passive consumer vs. passionate participant: reader, writer, reader.

[reenka]

All right, so I've been reading some of the discussion about the new SGA lit-crit/discussion community, and I understand that people get their feelings hurt easily by criticism and we're a fandom community rather than a bunch of mercenary professionals, and we're all swimming in the same fishbowl and a lot of writers just write fic only for fun-- all right, I understand that and I fully agree that we should be kind and considerate to one another and to others' emotional attachments to their fics. But.

What most writers who say 'but can't you be nice?' don't understand fully is that almost any opinion, however it's worded, that's not actual praise could be construed as 'mean' or unfriendly or... not sweetly encouraging. And that's where I pretty much balk.

I read, therefore I write. It even goes in the opposite direction-- I write, therefore I read. It's that simple for me. Fiction bleeds into nonfiction for me, nonfiction into poetry, poetry into fiction. I react.


I've seen it said that writers and critics don't go together-- they're like 'tomcats in the same burlap sack'-- and I suppose that does seem to be true. And perhaps it's not surprising, actually, that I see myself as a writer and a critical reader (and I couldn't pick one-- writer and reader, to me they're nearly the same thing, flipsides of the same coin)-- because I've always been 'conflicted', heh.

It's funny, because I don't feel as inspired to crit with canon-- with sources that exist outside fandom, written by people who're not part of the community. I feel like -discussing- but not really critiquing professional work in depth because my response is largely that of a consumer. I consume-- I approve what I do and discard what I don't. In some cases, I really bond with a work on a very personal level, and then I have lots of affection and a fair amount of addiction to it and for its creator, but even then I don't often take the critical approach because yeah, that's recreational reading and entertainment, and it's 'just for fun'.
    If I critique anything, it's going to be genre-wide things and issues of trend and recurring tropes in many different (fantasy) books or comics-- something that keeps cropping up and annoying me. I'm not going to bother with things that are very particular to a specific work unless I really love it otherwise and that one bit just throws me out of the story completely.

I may have some huge issues with a canon source, true. It's just that then I leave it alone-- or I watch it out of morbid curiosity, with the sense of 'okay, 2 hours later, the torture is over'. Like, wtf was that with the writing in Hunter: The Age of Magic, anyway?? That SUCKED ASS-- and likewise with the Star Wars prequels. But I don't really think about the nitty gritty outside of being able to name what bothers me, because I'm still a passive consumer. I'm not a participant in the overall process, as with fanon-- it's not a shared world scenario. I just pass judgment. With a fanfic-- yep, it's a shared world. I have a stake in it, as a reader/writer. I'm inspired or disgusted by some element that I might or might not use; I'm startled by a pairing I might also suddenly want to write; I am disturbed by a characterization that seems wrong in a way that sets me to thinking about many related issues or a plot-device that ignores some major area of interest or obsession to me in canon.

Fanon-- amateur writing-- that's where I'm a passionate participant, not just a consumer. I feel involved-- I feel some personal stake, even, in others' work, as if it reflects upon me, just because it's my pairing, my fandom, my favorite character. And I'm not deluded to think that way, not the way I would be if I railed against JKR for writing her own characters 'wrong' (unlike railing at her for just writing it badly-- that's perfectly possible).
~~

    Yes, I'm a writer as well as a critic, and I am quite sensitive enough to being told my writing sucks, really, even though I've grown a thick skin. The only thing is-- the main difference between me and the people who have issues with public crit-- is that I take my writing seriously because it's 'just for fun', because I love doing it, because it is what I do even though I don't have to. So on some level I feel left out by that whole concept of fannish writing/reading being less important or worthy of polite yet honest critique/discussion than some more professional work which is less personal to us. To me, fun is what's important, and therefore I want to pick it apart and put it back together and mess around with it. I'm willing to be hurt, because I love it. Because I don't have to-- it's just for fun. I chose this.

Or perhaps I just mean different things by taking my writing 'seriously'. After all, if you get upset at critique, you are, in fact, taking your writing seriously in a sense. Well, you're taking your ego seriously, and you're taking your own investment and work seriously, and you're taking your authorship seriously. That... I don't know if I myself take that seriously, and this is not just a crucial difference between critics and writers, but between different kinds of writers. I do have an ego, and it can easily enough be hurt by certain things said intelligently, but I don't prize my authorship, really, or the quantity of my work when compared to the quality. I love the fics I'd worked most on the best, of course, and I wibble about their reception, but I don't expect (demand?) people to understand and value them as I do. I know they won't.

My writing is important to me, and my readers are important to me, but I learned early on that this isn't really connected-- that most of my readers don't have any special insight into my brain or my stories' intent, but their feedback still makes me happy. I'm glad they enjoyed it. I'm interested why they haven't. But I don't need them to enjoy it, because... well, maybe I'm just too weird for most people and I accepted that very early on.

Mostly, all I wanted to say is that critique and story analysis is as natural to me as writing is. It's not that I choose to gossip or badmouth stories because I get off on hurting people or tearing things down-- I don't, not at all. I just enjoy talking about and comparing/contrasting my reactions to stories with others. I don't do this much in fandom, and don't expect fandom to provide an outlet for this hobby, exactly, I'm just saying that it can be a natural expression of one's approach to fiction. Actually, writing fiction (fanfic and original) itself is a natural expression of my approach to fiction.

And I realize that what I write has an impact on my readers, especially if it involves critiquing the writer, which is why I always go meta and generalize when talking about fanfic. I don't want to upset anyone, but-- critique is a creative act too. Everyone reacts, yes, but there are some of us who react in words, who take 'feedback' one step further and would flourish in a community of fannish discussion.

Fan to fan, reader to reader: we have questions. We want answers. Why do we like what we like? Why do we dislike certain elements of fanfic, certain tropes, and can accept others in one context but not another? How does this character work in a number of fics of a certain theme, like hurt/comfort, and what does this say about his canon relationship with that other character? What drives us to reading fics that do this one thing to a character, and why doesn't it work in that particular fic? How do we relate to this characteristic of that character in this story? How does it clash or reflect on canon? And so on and on and on.
~~

The whole idea of writing the author directly to give one's con-crit misses the point entirely, because there's a large difference between positive/negative/mixed feedback (intended for the author) and a positive/negative/mixed review (intended for other readers). The assumption that all discussion on a story has to basically double as direct feedback sort of... bothers me. A lot.

Not that this is an excuse to be rude, nasty and inconsiderate, not at all-- nothing is an excuse for being an arse. It's just... writers have to understand that readers want their space too, their own shop-talk that isn't about the writers. It's like-- a lot of women like to talk about some things with other women, things that just feel more comfortable or understood in that venue, things they couldn't quite express correctly or be understood in mixed company. Readers want to talk with readers. Readers don't exist for the sake of writers' egos or to fulfill their needs, even in fandom. Fannish readers could easily have something to say that's meant only for other readers of like mind-- that's all.

Comments

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

I may have some huge issues with a canon source, true. It's just that then I leave it alone-- or I watch it out of morbid curiosity, with the sense of 'okay, 2 hours later, the torture is over'.

I just don't get this about you. I mean, it isn't just that it's going to be over soon (which doesn't make sense, cos most fics I read take far less time to consume than the HP canon or even an episode of SGA) and they're profiting from it. I mean, if they make money but still make horrible mistakes in canon, shouldn't they be held to a higher standard of critique? Even moreso because they're supposed to be professionals, and not amateurs in fandom?

I mean, seriously, I sit through an episode of SGA and can't stop laughing for all the wrong reasons (last one I sat through they Sued Teyla to canon hell and back) but I've read a few fics and though they weren't really very good, I didn't feel the need to send the writers a mocking letter as much as I did the writers of SGA. Your passiveness is annoying my activeness :P.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahahah, I dunno what it is myself :D It's not about holding things to a standard, precisely, as in-- writer X -has- to be better than -this-, but rather feeling invested enough to really think about something analytically, I guess, because analysis doesn't always come naturally to me :)) And if something doesn't come naturally, I tend to just be passive and... not do it at all. Unless I'm really emotionally struck by that something (thus making the response natural in any case). So yeah, I would easily say something like 'SGA sucks' (were I to watch SGA), and then I'd be... bleh, who cares?? I'd only care if it was the omg-huge-sensation-all-over-the-world (like HP), and initially I -was- pissed that anyone liked HP (back when I read the first 10 pages and threw it across the room in disgust, not to look at it again till fandom participation guilt-tripped me into it).

I don't enjoy things -because- of the chance for analysis itself (like enjoying MST3K-ing an ep of SGA or something), in other words, I enjoy things first and -then- enjoy the analysis. I'm emotionally driven moreso than passive, precisely. :>

I also don't necessarily care if something's 'supposed' to be good or not, ie, professional vs. amateur. I just care more if it's good in terms of fanfic (because I'm invested) and don't care in the case of various canons-- because... why would I care? Unless I care about a whole genre (sci-fi shows, say), and I'd be like, OMG NOT ANOTHER BAD SCI-FI SHOW. And then I would weep a single emo tear and never watch that particular one again. Even with Star Trek (which I adore in concept because of the earlier novelizations of it), I didn't feel invested enough in canon to watch DS9 or most Voyager once it got bad, or even all of the original series (which I'd seen novelizations of). I still haven't read most of CoS just 'cause I'm lazy -.- Um. I just... don't care that much about canon if what I'm invested in is some version of fanon. And if I'm invested in canon, I tend to avoid fanon anyway. I tend to read/watch canon for 'research' purposes only (because I care about things being IC purely on principle), and in that case sometimes my sheer laziness does kick in.

I'm no activist, I guess~:) But neither am I the sort of person who won't say something if she's got something to say :>

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

and don't care in the case of various canons-- because... why would I care?

Because that's an important part of being in a fandom, even if it's not the main part? Like, you wouldn't be all over Harry if there was no canon, afterall.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Right, right, if I'm already -in- a fandom for it, then I care enough to watch/read it for reference, as I said (er... but I don't, personally, tend to be in fandoms where I liked canon first). With 'various canons', I was more talking about me not being too interested in analysing random shows/books for the heck of it (given they might have a fandom I may or may not want to join). So it's not that I was saying 'to hell with canon', but more that I need a reason to care about that canon in the first place.

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

I think I kinda understand where you're at now. I'm kinda like that too.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*giggles* I feel so complicated all of a sudden :>

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

I think that's just cos you think about it too much. Look! Shiny thing! *points*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*leaps!*

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

BTW, where'd you get that icon from?

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hee :D Um, it was one of the free icons at a scanlation-request board :D

[verstehen.livejournal.com]

Bwahaha.

Your essay isn't funny, just that you ventured into the SGA community and it sparked. I'm just amused. (Of course, I'm frustrated with the SGA community as a whole, because it discovered a single fandom-defining pairing and turned stupid.)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Oh man, I didn't really venture into SGA at all-- I haven't even watched or read any SGA at this point, ahahah, I'm just following metafandom & everyone's talking about this, so it's like, transcending SGA :D

It -would- be funny if I suddenly got into SGA fandom, though :D I mean, not that I've never read fic for sci-fi shows (I have), but just... SGA. Yes ^^;;

[verstehen.livejournal.com]

It's on metafandom? Dude. Haven't we had this discussion like fifty times by now? *laughs*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hahah, we have, but... er... *looks shifty* Sometimes I'm more interested in it than others?? I dunno if -I've- said all this before, at any rate, so I decided to just... note what I thought to organize my own feelings on the subject, and also because the whole thing where writers are seen so obviously dominant over readers in fandom just... really bothers me, especially 'cause it leaves out the essential unity of reader & writer, at least in myself. As if you can write well without reading well, that sort of thing.

Of course, nearly every major fannish subject has been hashed to death by now-- I think in a way, being in fandom means you've got to have a tolerance for constantly repeating yourself, heheh.

[verstehen.livejournal.com]

I don't mean you specifically, just fandom in general. It seems an unending debate between two groups who feel they're in power and, in reality, are actually equally important to the survival of fannishness.

I know I should be tolerant, but this is one discussion that's been done past death. And rebirth. And death again. *g*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahahaha, I suppose we're all just looking for enlightenment we still haven't found, then :D

...People are pretty slow, aren't they :D

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

The other funny thing about this is it gets right into that...hypocrisy zone?...in fandom. Because as much as we get annoyed and mock when authors like Robin Hobb tell us they feel this way, we're obviously taking some liberties whenever we decide to do things with canon. Not that I think we're overstepping our bounds or anything. But I am aware that maybe the author wouldn't be interested in reading my ten pounds of meta on her work, and maybe she'd disagree with me on it, to which my response would be that I was still right.;-) (Unless she could objectively convince me otherwise like any other reader--not just by saying she was the author.)

But you're absolutely right when you say that the thing is anything can be considered mean, even if it's phrased politely. Some things just can't be phrased as politely as people want, because they need it to be so polite it's actually not a criticism. Or they need to be told that criticism doesn't matter, like in a recent conversation where somebody pointed out some glaring anachronisms in a historical piece and the author said she didn't care, despite the fact that not only was the source material all about its historical context but she'd just been accepting praise for it's being canonical. I think that's what gets people more antsy in fanon, I think, not just the fact that people do stuff that pings them as wrong but that there's always a crowd of people ready to say that's just how it is in fanon. I know even as a meta person I get irritated by certain versions of things that canon-whores cling to as canon to the point of looking down on anything else, when I think they're flat-out wrong and contradicted by canon.

That was a total tangent. But anyway, uh, yeah. I guess canon, for most of us, is a fixed thing that can't be changed, nor would we really want to be able to change it, for all we claim we would. That is, we'd probably all love to talk to the author about things we see and think s/he might see it the same way, but if we forced him/her to write what we wanted then it wouldn't be "real." Fanfic, by contrast, is not real. We're very aware that it's being twisted to hit certain buttons. If that makes sense.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's not like JKR needs to approve of meta or anything o_0 That sort of boggles the mind. But I see how it's a reflection of the focus on author's permission and author's calling dibs on discussion/interpretation of fanfic, also. I think most people just see a lot more separation between reader/writer/text as three separate entities than I do, or perhaps it's like writer/text is one whole perfect shining thing and the reader... the reader is ----------------->somewhere over there :D

Oh my god, yeah, the people who say a criticism of a basic factual canon inaccuracy 'doesn't matter' because it's 'just fanfic'... oh my god, it... hurts my brain to even think about. Like, I don't even understand, because if that's "just how it is", then... I don't know, that level of subjectivity sort of scares me, like nothing has any value outside of one's enjoyment. Like it's literally all about the wank (and/or entertainment). I suppose this is the 'fanfic is just like soap-operas and talk-shows' model of fannish writing.... I think those people literally don't get why one would want to analyze/discuss seriously for fun, 'cause if you analyse soap-operas seriously, the whole premise falls apart entirely. So maybe underneath it all they really think all fanfics sucks or something :D


Man, but what makes me woeful is that there are actually people who say things like 'canon read like a fanfic to me' with complete seriousness, it seems like, as if they can no longer differentiate between the two-- 'real' and 'unreal'. Or maybe after awhile spent in fanonland, 'real' doesn't matter so much as 'what I want to see'. I'd like to think I'm just being paranoid, but I suspect I'm not exaggerating too much. I really don't know, those H/Hr wankers really -would- have liked canon to be the way -they- saw it, I'm pretty sure. That's kinda what broke my brain, but yeah... there's a certain kind of fan, y'know... a certain kind of fan.... Tinhat, I guess you'd say :>

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Actually, I find it easier to deal with the people who say "it doesn't matter because I like it this way," because on some level that's at least admitting it wouldn't work as canon. What drives me crazy are people who instead of confusing canon for fanon do the opposite, and have to elevate whatever they like in fanon to canon. So stuff they do that's totally against canon is suddenly supposed to be really in character or like canon.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I think with the 'doesn't matter' people it's not the stance alone that bothers me, but the way they get defensive and like 'who are you to critique it, it's perfectly fine', usually with an all-fanfic-is-created-equal mentality behind it, I guess. So it's not that they say 'oooh, crackfic, yeay!' but more that they don't balance it with non-crackfic... like fanfic is by nature crackfic-- or at least that's what I sometmes get from the 'doesn't matter', y'know?

As for the elevating-fanon projecting people... they're more deluded rather than just annoying :D

[ex-ella-bane358.livejournal.com]

Readers want to talk with readers. Readers don't exist for the sake of writers' egos or to fulfill their needs, even in fandom. Fannish readers could easily have something to say that's meant only for other readers of like mind-- that's all.

I see your reasoning here, and it's happened for me when I've chatted with others on Y!M about stories we've both liked and disliked and it was stress free because the author wasn't there. We didn't have to worry about hurting feelings. We could just talk. When the author is involved in the discussion, the real 'truths' people feel about the work are sometimes colored. Not everyone's thoughts will be presented in an altered fashion -- some readers are completely forthright -- but some will phrase their feelings carefully, and others will say nothing at all.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, I know the presence of the author would color things, which is why I favor having a space just for readers, without the author's presence. And as for the some of the readers censoring themselves-- of course that will happen, but I guess it's inevitable and the community's ultimately not going to be meant for them but rather for the people who'd like to have a public discussion in the first place.

People saying that free speech isn't as important as politeness in general terms-- they were the ones I was responding to.

[ex-ella-bane358.livejournal.com]

People saying that free speech isn't as important as politeness in general terms-- they were the ones I was responding to.

I'm very glad you did! I liked the whole tone of this essay and the idea that all of us, artists and essayists and authors alike, are ultimately readers/consumers just as lurkers are. We're all here to celebrate our varied loves of Harry Potter and the way we present ourselves is just as important as what we discuss. Certainly, in my view, politeness will yield more discussion than it would halt as comment tagging can fall into nothing important or fun. So yeah, I agree with you.

[shaggirl.livejournal.com]

The thing that has bugged me about the recent kerfuffle (well, *one* of the things) is the whole reader entitlement vs. privileged author debate, as if we aren't all one and the same. Look at the people who were commenting on thecuttingboard -- those aren't greedy, unappreciative consumers of fandom authors' hard work, by and large they're fellow authors who have a vested interest in the writing process. I'm at a loss to understand why reasonable discussion of a story's strengths and weaknesses (canon text or fanfic) is nearly *always* branded sour grapes in fandom. Apparently we are meant to exist here in a vaccuum -- read and enjoy, but never think *why*.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I -knoooowwww- :D :D :D *totally agrees!!*
I was also struck by how reasonable and polite the discussions seemed to be, to the point where I just didn't get the point of the kerfuffle in the first place. Like, people are still freaking out over the mere -idea- that omg, people -might- say something hurtful if the authors looked (like say, Prufrock did), and then, omg it would be just this terrible demoralizing disappointing blight on the face of fandom. Nguh.

[balfrog.livejournal.com]

yay! Reeeena!!!
:D
(*dumbcommentses as am staring at pretty sketch boyfriend*)
:D
:D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Yeay, Frog!! :D
I'm glad you found it non-prescriptive, btw, since I'm always trying to get away from my rep of trying to brainwash people :))

...it's nice to have a cheering squad... of one... but still. :D

[balfrog.livejournal.com]

sorry I couldn't jump in and say why I liked it and stuff - I was feeling dumb yesterday... but it made the whole writing/reading relationship more interesting (more the way I'd LIKE it to be) - than the defensive/and slightly antoagonistic position that some takes could make it out to be.
Of course, that said, it doesn't matter which is more often the case. More that which do WE want to be the case...

or something like that.
:D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I think the people who're not both writers & readers are just in denial :D Or... uh, notsogood writers ^^;;;;

[isiscolo.livejournal.com]

The assumption that all discussion on a story has to basically double as direct feedback sort of... bothers me.

And in fact, the reverse is true, at least to me. I blame public "review" boards on fanfic archives for conflating the concepts of review and feedback, when they really oughtn't be. Livejournal comments are even in a third category, as they are sorta-direct to authors, but still public.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

You mean you see direct feedback being seen as having to double for discussion/review or just actually -being- a review? Because most people don't leave very in-depth feedback that I've seen, at least in places like lj or skyehawke, or even Fiction Alley-- they just say 'that was great, write more' 90% of the time in my experience. Though perhaps I just don't inspire people much or write long enough fics.

I guess I was thinking about my own intent, mostly, with things like livejournal comments-- that is, I know they're public, but since I intend them for the author's consumption, I make them directly addressing the author. Just because other people might read them doesn't really bother me or even concern me, but I realize perhaps other people are more self-conscious. I'm not sure how many write lj feedback differently because it's public, and aren't actually just addressing the author.

[isiscolo.livejournal.com]

What I mean is "that was great, write more" makes sense as a private message to the author, but is useless as a public review. When I first discovered 'review boards' I thought they would be places where we might get a sense of whether we'd like the story before reading it - but in practice that is not the case.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahh, you meant you -wanted- people to make feedback more review-ish for reader's purposes :D I think that's mostly because the majority of readers aren't actually very analytical :>

[isiscolo.livejournal.com]

No, I mean that I want readers to send feedback to the author, and post reviews publicly. Basically, I wish "review" hadn't been co-opted to mean "feedback" in fanworld.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I don't think most people would 'review' if, well, if those board 'reviews' really meant what they say. We really need another word, I suppose, because while there -is- a rather small number of self-appointed reviewers out there, most people like the public-feedback system because it's easy & convenient. I'm not as aware of the misuse of the word because I don't hang out at archives much anymore-- so I've gotten used to the word 'comment' (as in, 'I want comments!!!!' like on ff.net) or 'review' for something more meaty. In other words, perhaps the terms are shifting that way lately~:)