![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Con crit! Rant! Bitchiness!
It's writing month in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
tkp's journal, because she likes talking about herself in the third person, and also because it's March and she has a fetish about themed months. Later there will be flowers (edelweiss), my usual monthly questions, hopefully fun discussions about writing and how we do it and how we make it better, interspersed with all the B/A bits I wanted to post in February but didn't get around to.
For now, I'm going to rant about con crit, that never ending debate, and I'm going to put on my bitch hat and my snooty gloves, and say exactly whatever I damn well please.
First of all, a definition. My concrit:
-gives at least one compliment. The compliment must be wholly positive. No, "I liked your style in the beginning and I wish you'd kept it up towards the end." I might say something like that elsewhere, but I always try to include one bit of pure unadulterated praise, complete with why it worked for me and possibly examples of what I liked about it.
-suggests at least two problems within the fic. Sometimes it's really easy and deals with broad things: "I have a problem with a. your excessive use of adjectives and b. your characterization." Sometimes it means getting down into the nitty gritty: " I have a problem with a. your excessive use of adjectives and b. you missed a period after "orgasm" on page 52, third paragraph."
-provides at least one specific example that supports an initial critical claim. I.e., "You use too many adjectives; look how many you used here, here, and here."
-provides an explanation for why the examples + intial claim = fault. I.e., "Too many adjectives can clutter the modified object, making the description indecisive and hazy rather than producing a sharp and definitive image/feeling/etc."
-if one of the problems is with characterization, almost always discusses specific moments in canon where the character was in a similar situation and made a different decision. Especially in Buffyverse, there is almost always a similar situation. The logistics and circumstances may be different, but almost everything is going to deal with a core issue addressed in canon: love, sex, heroism, abuse, courage, guilt, etc.
-sometimes ventures a solution to the problem, complete with explanations and sometimes examples.
-almost always rounds off (or begins) the initial sally with a disclaimer so that the person on the recieving end knows I'm being picky about their work because I like it. The only time I don't do this is sometimes when someone asks for concrit and I feel obliged to offer it, because sometimes in those cases, I don't like it--but very rarely.
Which brings me to my next list.
I leave concrit for some combination of the following:
1. when I like the fic(s) in question
2. when I like the author in question, not just as an author, but as a person.
3. when someone is explicitly asking for it outside of their story; i.e., it's usually not a line in the A/N that says "concrit would be nice."
Usually, all three are required for me to leave crit. Sometimes, as in the case ofpeasant_'s awesome concritathon, I'm in a position where I feel obliged to offer crit whether I like the fic or the author or not, but that rarely happens. Which brings me to why only those things will inspire me to leave concrit.
As regards #1, I don't want to expend effort on something I deem unworthy. Some stories are so bad, I think the only way I could help is if I rewrote them myself. Sorry, I have my own fic to write. Other fics are salvageable, but do I really want to waste my time finding that one pure compliment for you that I believe is absolutely necessary for constructive criticism, and do I really want to expend my efforts wallowing in the quagmires of your atrocious writing long enough to figure out how it can somehow be saved? Nah, not me; I don't take martyrdom that far. Lastly, some fics have such a potential to be good, and just aren't, that it makes your fingers itch to go save them. But I figure, why waste time on them, when there are stories that I like, that have their own sets of problems? So, I only crit fics I like.
I only crit fics for people I like for several reasons, one of which is the same as above. Why should I waste my time on you if I don't like you? Why should I waste my time on you if I don't know you? (That said, a good relationship can start out with mutual critique. More often than not, though, that kind of relationship does not begin with a chunk of con crit. It begins with "Do you have a beta? If you don't, can I beta for you?"--and beta'ing is another ball game from con critting, imo, because all the things I'm talking about--liking the person, and the author wanting crit--should all be a given for everyone in a beta relationship.)
The other thing about knowing the people I con crit for is that if I know them, I'm more likely to trust them when they say "I want con crit," and I'm also more willing to trust the implication of that, which is always, to me: "I want to be a better writer." And that's also a reason behind #3: lots of people say they want con crits in their author's notes. Most people don't mean it, or if they mean it, they're not really going to use it. Even when people explicitly ask for con crit outside of their stories, they seem to rarely mean it. Take a look at that anon crit meme. I saw authors of every shape and type shutting down, tuning out, and getting defensive at critiques of their works, and I saw just as many saying "Yeah, I know I do that; too bad isn't it, but it's the way I write and I'm not going to change or think about changing" (except not in so many words).
Speaking of that anon crit meme, there's a whole 'nother side to this "trust" aspect between me and writers I like, or better yet, writers who like each other mutually. Just as I'm more likely to trust someone I know when they ask for crit, and trust that they'll take it and try to use it, those I offer it to are more likely to trust me in turn if they know me, and especially if they like me. If they've read my writing and appreciate it, my crit will mean more to them. If they know me as a person, they know I'm not offering crit to get them down or insult their writing, but out of a true desire to help. And if they know all that, maybe they'll be more likely to consider what I say and try to change their writing for the better.
Because my con crit involves one more thing besides the compliments and the examples and the explanations and the disclaimers, and that's payback.
Payback is discussion, and sometimes change. Payback can be the author agreeing with me, perhaps explaining why she has that problem or collaborating with me in how she's going to fix it, and actively working later on to fix the problem. Or, payback can involve the author disagreeing with my crit and defending herself, which can lead to me a. seeing her point and adjusting what I think her approach should be (the original crit always holds, because again, I don't offer it if I don't think I have a point. There just might be a different way of addressing the problem, depending on what the writer reveals her intention to be.), which also should eventually lead to actively fixing the problem, b. defending my crit until the author sees the error of her ways, and goes on to, again, actively fix the problem, c. agreeing to disagree, something I'm perfectly fine with, as long as I got some good discussion about writing out of it.
Payback is not the author saying, " My fic is perfect, bitch, how dare you say any different." That shuts down discussion, because I refuse to dignify things like that with responses, and it actively fights change. Payback is not the author saying, "Yeah, you're right, but I'm not changing," to which I react in much the same way. Payback is also not the author simply saying, "Yeah, okay, thanks," and that's it. Although the writer doesn't explicitly state there: "I'm not changing", the lack of interaction there suggest to me that the person is not interested. It might be a presumptuous conclusion, but if you're not going to discuss it at least a little with me, you're not giving me what I feel I deserve for my time and efforts, why should I waste my time with you?
Con crit absofuckinlutely means to me discussion. It means talking about writing, which is one of my favorite things to do in the world. It means talking about fic I like, again, favorite thing. It means talking to people I like, which most people aside from like the Unabomber think is fun. Sometimes it means discovering things I hadn't thought of before. Sometimes it involves discoveries about writing and canon and the price of eggs in China.
In conclusion, I rarely offer con crit, and it's not because I'm nice. I don't offer con crit to people who don't want it, and it's not because I'm worried I'll hurt anyone's ickle feelings, or discourage new writers, or step on someone's toes. I make sure my con crit includes compliments and disclaimers and things that make the author feel good, but it's not because I'm so fucking polite or kind or sensitive to others.
It's because I'm selfish. It's because I don't do something for nothing; it's because I want to get something out of con crit. I want to read fics I like, and if I see problems in them, I want those problems to be gone. Offering sincere compliments about things I truly liked about the piece does soothe my instinct to be nice. But it's also a way of getting an author in a frame of mind to accept my crit, because no matter how gently anyone points out errors and how generously they suggest ways for it to be fixed, crit's not constructive to a lot of people unless it offers one little thing that'll gratify the author's vanity, thus putting them in a frame of mind to listen, rather than see red or feel bad.
And it's because I'm arrogant. I'm only going to spend effort on you if I think you'll give me the attention and consideration and appreciation I feel I deserve.
My time, my effort, my work are things I deem valuable, and I refuse to waste them. The other thing that's valuable to me is my opinion; I rarely offer it unless I think it has merit. If you're going to spit on that opinion, if you're going to ignore or denegrate something I think is worthwhile, something that's important to me, why the fuck should I bother giving it to you?
I've seen some wonderful comments, posts, and essays about our responsibility to offer con crit. I've also seen some great rants and agitation about how we should be able to offer con crit, and about how there's lots of bad fic out there that needs to be critiqued. I find both of those points reasonable, interesting, and excellent, really, but after stewing on it for a while, I decided I didn't feel the same.
I'm happy with the way of things. I'm happy that I like and am proud of what I write. I'm happy there's fic I think's worse than mine, because it makes me feel better about myself. I'm happy that the really bad fic provides hours of endless entertainment and kind of morbidly fascinates me, in a way. I'm happy I'm too much of a lazy, self-absorbed and pompous bitch to be bothered by what's happening with those who I don't think write well; I'm happy other people think people-I-don't-think-write-well do write well, or else my goddamn bleeding heart would have to feel sorry for the badfic writers and would feel some obligation to help them; I'm happy I don't have to read them, see them, or think about them if I don't want to, much less offer swine the pearls of my con crit--yes, pearls, it's a gift, told you I'm a pompous ass, and you didn't believe me, did you. I'm happy I don't even have to give fics I don't consider swine-ish at all con crit, just because I'm lazy and selfish like that; I'm happy I don't have to do a damn thing I don't want to or get agitated about a single damn thing that's not my problem.
On that note, this is completely my take on con crit and what it means to me. It's all about me me me, and I'm not telling a single one of you how to think or act or anything like that. In fact, the reason I'm putting it out there is I'd love to hear more opinions of others' in this never-ending, scintillating debate. You're free to offer up your own opinion. You're also free to debate, or try to change my mind. Just because I'm a cocky stuck-up asshole doesn't mean I'll try to force my opinion on you, or be rude to you, or call your mother a hamster. Really.
tkp's journal, because she likes talking about herself in the third person, and also because it's March and she has a fetish about themed months. Later there will be flowers (edelweiss), my usual monthly questions, hopefully fun discussions about writing and how we do it and how we make it better, interspersed with all the B/A bits I wanted to post in February but didn't get around to.For now, I'm going to rant about con crit, that never ending debate, and I'm going to put on my bitch hat and my snooty gloves, and say exactly whatever I damn well please.
First of all, a definition. My concrit:
-gives at least one compliment. The compliment must be wholly positive. No, "I liked your style in the beginning and I wish you'd kept it up towards the end." I might say something like that elsewhere, but I always try to include one bit of pure unadulterated praise, complete with why it worked for me and possibly examples of what I liked about it.
-suggests at least two problems within the fic. Sometimes it's really easy and deals with broad things: "I have a problem with a. your excessive use of adjectives and b. your characterization." Sometimes it means getting down into the nitty gritty: " I have a problem with a. your excessive use of adjectives and b. you missed a period after "orgasm" on page 52, third paragraph."
-provides at least one specific example that supports an initial critical claim. I.e., "You use too many adjectives; look how many you used here, here, and here."
-provides an explanation for why the examples + intial claim = fault. I.e., "Too many adjectives can clutter the modified object, making the description indecisive and hazy rather than producing a sharp and definitive image/feeling/etc."
-if one of the problems is with characterization, almost always discusses specific moments in canon where the character was in a similar situation and made a different decision. Especially in Buffyverse, there is almost always a similar situation. The logistics and circumstances may be different, but almost everything is going to deal with a core issue addressed in canon: love, sex, heroism, abuse, courage, guilt, etc.
-sometimes ventures a solution to the problem, complete with explanations and sometimes examples.
-almost always rounds off (or begins) the initial sally with a disclaimer so that the person on the recieving end knows I'm being picky about their work because I like it. The only time I don't do this is sometimes when someone asks for concrit and I feel obliged to offer it, because sometimes in those cases, I don't like it--but very rarely.
Which brings me to my next list.
I leave concrit for some combination of the following:
1. when I like the fic(s) in question
2. when I like the author in question, not just as an author, but as a person.
3. when someone is explicitly asking for it outside of their story; i.e., it's usually not a line in the A/N that says "concrit would be nice."
Usually, all three are required for me to leave crit. Sometimes, as in the case of
peasant_'s awesome concritathon, I'm in a position where I feel obliged to offer crit whether I like the fic or the author or not, but that rarely happens. Which brings me to why only those things will inspire me to leave concrit.As regards #1, I don't want to expend effort on something I deem unworthy. Some stories are so bad, I think the only way I could help is if I rewrote them myself. Sorry, I have my own fic to write. Other fics are salvageable, but do I really want to waste my time finding that one pure compliment for you that I believe is absolutely necessary for constructive criticism, and do I really want to expend my efforts wallowing in the quagmires of your atrocious writing long enough to figure out how it can somehow be saved? Nah, not me; I don't take martyrdom that far. Lastly, some fics have such a potential to be good, and just aren't, that it makes your fingers itch to go save them. But I figure, why waste time on them, when there are stories that I like, that have their own sets of problems? So, I only crit fics I like.
I only crit fics for people I like for several reasons, one of which is the same as above. Why should I waste my time on you if I don't like you? Why should I waste my time on you if I don't know you? (That said, a good relationship can start out with mutual critique. More often than not, though, that kind of relationship does not begin with a chunk of con crit. It begins with "Do you have a beta? If you don't, can I beta for you?"--and beta'ing is another ball game from con critting, imo, because all the things I'm talking about--liking the person, and the author wanting crit--should all be a given for everyone in a beta relationship.)
The other thing about knowing the people I con crit for is that if I know them, I'm more likely to trust them when they say "I want con crit," and I'm also more willing to trust the implication of that, which is always, to me: "I want to be a better writer." And that's also a reason behind #3: lots of people say they want con crits in their author's notes. Most people don't mean it, or if they mean it, they're not really going to use it. Even when people explicitly ask for con crit outside of their stories, they seem to rarely mean it. Take a look at that anon crit meme. I saw authors of every shape and type shutting down, tuning out, and getting defensive at critiques of their works, and I saw just as many saying "Yeah, I know I do that; too bad isn't it, but it's the way I write and I'm not going to change or think about changing" (except not in so many words).
Speaking of that anon crit meme, there's a whole 'nother side to this "trust" aspect between me and writers I like, or better yet, writers who like each other mutually. Just as I'm more likely to trust someone I know when they ask for crit, and trust that they'll take it and try to use it, those I offer it to are more likely to trust me in turn if they know me, and especially if they like me. If they've read my writing and appreciate it, my crit will mean more to them. If they know me as a person, they know I'm not offering crit to get them down or insult their writing, but out of a true desire to help. And if they know all that, maybe they'll be more likely to consider what I say and try to change their writing for the better.
Because my con crit involves one more thing besides the compliments and the examples and the explanations and the disclaimers, and that's payback.
Payback is discussion, and sometimes change. Payback can be the author agreeing with me, perhaps explaining why she has that problem or collaborating with me in how she's going to fix it, and actively working later on to fix the problem. Or, payback can involve the author disagreeing with my crit and defending herself, which can lead to me a. seeing her point and adjusting what I think her approach should be (the original crit always holds, because again, I don't offer it if I don't think I have a point. There just might be a different way of addressing the problem, depending on what the writer reveals her intention to be.), which also should eventually lead to actively fixing the problem, b. defending my crit until the author sees the error of her ways, and goes on to, again, actively fix the problem, c. agreeing to disagree, something I'm perfectly fine with, as long as I got some good discussion about writing out of it.
Payback is not the author saying, " My fic is perfect, bitch, how dare you say any different." That shuts down discussion, because I refuse to dignify things like that with responses, and it actively fights change. Payback is not the author saying, "Yeah, you're right, but I'm not changing," to which I react in much the same way. Payback is also not the author simply saying, "Yeah, okay, thanks," and that's it. Although the writer doesn't explicitly state there: "I'm not changing", the lack of interaction there suggest to me that the person is not interested. It might be a presumptuous conclusion, but if you're not going to discuss it at least a little with me, you're not giving me what I feel I deserve for my time and efforts, why should I waste my time with you?
Con crit absofuckinlutely means to me discussion. It means talking about writing, which is one of my favorite things to do in the world. It means talking about fic I like, again, favorite thing. It means talking to people I like, which most people aside from like the Unabomber think is fun. Sometimes it means discovering things I hadn't thought of before. Sometimes it involves discoveries about writing and canon and the price of eggs in China.
In conclusion, I rarely offer con crit, and it's not because I'm nice. I don't offer con crit to people who don't want it, and it's not because I'm worried I'll hurt anyone's ickle feelings, or discourage new writers, or step on someone's toes. I make sure my con crit includes compliments and disclaimers and things that make the author feel good, but it's not because I'm so fucking polite or kind or sensitive to others.
It's because I'm selfish. It's because I don't do something for nothing; it's because I want to get something out of con crit. I want to read fics I like, and if I see problems in them, I want those problems to be gone. Offering sincere compliments about things I truly liked about the piece does soothe my instinct to be nice. But it's also a way of getting an author in a frame of mind to accept my crit, because no matter how gently anyone points out errors and how generously they suggest ways for it to be fixed, crit's not constructive to a lot of people unless it offers one little thing that'll gratify the author's vanity, thus putting them in a frame of mind to listen, rather than see red or feel bad.
And it's because I'm arrogant. I'm only going to spend effort on you if I think you'll give me the attention and consideration and appreciation I feel I deserve.
My time, my effort, my work are things I deem valuable, and I refuse to waste them. The other thing that's valuable to me is my opinion; I rarely offer it unless I think it has merit. If you're going to spit on that opinion, if you're going to ignore or denegrate something I think is worthwhile, something that's important to me, why the fuck should I bother giving it to you?
I've seen some wonderful comments, posts, and essays about our responsibility to offer con crit. I've also seen some great rants and agitation about how we should be able to offer con crit, and about how there's lots of bad fic out there that needs to be critiqued. I find both of those points reasonable, interesting, and excellent, really, but after stewing on it for a while, I decided I didn't feel the same.
I'm happy with the way of things. I'm happy that I like and am proud of what I write. I'm happy there's fic I think's worse than mine, because it makes me feel better about myself. I'm happy that the really bad fic provides hours of endless entertainment and kind of morbidly fascinates me, in a way. I'm happy I'm too much of a lazy, self-absorbed and pompous bitch to be bothered by what's happening with those who I don't think write well; I'm happy other people think people-I-don't-think-write-well do write well, or else my goddamn bleeding heart would have to feel sorry for the badfic writers and would feel some obligation to help them; I'm happy I don't have to read them, see them, or think about them if I don't want to, much less offer swine the pearls of my con crit--yes, pearls, it's a gift, told you I'm a pompous ass, and you didn't believe me, did you. I'm happy I don't even have to give fics I don't consider swine-ish at all con crit, just because I'm lazy and selfish like that; I'm happy I don't have to do a damn thing I don't want to or get agitated about a single damn thing that's not my problem.
On that note, this is completely my take on con crit and what it means to me. It's all about me me me, and I'm not telling a single one of you how to think or act or anything like that. In fact, the reason I'm putting it out there is I'd love to hear more opinions of others' in this never-ending, scintillating debate. You're free to offer up your own opinion. You're also free to debate, or try to change my mind. Just because I'm a cocky stuck-up asshole doesn't mean I'll try to force my opinion on you, or be rude to you, or call your mother a hamster. Really.
no subject