feel -lie- to me on some level. It's insiduous like that. On the other hand, I think this is merely a type of badfic. Lots more fic is just written badly, I find boring in premise, uninspiring, dull, full of shoddy workmanship and un-thought-through characterizations. "Bleh", basically.
Usually, this "bleh" response can be overcome by sparkly writing. For instance, some of my at-one-point-favorite fics are really kind of hard to believe and fluffy in parts. But they have personality. The first few chapters of Love Under Will, for instance, have personality even though I don't think they have high canonical plausibility~:) Even though the canonicity or characterization of `The Untold Want' is questionable, it has this... aesthetic that's peculiar to itself which I'm tempted to call charm, which is more the -writer's- overall aesthetic than anything else. `Resolution' doesn't. Most things don't.
Basically.... What works for people in practice depends on who they are and thus are receptive to (intellectually, aesthetically, emotionally) and what they expect from fanfic and from fiction in general, and also what they can comprehend. I suspect Olympia's fics are beyond most people on a number of levels, as are the subtleties in Silvia's fics, maybe. That said, I don't mean that makes either author somehow "superior" because they have less blatant mass appeal-- I just mean that it's a consideration in terms of projecting reader response and constructing some sort of HP fanfic hierarchy.
Plenty of people, especially those of a more intellectual bent, want canonicity above all else-- not just the general believability of the character's behavior but some sort of strict adherence to (their) view of canon. This usually isn't so prevalent with the H/D-reading segment since really, first you have to get over the imaginative hurdle of envisioning H/D as relating to canon in the first place. The whole pairing is a subversion of canon in some ways while an expansion of it in others. In this sense, I would say almost no H/D fic measures up. I think... maybe `Red' by Miss Breed, `Sins of the Father' by Ali (mostly for pre-OoTP Harry) and eh... Origins for pre-OoTP Harry. Possibly I'd say Silvia's fics, Dee's `The More Things Change' & `Underwater Light' for Draco, but that's a very specific view on Draco. On the other hand, aren't they all?
Eh, to hell with it. Usually, the glaring hatreds for particular fics that people keep hidden play on their own ideas of the characters being betrayed somehow, and then lo! Look, the fandom's lapping it up. It's annoying. It's like somehow, they're saying that this other conception of the character isn't as real when they celebrate this stupid conception of him, I suppose.
To me personally, it doesn't matter how popular a fic I like or dislike is, simply because I think -most- fics get something wrong and I realize the large role my bias plays in my perception of this wrongness. Ideally, I want a fic to -prove- to me whatever view of the characters it has, simply by use of slow-and-steady characterization and plotting and such. Usually, good writing is necessary to make the medicine go down easier. For instance, I rather disagree with Olympia's takes on Harry & Draco in `The Tale of the Shining Prince' and sequels, but it doesn't matter-- they're so self-contained, so smooth that it says what it wants to say and draws you into that world. It presents a bubble, a mini-universe-- it exemplifies the idea of fanfic-as-AU that I'd mentioned in another post. It wouldn't have been able to do so if it wasn't written as gorgeously as it is, I think.
In terms of -my- response... I greatly admire it but have no deep emotional investment in it, post-reading. UL, which is more of a canon-based fic, I have an investment in, but I don't think it's -because- it's extrapolative but rather because I simply like that Draco more, that's all. (I wouldn't be able to -begin- to compare Maya's and Olympia's writing talent in general... I think this where it sort of levels out and becomes comparable and yet deeply incomparable at the same time).
Thus there are two things that remain semi-constant: the overall success of whatever aesthetic or idea the author had been trying to portray-- regardless of its degree of relationship to canon-- based on the writing itself; that is to say, the writer. And secondly, a particular reader, who has the same biases and desires from fic to fic. Er. All of which is entirely unhelpful, I know :/
Dude. You can tell I haven't eaten yet. I could've said all this in like, one paragraph, I'm sure. But whenever I'm out of it, I get progressively more verbose. Fear me.
EDIT - also. MY GOD, WHY CAN'T I STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS; SOMEONE GAG ME!!1 >:O
The question arises: why is it all crap?
I'm not talking characterization or pacing or plot-- I'm just saying that most people can't seem to write, that's all. It's either overwrought or awkward or completely unbelievable juvenilia or entirely mired in some sort of fluffy-or-depressive ouvre where the author bias overwhelms everything the characters can possibly do. As soon as I want to make my oh-so-shocking List of Doom, I can't, because it's not that I hate everything, it's that I can't honestly single out certain fics and imply that there's not another 100 fics just like it out there.
That said, I actually enjoy most things I read by judicious use of suspension of disbelief, desire to have my kinks worked and a certain amount of blind obsession with certain tropes.
chresimos said that maybe reccing is a pointless endeavor because emotional-impact works will of necessity not be able to be guarranteed success and a brilliantly-done piece will do nothing for the reader without some sort of emotional connection involved. Personally, I don't rec in order to set up some sort of... er... elite club(?) I just rec to keep track of things. It's compulsive. My dislike for hyperbole in others' recs is simply a part of my dislike for hyperbole in general. But anyway. I realized that the thing that makes writing -work- for me is the basic competence of the writer-- which is why I tend to like writers in general more than any particular work. Competence is a stable thing, generally. I might even call it talent. Any particular work is iffy, whether it's effective for any particular person at any particular moment-- but you can still separate the ff.net-style clunky wooden shoes of literature and the more soft eel-skin boots which feel soft and nice even if they're not "your thing".
I think the problem is that in fanfiction, there's an even wider range of writing ability than in what's studied and recommended in terms of "real literature". There's a lot less of a divide between Dickens and Maupassant and Tolstoy and Fitzgerald than between... say... Hpgryffin and Rhysenn or Olympia, even if you really really dislike IP and `The Tale of the Shining Prince' (both of which I consider beautiful but have severe problems with also). You still see how they're worlds better than "Artificial Passion", right. Or, to be blunt and antagonistic, than oh... "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables" (heh) or Resolution. Bleh. Though Resolution is in its beginning stages whereas IP is done, so I can't really judge entirely... even so... as fiction, the writing itself is much tighter (even though not to everyone's taste) and more vivid in IP. Both of their characterizations are questionable of course, which brings me to my other point. (That said, I don't "hate" Resolution simply 'cause nothing about it emotionally pings me one way or the other. I like some of the smut though, and it's readable, certainly, and enjoyable on a surface level.)
The other thing is that you can more easily take "original" fiction on its own merits (style and writing talent is thus considered more important, I guess), whereas fanfiction has to also work as fanfiction, which is a tricky, tricky bitch of a standard 'cause unlike basic writing quality, it's so dependent on subjective reader judgement of canon.
A lot of the fanfics that annoyed me or got a strong negative reaction ("Perfect Imperfection", "Ruses", "All Torn Down", "Checkmate", the Weather trilogy) aren't so much badly written (indeed, Shalott's writing is brilliant) as er... questionably characterized without back-up, based on my admittedly biased judgement. I realize a lot of people dislike some fics I like based on characterization reasons (it ranges from `Lustre' to the Draco Trilogy). I get to feel a bit smug because I realize the characterization issues being referenced are real, it's just that in my estimation, the other factors outweigh any harm incurred. Those factors are almost always: 1) the writing itself is stellar; 2) I -like- and was convinced of this Draco and/or Harry, Ginny, Ron, etc. for the duration of the fic, whether they're "canonically likely" versions or not. So basically, those fics-- `Checkmate', say-- make no headway in the conviction department. Of course, this `conviction' is just painfully subjective by definition.
So it seems that while bad writing is everywhere, it's much more painful as a fanfic reader to read acceptably-written awful rapes of the characters. And I'm rather liberal, especially since I started with fanon before canon. In the end, I -will- take the writing itself over characterization because I've found good writing (in all its multiple facets) lends itself to psychologically interesting characters that I can respond to as Harry or whomever if I felt like it.
This is a tricky subject; while seemingly, "canon" should be more of an objectively-present entity than "talent", people's desires and interpretations of canon are -so- wide-ranging that it's hard to use "canonicity" as a predictor of whether people will like it. And in fact, I didn't dislike those fics because they were uncanonical, per se. I disliked them because an inexplicably fluffy or dark characterization of a character I'd like to see as complex (I get annoyed at both) sort of rubs me the wrong way, personally. But it's not enough to say that I dislike those fics because their characterizations are too blatantly skewed-- no, I also have a personal bias against abusive!Harry or abusive!Draco or crying!Draco or sweet-fluffy-gentle!H/D. I like funny, cute fluff which is ridiculous and bouncy and doesn't take itself seriously and hopefully contains liberal doses of smut (mmmm, Dahlia, Silvia, Eddy, etc). Serious fluff ("Checkmate" and a horde of others which make me retch awfully) is just... an offense of some sort. A lie, basically.
So yeah, I tend to hate the fics that I feel -lie- to me on some level. It's insiduous like that. On the other hand, I think this is merely a type of badfic. Lots more fic is just written badly, I find boring in premise, uninspiring, dull, full of shoddy workmanship and un-thought-through characterizations. "Bleh", basically.
Usually, this "bleh" response can be overcome by sparkly writing. For instance, some of my at-one-point-favorite fics are really kind of hard to believe and fluffy in parts. But they have personality. The first few chapters of Love Under Will, for instance, have personality even though I don't think they have high canonical plausibility~:) Even though the canonicity or characterization of `The Untold Want' is questionable, it has this... aesthetic that's peculiar to itself which I'm tempted to call charm, which is more the -writer's- overall aesthetic than anything else. `Resolution' doesn't. Most things don't.
Basically.... What works for people in practice depends on who they are and thus are receptive to (intellectually, aesthetically, emotionally) and what they expect from fanfic and from fiction in general, and also what they can comprehend. I suspect Olympia's fics are beyond most people on a number of levels, as are the subtleties in Silvia's fics, maybe. That said, I don't mean that makes either author somehow "superior" because they have less blatant mass appeal-- I just mean that it's a consideration in terms of projecting reader response and constructing some sort of HP fanfic hierarchy.
Plenty of people, especially those of a more intellectual bent, want canonicity above all else-- not just the general believability of the character's behavior but some sort of strict adherence to (their) view of canon. This usually isn't so prevalent with the H/D-reading segment since really, first you have to get over the imaginative hurdle of envisioning H/D as relating to canon in the first place. The whole pairing is a subversion of canon in some ways while an expansion of it in others. In this sense, I would say almost no H/D fic measures up. I think... maybe `Red' by Miss Breed, `Sins of the Father' by Ali (mostly for pre-OoTP Harry) and eh... Origins for pre-OoTP Harry. Possibly I'd say Silvia's fics, Dee's `The More Things Change' & `Underwater Light' for Draco, but that's a very specific view on Draco. On the other hand, aren't they all?
Eh, to hell with it. Usually, the glaring hatreds for particular fics that people keep hidden play on their own ideas of the characters being betrayed somehow, and then lo! Look, the fandom's lapping it up. It's annoying. It's like somehow, they're saying that this other conception of the character isn't as real when they celebrate this stupid conception of him, I suppose.
To me personally, it doesn't matter how popular a fic I like or dislike is, simply because I think -most- fics get something wrong and I realize the large role my bias plays in my perception of this wrongness. Ideally, I want a fic to -prove- to me whatever view of the characters it has, simply by use of slow-and-steady characterization and plotting and such. Usually, good writing is necessary to make the medicine go down easier. For instance, I rather disagree with Olympia's takes on Harry & Draco in `The Tale of the Shining Prince' and sequels, but it doesn't matter-- they're so self-contained, so smooth that it says what it wants to say and draws you into that world. It presents a bubble, a mini-universe-- it exemplifies the idea of fanfic-as-AU that I'd mentioned in another post. It wouldn't have been able to do so if it wasn't written as gorgeously as it is, I think.
In terms of -my- response... I greatly admire it but have no deep emotional investment in it, post-reading. UL, which is more of a canon-based fic, I have an investment in, but I don't think it's -because- it's extrapolative but rather because I simply like that Draco more, that's all. (I wouldn't be able to -begin- to compare Maya's and Olympia's writing talent in general... I think this where it sort of levels out and becomes comparable and yet deeply incomparable at the same time).
Thus there are two things that remain semi-constant: the overall success of whatever aesthetic or idea the author had been trying to portray-- regardless of its degree of relationship to canon-- based on the writing itself; that is to say, the writer. And secondly, a particular reader, who has the same biases and desires from fic to fic. Er. All of which is entirely unhelpful, I know :/
Dude. You can tell I haven't eaten yet. I could've said all this in like, one paragraph, I'm sure. But whenever I'm out of it, I get progressively more verbose. Fear me.
EDIT - also. MY GOD, WHY CAN'T I STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS; SOMEONE GAG ME!!1 >:O
