~~rec unto others as you would have others rec unto you.

[reenka]

it's not a surprise or anything, but i often ask myself why people in general seem to have such horribly poor taste in fiction. on the one hand, a number of the really popular authors are really good-- a number aren't. but the really good ones-- all those people who read them have taste, don't they?

what if they don't?
what if the things they find good about that piece of work aren't even -related- to the things -i- would enjoy about it? that's all i can come up with.
    if the rec is by a writer i think is brilliant, or by someone whose taste i know and whose intelligence i respect, i am almost never disappointed. i would've thought the intelligence bit would be enough, but it isn't. naturally, quirks in personal preferences have a lot to do with it, but i just can't help feeling bewildered at the stuff people think worthy of recommending.

but, a number of the stories -i- found utterly enjoyable, i wouldn't rec unless i knew the person i'm reccing to had similar tastes as me. for example-- among people i respect and whose opinions i know, there's a split opinion on rhysenn's `irresistible poison'-- and all the popular works, but sticking with that....
     for some people it's too sugary, too much romance or whatever. now, it's perfectly valid to think that. i mean, i know -i- am probably blinded by my complete love for romance, often of the starcrossed variety. it started when i was little and never went away. it's a personal quirk. i'm not about to defend the great intellectual worth of traditional romantic tropes, though i could try and probably get -somewhere-.

still, it's done very well, i feel, and that much, i feel confident in. it's a very good, symbolically rich, interwoven, well-paced traditional romance.
    or say, take maya's `underwater light'. on the one hand, i think it's brilliant and i think that's objective. but again, -what's- brilliant about it. to me, the dialogue, the humor, the characterization, is enough to make me adore it. but what if someone was looking for something completely different? what if they were looking for some sort of in-depth commentary on the human condition, what if they were looking for a serious dealing with all the unsavory aspects of malfoy-the-git? what if they were annoyed by snarky!adorable!malfoy and thought he was ridiculous?

i don't know what i'm saying, really.
i'm annoyed at continuously coming across people who praise stories i consider lame at best. i am also aware of what could be perceived as my hypocricy, because i would praise things without reservation that some people whose opinion i respect would see as lame. still, stories like `mind games'-- and i've only read barely a page-- make me cringe and say there's no way this is good or rec-worthy.

i mean, it doesn't suck or anything. it has interesting stylistic choices and it flows ok. but. maybe there are some characterizations i just refuse to accept (like some people might refuse snarky!charmer!draco), and superpowered-veela!draco is most definitely one of them. i read about his wings and i just want to run far, far away. i mean, hey, artistic license. they're allowed to give him wings. aren't they?

maybe i've been trained by the snarkier members of the fandom to look upon superpowered beautiful people with suspicion (even though they're usually mary sues). this draco smells like a mary sue from a mile away. and hey, for all i know, a number of the draco's i -liked- have been mary sues too. so. *sigh*
    this is just a rant. i don't think i've said anything worthy. but. i -am- continuously surprised (and even surprised at my ability to be surprised) by the junk people lick up as ice-cream. i mean, i think i can tell the difference between disagreements borne of "divergent tastes" and just-- lack of taste. and it try to say-- but it doesn't mean you're -stupid- if you can't tell what's good or bad objectively and go around reccing things that are just plain bad. well. um. gah. i can't hold on to that nicety. yes. as well as being unable to not consider their understanding of certain characters (um. draco) suspect. *sigh*
~~
it's not worthy of my time to snark at plebe!fics, is it ><;;

EDIT: um. i wound up liking the story. it's too insane not to enjoy on some sort of demented level. taking it seriously, it sucks ass. but it's cute seeing harry having his repressed sexuality described as a physical object. muwahahaha.

Comments

[deche.livejournal.com]

you are assuming that taste is something that can be put on a scale of "good to bad" and that your point of view of taste is the accurate one. Rather taste is something completely relative as you explore throughout your post. Different things will appeal to different people.

What is Junk to one man is another man's Treasure.

Perspective. Baby. That's what can make writing interesting. What's good and what's bad all relies on who's presenting the account.

And the vanity of human nature is to think that one's own taste is the Right and Good taste. When easily, clearly, ask someone else and we are the ones with bad taste.

The only way to find recs that you will enjoy is to find people who you know have similar tastes to yours.

[penelope-z.livejournal.com]

Agreed, but God. Some things are just so crap from the fairly objective perspective of plot, grammar, syntax and fluidity in narration that I'm just amazed when I see them recced.

[deche.livejournal.com]

*laughing* i'm refraining from commenting because I know half the time I'm inclined to go "this story sucks!" but then I know i resent it when other people diss my likes. you can't have it both ways man.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*laughs*
i think i've grown up on the idea of Good Literature too much for the utterly subjectivist view to overtake me.

i think i was saying that -even though- taste is of course relative, there is in fact such a thing as good writing and not-so-good writing.

i am fully able to appreciate the good writing of even things i don't personally enjoy. i can prove it-- i think there's been stuff i haven't enjoyed the plot, characters or style of, but i can tell you honestly that i think it's really good.
shakespeare is really good.
i don't care -who- you are, or what your tastes are, if you don't think he's good you are a plebe ^^;
art in general is a weird combination of subjective and universal-- not to say "objective" but just-- it speaks to something we all have in common, making it a work of Great Art and thus good in general.
have you seen some old cathedrals? some works of art by the old masters? you walk in the cathedral of st. peter in rome, for example, and no matter who you are, you are overwhelmed by beauty, if you have an aesthetic bone in your body, i'm sure of it.

while literature is more muddled-- you have to -think- to appreciate it-- i still think language and philosophical weight and brilliant humor and all things we can talk about in vaguely generally-applicable terms.
damn, i'm such an english major ^^;;

[ashkitty.livejournal.com]

It's so subjective, taste is. People like different sorts of stories, and characterisations, and writing styles, and some people care more about one aspect (characterisation, say) than another (plot) or whatever. It's really not that big a deal, is it? If someone recs something you don't like, which to be honest happens to me a lot, just don't finish reading it or whatever. ;)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

well, it's true of course that taste is subjective (as i'd said myself)...
but quality isn't 100% subjective.
while you could make a case for it, it's a bit too depressing and post-modern for me...
i can name a whole bunch of books/stories/etc that suck so bad they make me want to hit things. if someone likes them, they are just plain stupid. there are things/stories/etc like that.
example: `drakee luvs herry. they hatid each ozer but one day, ze sunshine smile down upon them and they said, "lets not b enemies anymore." and zey lived happily ever after & had lotz of kidz.'
erm. or something.

anyway, i consider superpower!draco with wingsies and telepathy to be -that bad-.
in fact, my first impression of jkr was that -she- was that bad.
i am fully able to appreciate things that i don't personally find appealing as being well-written and well-said and plotted and so on.
it's not a -science-, lit-crit that is, but it's not fully mumbo-jumbo subjective magic either, i don't think

as for why i bother commenting on other people's disappointing recs: well i'm always disappointed that these things aren't obvious. i dislike seeing people make what i consider simple mistakes in judgement.
while yes it's subjective, and i wouldn't usually say anything, i thought this particular rec was hilariously bad from almost every angle. which annoys me. bad stories don't deserve to be recced. muawhahah. kill them, kill them all.
and weirdly, i decided `mind games' wasn't so bad. overall. her draco is atrocious and the superpowers make me sick, but i do like the funny bits. so. see? i can overcome my distaste and acknowledge the good points. if there are any. sometimes there aren't ^^;

~reena, who feels decidely ill-at-ease with complete subjectivism

[lasultrix.livejournal.com]

Feeling worried. Feeling very very worried.

*drastically rewrites VM*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

*lightbulb goes on in head*
ahahah! superpowered-veela!draco, eh??

erm.
well.
*coughs*
*wibbles*
see, um, you should look at that fic's first chapter to see what i mean.
it's not that he can't be veelaesque. i mean, i adore `plague of legends' (by ishuca), and he's majorly veelaesque in that...
no it was the Superpowers that included telepathy, wings, face-changing, mind-melding, blah blah etc blah. y'know? it sounded like a bad ya novel where everyone has exciting powers and they all save the world. you can use a magical idea without making the character into a complete mary-sue-superhero, y'know~:)

hee ~:D

~reena, who's stoked 'cause she knows `hidden' plot-element now ;D *bounces*

[ishuca.livejournal.com]

he is?!

damned if i'd ever noticed... how do you figure? ^-^;;

but yay! VM plot point!!

(though i still haven't read the latest chapter, *bad* me...)


~i

(i'd rather say that *yes* the liking of writing is completely subjective. however, most of us have been trained towards ~a~ cultural norm/s on what is considered 'good' and 'bad' writing. it's like anything else. but, in my *opinion*, the world is chock-full of writing crap. blarg. and i stick to this opinion like superglue)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

i think in PoL it's all that "veela silver" thing going on. i mean i'm not saying he's veela (and i don't -think- he is in vm either, though um... i could be wrong ^^;; er...)
also that the veelas seemed to know something about him and why he's immune to them.
gahd that seems like an eternity ago, the whole atmosphere was so different...
but yah i'm just saying it's a fic that has draco associated with veelas, somehow.
it doesn't really matter how, i wasn't really saying he's got superpowers :D ahaha that'd be funny.

um. ok, so everyone thinks writing quality is completely subjective.
hmf. i'll just be the lone ranger then.
i'd say it's -mostly- subjective but that we aren't SO different from each other that we can't decide on anything as a group-- as "readers" through the ages, as human beings responding to a common stimulus.
if you say that -because- we're talking about our feelings, it's subjective, then yes.
but because those feelings can be reproduced and you can see patterns and degrees of precision and innovation in the production of those feelings, as well as a certain wide-spread appeal-- that is, great art tends to affect 95% of viewers in some positive way, whether prepped on not. i -think-.
anyway, because of that, you can say that by uniting our subjectivity you can achieve a certain "reality".

so it's not so much "objective" as just, real. as in, i don't just think `hamlet' is good. that's not entirely subjective. in my own reaction, that's my subjective opinion.
but it's -also- an opinion i can explain-- by using technique, language-use, theme resolution, innovation in story-telling, and so on, as guide-lines.
it's also an opinion that others would -share-, if they used those guidelines.
anyway, something like that. maybe i just want to believe it's true, that there is some standard, some reality to the beauty of writing/art that's outside of my own head.

even if it's just in our collective heads as humans, that's ok.
i feel i -share- this appreciation and that makes it more than purely subjective.
there are two ways to judge art: one would be pure emotional response it evokes.
two would be analysis of its structure, movement, innovation, symmetry, evocativeness, width of vision, wit, visual power.

um. it's like-- every listener of mozart re-creates his greatness within their own hearts and minds.
and in fact there would be no way to know he is great if there wasn't every individual critic, reacting with amazement and awe in turn.
but in a meta sort of way, we still can detach ourselves and see that he fits into a -pattern- of greatness-- his music possesses certain -qualities- that make it great.
a part of me thinks it's a valid question whether or not, if we fed an endless amount of data as to what makes a great piece of art into an artificial intelligence, if it would be able to create a masterpiece.
probably not. but still, i think that's partly due to us not being intelligent enough to really gather all the data.

there -are- cultural norms but they don't need to brainwash everyone. and anyway, the story in question is totally plebe and not on any grand level where it's great but only for a small audience of subjective readers.
that story was just plain awkward. it had good points that i noticed. but the first chapter especially was particularly cringe-inducing.
i refuse to believe the badness of unimaginative, stilted, unbelievable-premise writing exists solely in my head...~:)

~reena, who can't seem to stop talking about this ^^;

[dancingrain.livejournal.com]

EDIT: um. i wound up liking the story. it's too insane not to enjoy on some sort of demented level. taking it seriously, it sucks ass. but it's cute seeing harry having his repressed sexuality described as a physical object. muwahahaha.

Ah, that's when it becomes what's known as a "guilty pleasure" :)

[lasultrix.livejournal.com]

Whee! I have another reader! *cackles*

He's not exactly Veela. He just has a bit of Veela blood - it's mentioned in Chapter 2, actually, but then not mentioned again until the most recent chapter. Which has just been minorly spoiled for you. Ohdear.

(Btw, I got Maya to read PoL, though I haven't actually read it myself yet. But I trust Reena's recs.)

[lasultrix.livejournal.com]

Nah, it's not completely subjective at all. Most people can tell what crap writing is, it's just that people are able to concentrate on the good bits and blank out the bad bits to differing degrees. I'm incapable of ignoring bad bits, even if there are good bits there, so I'm considered a tough critic.

Well, that's my theory anyway. If everything was subjective, how would we ever agree on anything? How could we ever even explain our enjoyment of technique to anybody else?

(I have such a strange feeling that this theory of mine on writing is, in some way, all of a kind with my distaste for socialism. I know not why.)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

yeay~! lasair agrees with me, and all is right with the world :D *bounces*
yah, i'm with you on the blanking out bit. otherwise i'd probably be a pretty tough critic too (because i notice myself blanking out stuff often enough). instead i'm like, this cuddly nice person who can also be snarky >< ahahah at least that's how -i- see my critiques :D
i've never actually torn anyone apart. takes too much mental energy anyway, heh. concentrating on bad writing makes my brain hurt.

yah, but as for the "but we agree on pieces of writing"-- i think some people would say that that's because we, as readers, as alike, our tastes are alike by virtue of our personalities being alike somehow.
so then we like similar things, and understand things similarly.
so it's sort of a coincidence borne of kinship, or something like that.

heheheh ~:) not that i believe that could explain it, but i'm just saying there's more to it than agreement, if you wanted to prove objectivity in literature. wah. heheheh i think i'd enjoy it if i proved it if only because it would piss off some post-modern theorists :D
and, wah~! you trust my recs~! *bounces*
*feels warm and fuzzy*

eeeee~ :D

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

well, seeing as how fanfic in general is my guilty pleasure, this is really overkill, but yeah :D

apparently there are levels of guilt. i mean, it's sort of better to at least spend time squeeing over well-done fanficcy goodness :D

*refuses to feel guilty* ahh yes, the joy of accepting oneself in all one's tasteless d0rky glory :D