audience, demand and idiocy
Jul. 12th, 2004 07:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
branchandrootOk, I finally skimmed the anime thread on fanfic_hate. My immediate reaction was: don't these people have anything better to do with their time?
On reflection, though, I think there is, in fact, a valuable lesson to fic writers that can be derived from f_h. It lies in the very proliferation and drastically contradictory nature of the pitiful puling that I found.
The pessimistic way to put it is that there's no possible way to "do it right". If you write lots of sex, someone will complain that you're ignoring the obvious gen aspects of your source; if you write only gen someone will insist that you don't do justice to the obvious romantic tension of your source; if you use lyrical and image-laden language you are sure to be accused of prosey purpleness; if you write primarily in dialogue some will howl that you write mere scripts, not stories; if you write a lot of AUs they will say that you aren't really writing Series Y at all; if you tend to missing scene stories they will deride you for lack of imagination. There's no way to win this game.
The more pragmatic way to put it is that, no matter what you write, someone will get their panties in a big, starchy twist over it, so you might as well ignore them all, write however you damn well please, and let the chips fall any old how.
Author responsiveness to audience desire is a courtesy, in our non-commercial niche, not a market neccessity, and certainly not some kind of moral imperative. The same, of course, holds true for audience response. I rather think it would do fandom good to remember this. As much as authors attempting to extort feedback are overreaching themselves, so, too, are readers who attempt to impose their priorities on the writers.
(I should probably say, here, that none of my own regular readers have crossed this line, and I treasure every one of you.)
Thus, the appropriate response to Jane Reader, when she says that some part of your story was not quite to her taste is: Too bad.
I have read a great many stories that delighted me. I have never read a single one that I would not, given the opportunity, alter in some way, great or small. This is an imperfect world.
For pity's sake, deal with it.
On reflection, though, I think there is, in fact, a valuable lesson to fic writers that can be derived from f_h. It lies in the very proliferation and drastically contradictory nature of the pitiful puling that I found.
The pessimistic way to put it is that there's no possible way to "do it right". If you write lots of sex, someone will complain that you're ignoring the obvious gen aspects of your source; if you write only gen someone will insist that you don't do justice to the obvious romantic tension of your source; if you use lyrical and image-laden language you are sure to be accused of prosey purpleness; if you write primarily in dialogue some will howl that you write mere scripts, not stories; if you write a lot of AUs they will say that you aren't really writing Series Y at all; if you tend to missing scene stories they will deride you for lack of imagination. There's no way to win this game.
The more pragmatic way to put it is that, no matter what you write, someone will get their panties in a big, starchy twist over it, so you might as well ignore them all, write however you damn well please, and let the chips fall any old how.
Author responsiveness to audience desire is a courtesy, in our non-commercial niche, not a market neccessity, and certainly not some kind of moral imperative. The same, of course, holds true for audience response. I rather think it would do fandom good to remember this. As much as authors attempting to extort feedback are overreaching themselves, so, too, are readers who attempt to impose their priorities on the writers.
(I should probably say, here, that none of my own regular readers have crossed this line, and I treasure every one of you.)
Thus, the appropriate response to Jane Reader, when she says that some part of your story was not quite to her taste is: Too bad.
I have read a great many stories that delighted me. I have never read a single one that I would not, given the opportunity, alter in some way, great or small. This is an imperfect world.
For pity's sake, deal with it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 05:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 06:08 pm (UTC)*hugs the Trudy*
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 05:29 pm (UTC)Hmph.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 06:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 06:00 pm (UTC)But, man. I don't even remember bad fic I read. These people are massively bored.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 06:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 06:17 pm (UTC)There are many layers of weirdness. Authors that I love are mentioned, and then about half of the replies are general defenses. People have a reflex to defend things they like as well, it seems. *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 08:45 pm (UTC)But, I do think that constructive criticism can be a good thing. While I doubt anyone truly ADORES having their grammar errors or flow errors pointed out, it CAN help the fanficcer along. However, suggesting and commenting on the subject matter - too smutty, too ooc for "character", that sort of thing - that's pretty durn pointless since the author obviously intended to write said pwp or whatever. -_-; Silly complainers.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-13 08:21 am (UTC)On the other hand, if anyone wants to correct my spelling I will shower her with virtual kisses, because I swear there are gremlins in my Dreamweaver spellchecker. ^_^;
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 10:21 pm (UTC)Word. Writing, to me, is something that I do for my own enjoyment. Someone who writes fic, while she may post it for others to read, is still only answerable to herself. (Barring the plagiarism issue, of course--on my mind due to the most recent HP plagiarism kerfuffle.)
Part of me understands the reason for fanfic_hate, because before that community started, most of us just compared notes with friends when we read truly awful fic. The thing is, the purported impetus for forming the comm was to vent about fic that people felt was overrated, not necessarily bad. That just screams "let's get together and slam the BNFs" to me. And that's what seems to be happening. I don't have a problem with the anonymice, as some seem to, but I do get kind of sickened when I see how gleefully and quickly people, anonymous or not, start slinging mud at authors instead of venting about fic. I suppose it's just human nature, but it's still a bit disturbing. I was also amazed at how upset some people got when the Smallville thread turned out to be a comparative lovefest. SV fen were accused of being everything from apathetic to cowed by mysterious BNFs and their "minions." Most of us were just sitting there scratching our heads and wondering who these shadowy figures were supposed to be.
Sorry to ramble like this in your journal. I just have such mixed feelings about that comm. On the one hand, I understand the need to discuss fic that leaves one underwhelmed and confused at its popularity. On the other hand, though, I get kind of creeped out by the junior high-style spite that flows through many of the posts. And yet, I do read it from time to time, so what does that say about me? I blame Fandom Wank for getting me in touch with my wank-loving side.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-13 08:33 am (UTC)You know, I have to wonder where the Legend of the Minions originated. I mean, I've seen the exhibitionists (read, BNFs) in the fandoms I've peeked at acting badly, especially to each other. Talk shows have nothing on fandom. But this whole Myth of the Minions Who Squash really sounds like one or two isolated incidents that were blown out of proportion in the retelling.