to crit or not to crit?

[xparrot]

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. (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.

Comments

[nenya85.livejournal.com]

I’ve actually had the opposite experience with ffnet. I may just have incredibly thoughtful reviewers, but I find that when someone as an objection, not to how I’ve told a story, but to what I’ve chosen to say, they tend to do so through email or on my LJ rather than through a public review. If I put the wrong army in the Trojan Horse, someone will tell me so in a ffnet review. But I think many people see a difference between that kind of factual correction and objecting to or questioning: a) why I’ve interpreted the characters the way I have, b) my pairings, c) why I’m not writing genfic, d) why I’ve bothered included a plot in my romance, e) why I’m not writing about other characters entirely or, f) why I’m not writing for Naruto when Sasuke and Naruto are so obviously just like Kaiba and Yami only better. In the latter cases, they are much more likely to do so via email or on my LJ.

I think that this is because both email and LJ posts feel more informal; it’s certainly more private, and maybe it makes the exchanges feel more like a dialog. Now where I might differ from a lot of the debate around this issue, is that I think each reader is as entitled to their preferences in reading as I am to mine in writing. I don’t see why they shouldn’t feel free to talk about how my story matches up with the one they want to see in their head, or how my interpretation not just of how a character is, but what they might be capable of in the future matches theirs -- provided they can do so without acting as if I was somehow responsible for their expectations or disappointment. And honestly, these are conversations I’d rather have via email or on my LJ (if I want to have them at all, which depending on how polite/demanding/interesting the person is, can be at times a debatable point) because they really are about reading and writing in general or how we see the characters rather than about a specific story.

I think though, you can usually get an idea of what kinds of conversations someone’s open to on their LJ simply by reading it, and I think that it’s only polite to use that as a guide before butting in.

I know though, that it's easy to get defensive when someone disagrees with you -- especially if it's based on their interpretations or preferences. Sometimes I need to take a step back and consider that what feels in that first moment of reading like an attack is probably someone expressing themselves quickly or bluntly -- but who has no intention of insulting me, even if they're disagreeing with what I wrote or how I envision the characcters' futures.. After all, people are going to spend less time on their reviews than I spent writing and that needs to be factored in.

I tend not to offer concrit unless specifically requested simply because if I’m reading a story, I tend to focus on what I liked rather than what I didn’t. Also, I have the attention span of a flea, so I tend not to read stories I don’t like or that are poorly written. Also, if the problem I have with a story is that the person has interpreted the characters in a way that, although reasonable, isn’t the way I prefer to see them developing, I tend not to comment. Because if I can’t honestly say that their interpretation of how they might develop is implausible, then it seems unfair to criticize it because it simply isn’t the vewrsion of how they would act that I want to see. And if the character’s actions were totally implausible, I probably would have already abandoned the story, making the point moot.