![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
to crit or not to crit?
I keep telling myself I'm not going to get any more involved in the concrit/review debate, that old saw that's currently making the rounds in SGA fandom. Especially because I straddle the fence on most of the issue, and get uncomfortable with the rhetoric and ideals that both sides throw around. (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
synecdochic eloquently expresses my general beliefs here.) But in discussion on friendshipper's post, a couple points came up that illuminated part of the situation for me, and why people get all crazy about it.
If I may present a hypothetical (gods no, not another one!, the collective voices of the internet cry; but bear with me):
So I've yet to read the (in)famous YA vampire novel Twilight, but I have read a few eager recommendations online. I've also read a few delightfully scathing reviews and follow-up discussions on various lj posts, gleefully dissecting every flaw of prose and characterization, and they were immensely entertaining as well as interesting from the writer's What Not To Do perspective. These conversations were reader-to-reader, existing separate from the author; if the author had appeared to decry them, it likely would've been seen as wanky, trying to exert an authority that she doesn't have. And no one would question the poster's motives - she didn't like the book, wanted to share her opinions about it, maybe dissuade others from wasting their money on it.
But what if one of those scathing reviews had been written by Anne Rice? Her review might be just as incisive and intelligent - but its motives would be far more questionable. Is she offering her honest opinion just to join the discourse? Or is she trying to undermine sales of her competitor? Is she simply jealous that someone else writes vampires better than she does? Whatever her true motives, she is not an unbiased reader, and no one would accept her as one. This doesn't mean that her opinion isn't valid, or that she shouldn't state it; but she'd probably want to be careful about how she states it if she doesn't want to come across as a bully or worse. Also, if Twilight's author wanted to discuss Rice's opinion with her, it wouldn't be as surprising - that discourse wouldn't be reader-to-author but author-to-author, on equal footing.
In fandom, we're all Anne Rice - we're all amateurs, all on equal ground. There are BNFs, but there are no professionals; there is no distinction between reader and author, between consumer and creator. There are some readers who never write fic or produce fanworks; there are some fan creators who don't consume others' creations (though those are far rarer.) But the only real line in fandom is between participant and lurker. And the moment you start writing reviews on your lj, even if you don't post fic or make vids, you've stopped lurking and joined the fandom, and you're on equal footing with all the other creators. Which means your motives will be questioned - are you rec'ing your personal friends? Are you trying to drum up support for your preferred pairing, or are you trying to insult an author who dissed your favorite char?
I am not advocating that we halt all discussion or debate in fandom just because it can potentially be personal; I'm not calling for a fandom-wide ban on reviews, critical or otherwise. And I believe that everyone has a right to their opinion, and a right to share it in public - that's what the Internet is for.
But if you are reviewing fan creations in a fandom you're participating in (and your review is participation) you can't claim that your opinion is impartial, that you are acting without malice or ulterior motives, that you are only trying to promote discussion - and expect to be believed without question. That may honestly be what you are intending, but your position is such that people may not believe you. And you can't assume that everyone will immediately understand what you are trying to do; you can't assume that they won't take offense, even if you are intending to give none.
I'm not telling people not to review or discuss fanfics. But it is not the same as reviewing a movie or a published novel, because you, as a fellow fan, have a different, more equal, relationship with the other fan creator, regardless of whether you have any personal acquaintance. And if you aren't careful about what you say or how you say it, if you ignore or overlook that relationship, don't be surprised if people get upset, or otherwise misinterpret what you say.
synecdochic eloquently expresses my general beliefs here.) But in discussion on friendshipper's post, a couple points came up that illuminated part of the situation for me, and why people get all crazy about it.If I may present a hypothetical (gods no, not another one!, the collective voices of the internet cry; but bear with me):
So I've yet to read the (in)famous YA vampire novel Twilight, but I have read a few eager recommendations online. I've also read a few delightfully scathing reviews and follow-up discussions on various lj posts, gleefully dissecting every flaw of prose and characterization, and they were immensely entertaining as well as interesting from the writer's What Not To Do perspective. These conversations were reader-to-reader, existing separate from the author; if the author had appeared to decry them, it likely would've been seen as wanky, trying to exert an authority that she doesn't have. And no one would question the poster's motives - she didn't like the book, wanted to share her opinions about it, maybe dissuade others from wasting their money on it.
But what if one of those scathing reviews had been written by Anne Rice? Her review might be just as incisive and intelligent - but its motives would be far more questionable. Is she offering her honest opinion just to join the discourse? Or is she trying to undermine sales of her competitor? Is she simply jealous that someone else writes vampires better than she does? Whatever her true motives, she is not an unbiased reader, and no one would accept her as one. This doesn't mean that her opinion isn't valid, or that she shouldn't state it; but she'd probably want to be careful about how she states it if she doesn't want to come across as a bully or worse. Also, if Twilight's author wanted to discuss Rice's opinion with her, it wouldn't be as surprising - that discourse wouldn't be reader-to-author but author-to-author, on equal footing.
In fandom, we're all Anne Rice - we're all amateurs, all on equal ground. There are BNFs, but there are no professionals; there is no distinction between reader and author, between consumer and creator. There are some readers who never write fic or produce fanworks; there are some fan creators who don't consume others' creations (though those are far rarer.) But the only real line in fandom is between participant and lurker. And the moment you start writing reviews on your lj, even if you don't post fic or make vids, you've stopped lurking and joined the fandom, and you're on equal footing with all the other creators. Which means your motives will be questioned - are you rec'ing your personal friends? Are you trying to drum up support for your preferred pairing, or are you trying to insult an author who dissed your favorite char?
I am not advocating that we halt all discussion or debate in fandom just because it can potentially be personal; I'm not calling for a fandom-wide ban on reviews, critical or otherwise. And I believe that everyone has a right to their opinion, and a right to share it in public - that's what the Internet is for.
But if you are reviewing fan creations in a fandom you're participating in (and your review is participation) you can't claim that your opinion is impartial, that you are acting without malice or ulterior motives, that you are only trying to promote discussion - and expect to be believed without question. That may honestly be what you are intending, but your position is such that people may not believe you. And you can't assume that everyone will immediately understand what you are trying to do; you can't assume that they won't take offense, even if you are intending to give none.
I'm not telling people not to review or discuss fanfics. But it is not the same as reviewing a movie or a published novel, because you, as a fellow fan, have a different, more equal, relationship with the other fan creator, regardless of whether you have any personal acquaintance. And if you aren't careful about what you say or how you say it, if you ignore or overlook that relationship, don't be surprised if people get upset, or otherwise misinterpret what you say.
no subject
Like 'friends list', I think 'community' on the internet is a bit of a misnomer when trying to hang that term and all it's baggage over such a disparate group of people whose only point in common might be a tv show.
no subject
I also don't believe 'courtesy' is the be-all and end-all; there are definitely things that take precedence. But when it comes to internet fandom, which is entirely a social pursuit and we're all presumably here to enjoy ourselves (in all the myriad ways we do so) - yeah, there's not many things more important here than doing our best to respect others' 'pursuit of happiness.' The trouble arises when one person's happiness is hurting someone else...
...But, yeah, in the end, these are all merely my opinions as much as anyone's, and the best I can do is seek out and create communities that follow them, and let the others be.
no subject
The thing about that though is that if people don't articulate it it relies on mind reading and the only mind that I can read is my cats which basically revolves around pats and food.
The one thing that I've noticed the more I travel are my social rules are not other people's social rules. Travelling around on public transport in America I was really surprised to see people striking up conversations with complete strangers - I thought it was cool, but back in NZ public transport is a hell of a lot less interesting - if someone tried that they would be considered presumptious, rude and possibly just plain nuts. We just have a larger personal space bubble.
When in Rome do what the Romans do - but unfortunately the internet is international virtual space, which means people can be stepping on toes but not meaning to or even thinking that it's a toe stepping situation.
and the best I can do is seek out and create communities that follow them, and let the others be.
*holds up lighter* :)
no subject
I agree with you about how you can only shape what you... is take in too broad? willingly take in? dunno.
no subject
however that's not fandom's nucleus, I think.
Yeah, I agree.
no subject
Anyway, it's my opinion that rl and online community is of the same weight, but I grew up with the internet and fandom to some extent. Moreover, I try to be the same person in both RL and online. I don't know that everyone cares to.
no subject
Oh absolutely, I mean the community of old were people would gather at town halls et al, certainly doesn't reflect how most of us live our urban lives today. And in a way the internet is filling this gap, because we can now associate with people that we might have more in common with than just a geographic locale.
I suspect we differ about weight given to off-line and on-line relationships, but then again I live so far away from the bulk of other users in lj that phone calls and visits to supplment the distance a keyboard brings really isn't practical.
Moreover, I try to be the same person in both RL and online. I don't know that everyone cares to.
Same here, and I know I'm being naive but I tend to expect the same as others that I interact with - but hey, hats off if they've got that kind of time and energy to want to go to the trouble of creating an internet persona - not my cuppa, but maybe it's therapeutic for some?