Critiquing ideas or the execution of them?

I read Silrana's and Oyster Girl's posts from a recent Hell's Kitchen thread, and wanted to take the topic here to ponder on (as I am only interested in polite discussion).

Is it possible for a writer to benefit from having the very idea he is writing about criticized? I'd say that it depends. "This suxz" variety probably isn't helpful. Well, we do get to know that someone isn't a fan, but that's about it. We all know that most people have a natural aversion for certain genres or themes. I think it is pointless for them to criticize someone for writing what they are not interested in. A sci-fi hater trying to persuade a passionate sci-fi writer to write a pseudo-medieval soft-porn romance novel instead to suit his tastes would not help anyone, himself included.

Another thing is that if the values and worldview of the author and the reader clash too badly it is likely that the reader won't like the story no matter what. If the reader finds the basic premises of a piece reprehensible, there is not much to do to make him like the story better. (A case in point: Life Expectancy by Dean Koontz. I have liked him before but I found this book so morally distasteful that I can't imagine what Koontz could have done to salvage the story in my eyes if that was his goal). Some people hate my favourite theme, redemption - and if their criticism is that there is redemption in my redemption story, it is not very useful for me. I am writing it for people who do not dislike the theme (or like some aspect of my writing so that they can stomach a little redemption as well).

I think it is important to realize that you can't please everyone (and the less mediocre and bland your piece is, the more likely some people are to actively dislike it). I think plot/idea criticism from a person who belongs to your target audience is valuable - they are the people who share your premises, and to whom, in a sense, you are writing to. Hence, frienships and beta reading are extremely valuable, and I think most of the Attic's in-depth criticism has moved underground in that manner.

There is also the distinction between criticizing the internal consistency of a piece, or the whole idea of it. The former is useful, the latter I don't see point of. Because then you are essentially saying that it shouldn't exist - and what would be the point of that? Trying to rid the world of all creations that you think suck seems an excercise in futility. Even those awful deleterius fics have a place in the world. Kids practice writing and act out their fantasies, and others have fun sporking them.

I read Silrana's and Oyster Girl's posts from a recent Hell's Kitchen thread, and wanted to take the topic here to ponder on (as I am only interested in polite discussion).

In a strange sort of way, I can see the other side. If you see certain things as being canon, then story elements that conflict with that canon can 'not ring true'. But throwing a snit-fit over it helps nobody.

Is it possible for a writer to benefit from having the very idea he is writing about criticized? I'd say that it depends. "This suxz" variety probably isn't helpful. Well, we do get to know that someone isn't a fan, but that's about it. We all know that most people have a natural aversion for certain genres or themes. I think it is pointless for them to criticize someone for writing what they are not interested in. A sci-fi hater trying to persuade a passionate sci-fi writer to write a pseudo-medieval soft-porn romance novel instead to suit his tastes would not help anyone, himself included.

Hehehe, I'll agree with you and give that a solid "yes and no". If, for instance, someone wrote a story where Keldorn was a child molester, I'd have to say, "I'm sorry, you have crossed my believability line". That wouldn't mean the person had no right to write it, just that it wouldn't work for me. But 'you suck' or 'this is wrong' doesn't communicate anything helpful.

I like your example. I'm reminded of when I was working on the Valygar romance (which I hope to get back to when AC is finished), I had people beg me to write a Haer'Dalis romance. All I could say was "but... I don't like him".

I think it is important to realize that you can't please everyone (and the less mediocre and bland your piece is, the more likely some people are to actively dislike it). I think plot/idea criticism from a person who belongs to your target audience is valuable - they are the people who share your premises, and to whom, in a sense, you are writing to. Hence, frienships and beta reading are extremely valuable, and I think most of the Attic's in-depth criticism has moved underground in that manner.

Actually, I think you are right. That's why I said in the Kitchen that the story comments are not the only feedback a writer can get.

There is also the distinction between criticizing the internal consistency of a piece, or the whole idea of it. The former is useful, the latter I don't see point of. Because then you are essentially saying that it shouldn't exist - and what would be the point of that? Trying to rid the world of all creations that you think suck seems an excercise in futility. Even those awful deleterius fics have a place in the world. Kids practice writing and act out their fantasies, and others have fun sporking them.

You know, I was thinking earlier today that those who think the Attic isn't on a higher level than most fanfic sites really have it wrong. Weyoun's latest story in the quiz is a perfect illustration.

Deleterius deals with stories in the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings universes. Think about those two for a moment. Think about the wide scope for stories, the broad chronology available, the sheer potential for creativity. But what is mostly found? Exchange students, goth girls who mysteriously fall to Middle Earth, little sisters, super special girls who steal all the guys' hearts... buckets and buckets of utter crap.

Now look at the Baldur's Gate games. They have a fairly fixed chronology and a limited character set. Yet look how much variety and creativity has emerged from a group of computer games. We have each taken a framework and built our own structures, and every one is unique.

I think that constructive critizism regarding the linguistics is always helpful -- ie. gramatical errors, spelling errors, etc. (And yes, I know . . . I can't spell. ) Also, if a reader says "this confuses me," that is a signal to me that something is wrong (unless my intent is to confuse them.)

Another thing is that if the values and worldview of the author and the reader clash too badly it is likely that the reader won't like the story no matter what.

True, but you have to hope that the reader would realize "I don't like this because of my values and worldview. That doesn't mean it's a 'bad' story."

I think plot/idea criticism from a person who belongs to your target audience is valuable - they are the people who share your premises, and to whom, in a sense, you are writing to.

Agreed.

There is also the distinction between criticizing the internal consistency of a piece, or the whole idea of it. The former is useful, the latter I don't see point of.

Criticising internal consistency is always a good thing, I think. If the cup is broken in one paragraph and whole in the next, that is something that as a reader, will jar me from the story. Sometimes it's as simple as the writer re-ordered a paragraph or two, and that slipped through the cracks.

As for critiquing the base idea of it . . . I would say no, that's not really helpful. In critiquing the base of the idea, I agree. . . it is like saying this idea should not exist.

Even those awful deleterius fics have a place in the world. Kids practice writing and act out their fantasies, and others have fun sporking them.

Those have been great sources of amusement. I read them and think: eeeep! I'm not that bad. . . . I hope . . .

I really hope I never post something that bad; I'm sure I've written stuff that horrible, but it stays safe on my computer, never to see the light of day . . .

Just my thoughts.

In a strange sort of way, I can see the other side. If you see certain things as being canon, then story elements that conflict with that canon can 'not ring true'. But throwing a snit-fit over it helps nobody.

Sure. People have differing philosophies about canon and fanfic. But I think everyone should be mature enough to leave other people alone if they want to follow a different philosophy in their writing. Then again, this isn't really a problem to most of the people. Not surprisingly, it all comes down to being polite and considerate.

Hehehe, I'll agree with you and give that a solid "yes and no". If, for instance, someone wrote a story where Keldorn was a child molester, I'd have to say, "I'm sorry, you have crossed my believability line". That wouldn't mean the person had no right to write it, just that it wouldn't work for me. But 'you suck' or 'this is wrong' doesn't communicate anything helpful.

In all likelihood, I would not finish reading that story (unless it was exceptionally well written in some regard) - not that its existence would bother me, but it wouldn't work for me and I'd rather read and possibly comment something more to my liking.

I like your example. I'm reminded of when I was working on the Valygar romance (which I hope to get back to when AC is finished), I had people beg me to write a Haer'Dalis romance. All I could say was "but... I don't like him".

...and since you don't, the romance would likely suck even if you did write it. One has to write what one yearns to write.

You know, I was thinking earlier today that those who think the Attic isn't on a higher level than most fanfic sites really have it wrong. Weyoun's latest story in the quiz is a perfect illustration.

At least the ones I have visited have been pretty awful compared to the Attic. To be fair, the writers seem pretty young in comparison, though.

Deleterius deals with stories in the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings universes. Think about those two for a moment. Think about the wide scope for stories, the broad chronology available, the sheer potential for creativity. But what is mostly found? Exchange students, goth girls who mysteriously fall to Middle Earth, little sisters, super special girls who steal all the guys' hearts... buckets and buckets of utter crap.

It is a vicious cycle - there is so much crap that I for instance don't have the stamina to search for a potential gem in the refuse pile. And that in turn leads to that people who actually are creative would feel discouraged to post their story where no-one could wade through to find it.

I think that constructive critizism regarding the linguistics is always helpful -- ie. gramatical errors, spelling errors, etc. (And yes, I know . . . I can't spell. ) Also, if a reader says "this confuses me," that is a signal to me that something is wrong (unless my intent is to confuse them.)

I think that goes without saying. (Though I have heard that some people may throw a hissing fit over pointing out a grammatic error.) While linguistic issues are still issues of taste to an extent, they are that considerably less so than issues of morals, characterization, themes and plot.

True, but you have to hope that the reader would realize "I don't like this because of my values and worldview. That doesn't mean it's a 'bad' story."

That takes both good writing and a mature reader - and my point was that the reader won't probably enjoy reading the story no matter what, and will likely find writing a fair critique hard. Sometimes the worldview can be so alien to the reader that she can't tell the difference between bad writing and simply a mindset she can't comprehend. To use a silly example, I don't think I could succesfully critique a literary piece by Jack Chick even if he was exceptionally talented

Criticising internal consistency is always a good thing, I think. If the cup is broken in one paragraph and whole in the next, that is something that as a reader, will jar me from the story. Sometimes it's as simple as the writer re-ordered a paragraph or two, and that slipped through the cracks.

Or in case of characterization, if a person is described as very suspicious and fearful of betrayal, and in the next chapter he invites a total stranger in his house and goes to sleep, I'd comment on that.

Those have been great sources of amusement. I read them and think: eeeep! I'm not that bad. . . . I hope . . .

Nope

In a strange sort of way, I can see the other side. If you see certain things as being canon, then story elements that conflict with that canon can 'not ring true'. But throwing a snit-fit over it helps nobody.

Sure. People have differing philosophies about canon and fanfic. But I think everyone should be mature enough to leave other people alone if they want to follow a different philosophy in their writing. Then again, this isn't really a problem to most of the people. Not surprisingly, it all comes down to being polite and considerate.

Not much to add there.

Pretty much everyone knows I come down on the canon side of that divide. I'm more reasonable about it than some; I don't expect everyone to have memorized every detail of all the Realms publications, novels included. I don't have everything memorized. But getting a major point of history or culture wrong when the information is freely available for the effort of a Google search will bounce me out of a story. I once compared such a faux pas to an historical novel that claimed Belisarius was a Gaul.

But you don't have to tell me twice that you don't intend to stick to canon.

You know, I was thinking earlier today that those who think the Attic isn't on a higher level than most fanfic sites really have it wrong. Weyoun's latest story in the quiz is a perfect illustration.

At least the ones I have visited have been pretty awful compared to the Attic. To be fair, the writers seem pretty young in comparison, though.

Darkrose used to say the same thing when she was still fairly new to fandom. Then she became more active in HP fandom, and she learned that an awful lot of those "young" stories were being posted by 30-somethings and up.

Deleterius deals with stories in the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings universes. Think about those two for a moment. Think about the wide scope for stories, the broad chronology available, the sheer potential for creativity. But what is mostly found? Exchange students, goth girls who mysteriously fall to Middle Earth, little sisters, super special girls who steal all the guys' hearts... buckets and buckets of utter crap.

It is a vicious cycle - there is so much crap that I for instance don't have the stamina to search for a potential gem in the refuse pile. And that in turn leads to that people who actually are creative would feel discouraged to post their story where no-one could wade through to find it.

Which then leads, eventually, to small boards like this one. They're out there for almost any fandom you could name. You just have to make contact with the right people to lead you there.

I read Silrana's and Oyster Girl's posts from a recent Hell's Kitchen thread, and wanted to take the topic here to ponder on (as I am only interested in polite discussion).

Is it possible for a writer to benefit from having the very idea he is writing about criticized? I'd say that it depends. "This suxz" variety probably isn't helpful. Well, we do get to know that someone isn't a fan, but that's about it. We all know that most people have a natural aversion for certain genres or themes. I think it is pointless for them to criticize someone for writing what they are not interested in. A sci-fi hater trying to persuade a passionate sci-fi writer to write a pseudo-medieval soft-porn romance novel instead to suit his tastes would not help anyone, himself included.

I would think that criticism would be less helpful than having an idea challenged. I agree that saying a hated it is not much of a criticism more telling is (using the example provided by Silrana) “I didn’t like your story because I just don’t believe that Keldorn would sexually molest a child” if someone were to write such a story they would have to work VERY hard to get me to buy the idea behind it.

Another thing is that if the values and worldview of the author and the reader clash too badly it is likely that the reader won't like the story no matter what. If the reader finds the basic premises of a piece reprehensible, there is not much to do to make him like the story better.

I am not so sure about this. a good piece of fiction is a good piece of fiction. There are many pieces that and books that I have ethical problems with but if the story is good and the author can convince me that the idea is workable and that it is worth my while to keep reading I will even if it clashes with my values. The movie Pulp Fiction springs immediately to mind. The plot and the characters rubbed my worldview and sense of right and wrong the wrong way but I just had to keep watching Pulp Fiction despite the disturbing things I saw and felt personally while watching it. I bought the concept and the story despite my personal discomfort.

I think it is important to realize that you can't please everyone (and the less mediocre and bland your piece is, the more likely some people are to actively dislike it).

sad but true

Hmmm, I think that, if well placed, some criticism on the idea, or the image of certain things might actually be of use. It depends on the writer. On one hand, we write our own story, on the other hand, we also write for an audience. If I learn that my view of a character is completely incompatible with that of the BG-fandom in general, something I can only learn by feedback of the 'I can't recognize XXX really in your fanfic and it disturbs me' or I do something else that turns people away from my story, I might consider adapting it. (It depends of course if it's a 'side line' or the 'main point'. If your story is all ABOUT Keldorn being a child molester, you obviously won't change that.)

Example: Laufey's Coran. If I had been around at the stage where he entered, I might have told Laufey that I didn't enjoy the pieces where he was in, because, TO ME, he seemed such an evil, racistic caricature of the character I knew. Now, I don't know how Laufey writes, but if I had been her, and I'd get a LOT of 'This Coran bothers me' reactions, I might have decided to drop his later appearances. (Of course, perhaps Laufey really WANTED to write them, I can't read her mind.)

So, while variety is good, and everyone sees a character different, when your character or idea is THAT different, or different in such a way, that you're estranging your audience, you need to know. So, if at anytime anyone thnks 'wow, this part of AB really bothers me', do tell. Theodur once did about Talek's declarations of hatred regarding Jaheira, and I took them into account. (not to say I'll always FOLLOW such things to the letter, but I'll take them into account.)

I would think that criticism would be less helpful than having an idea challenged. I agree that saying a hated it is not much of a criticism more telling is (using the example provided by Silrana) “I didn’t like your story because I just don’t believe that Keldorn would sexually molest a child” if someone were to write such a story they would have to work VERY hard to get me to buy the idea behind it.

I think you would have to be more specific than that in order to be useful for the writer. It is always possible that he just sees the character so differently than you do that he is not going to convince you of it no matter what. I would say that in my case it would be quite likely.

]I am not so sure about this. a good piece of fiction is a good piece of fiction. There are many pieces that and books that I have ethical problems with but if the story is good and the author can convince me that the idea is workable and that it is worth my while to keep reading I will even if it clashes with my values. The movie Pulp Fiction springs immediately to mind. The plot and the characters rubbed my worldview and sense of right and wrong the wrong way but I just had to keep watching Pulp Fiction despite the disturbing things I saw and felt personally while watching it. I bought the concept and the story despite my personal discomfort.

Hm, I think Pulp Fiction is an amoral piece - it's not as if the characters are presented as doing the right thing. Some may resent the way violence is shown as humorous and casual, and how violent people are given humanity in it.

It is possible to enjoy a work one finds morally disturbing, to a point, I think. But critiquing it properly is harder, proportionally so to the amount of moral indignation.

If I learn that my view of a character is completely incompatible with that of the BG-fandom in general, something I can only learn by feedback of the 'I can't recognize XXX really in your fanfic and it disturbs me' or I do something else that turns people away from my story, I might consider adapting it. (It depends of course if it's a 'side line' or the 'main point'. If your story is all ABOUT Keldorn being a child molester, you obviously won't change that.)

Both very true.

Example: Laufey's Coran. If I had been around at the stage where he entered, I might have told Laufey that I didn't enjoy the pieces where he was in, because, TO ME, he seemed such an evil, racistic caricature of the character I knew. Now, I don't know how Laufey writes, but if I had been her, and I'd get a LOT of 'This Coran bothers me' reactions, I might have decided to drop his later appearances. (Of course, perhaps Laufey really WANTED to write them, I can't read her mind.)

For me it would be rather that if I didn't get any 'yeah, that's just how Coran is' and neutral reactions in addition to the ones like yours, I'd consider changing the story. There is always going to be diversity about character development (and in case of fac fiction, characterization), and it would be very arrogant of a critic to assume that his opinion is the definitive yardstick of right and wrong approach.

So, while variety is good, and everyone sees a character different, when your character or idea is THAT different, or different in such a way, that you're estranging your audience, you need to know. So, if at anytime anyone thnks 'wow, this part of AB really bothers me', do tell. Theodur once did about Talek's declarations of hatred regarding Jaheira, and I took them into account. (not to say I'll always FOLLOW such things to the letter, but I'll take them into account.)

You are acting like a mature writer does. Listen, consider that there might be a point, and make your decision.

Hmmm, I think that, if well placed, some criticism on the idea, or the image of certain things might actually be of use. It depends on the writer. On one hand, we write our own story, on the other hand, we also write for an audience. If I learn that my view of a character is completely incompatible with that of the BG-fandom in general, something I can only learn by feedback of the 'I can't recognize XXX really in your fanfic and it disturbs me' or I do something else that turns people away from my story, I might consider adapting it. (It depends of course if it's a 'side line' or the 'main point'. If your story is all ABOUT Keldorn being a child molester, you obviously won't change that.)

You're still phrasing it wthout accusing the writer, so I don't believe most people would get upset. You might get some spillover resentment if there's been a particularly vicious exchange with someone else about it, but that's just human nature.

You learn pretty quickly who can't handle it. And there's no point in continuing to pick at someone once they've made it clear either that they'll never understand why you feel that way or that they're doing it consciously to explore some other idea. No one has the right to tell them they can't exlore that idea.

So, while variety is good, and everyone sees a character different, when your character or idea is THAT different, or different in such a way, that you're estranging your audience, you need to know.

Sure. The secret, as always, is respect for the other person. And your posting history has a lot to do with whether you're perceived as being respectful.

From what I’ve seen during my time in fanfiction, the whole concept of constructive criticism is a difficult one. Some people can accept more serious criticism, but some need a much gentler approach and I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing, though I know some people who do.

[quote]
Is it possible for a writer to benefit from having the very idea he is writing about criticized? I'd say that it depends. "This suxz" variety probably isn't helpful. Well, we do get to know that someone isn't a fan, but that's about it. We all know that most people have a natural aversion for certain genres or themes. I think it is pointless for them to criticize someone for writing what they are not interested in. A sci-fi hater trying to persuade a passionate sci-fi writer to write a pseudo-medieval soft-porn romance novel instead to suit his tastes would not help anyone, himself included.
[quote]

I agree with you here. If someone asks for my advice on a story idea and there are obvious flaws in it, I have no problem pointing them out. But I would never criticise someone for having an idea that I just didn’t personally like.

For example, one particular thing I really, really hate in stories is male pregnancy. It’s very common in some fandoms, but I have never understood it and the whole concept just makes no sense to me. I’ve read a couple of stories involving it, but I just can’t get my head around the whole thing. Does that mean I feel that people shouldn’t write such stories? No. Does that mean I constantly harass people for daring to write something that I don’t agree with? No. I just avoid stories that contain that particular element – I don’t read them and I don’t comment. I don’t think that such stories are ‘bad’, I just know that they aren’t going to be to my taste. It’s as simple as that really.

[quote name="Rand Al'Tor"]Hmmm, I think that, if well placed, some criticism on the idea, or the image of certain things might actually be of use. It depends on the writer. On one hand, we write our own story, on the other hand, we also write for an audience. If I learn that my view of a character is completely incompatible with that of the BG-fandom in general, something I can only learn by feedback of the 'I can't recognize XXX really in your fanfic and it disturbs me' or I do something else that turns people away from my story, I might consider adapting it. (It depends of course if it's a 'side line' or the 'main point'. If your story is all ABOUT Keldorn being a child molester, you obviously won't change that.)
[/quote]

Heh, personally I write for myself and post my writing only because I know that there are people who enjoy my stories. I remember when I posted the first part of my Kane and Edwin story here and I was worried about how it would be received, since I’d never written a slash fic for the BG fandom before. Obviously some people liked it and that’s why I still post it here, but even if a lot of people had disagreed with the concept, it wouldn’t have stopped me writing it. I would have still written it exactly the way I wanted and just put it up elsewhere.

[quote]
So, while variety is good, and everyone sees a character different, when your character or idea is THAT different, or different in such a way, that you're estranging your audience, you need to know. So, if at anytime anyone thinks 'wow, this part of AB really bothers me', do tell. Theodur once did about Talek's declarations of hatred regarding Jaheira, and I took them into account. (not to say I'll always FOLLOW such things to the letter, but I'll take them into account.)[/quote]

*nods* Personally, I don’t mind constructive criticism, whether it’s about the grammar, pointing out inconsistencies or telling me that something doesn’t make sense. And with regard to plot and characterisation…if anyone wants to criticise the way I do things, they are more than welcome to and I might possibly take their comments into account. But generally I do things my own way, how I want to do them and I always have. So comments along the lines of ‘but things didn’t happen this way in the game’ or ‘but Aerie/Jaheira/Jan/Edwin etc doesn’t really act like this – you’re doing things all wrong!’ or one of my personal favourites ‘You made Edwin gay! That’s just so wrong!’ (Yes, I did actually get that one once) won’t stop me from writing exactly what I want to write.

For me it would be rather that if I didn't get any 'yeah, that's just how Coran is' and neutral reactions in addition to the ones like yours, I'd consider changing the story. There is always going to be diversity about character development (and in case of fac fiction, characterization), and it would be very arrogant of a critic to assume that his opinion is the definitive yardstick of right and wrong approach.

Yeah. The comment wouldn't be 'this isn't Coran' but 'this is not how I see Coran and it hinders my enjoyment of your story'. it wouldn't be a matter of 'right or wrong', it'd be a matter of 'are people enjoying the story I'm writing?' In the case of Coran, I know there are many who DO seem him like that, and enjoy the story of him getting his 'just desserts'. I can only speak for myself as a reader. But I know that as a writer, I care about what my readers think (that is NOT how it HAS to be BTW, just how it is for me.)

This is not to say that I think dicussions about 'canonism' of characters ad events are all useless, and 'each interpretation is equally true' (note that I say true, not right... there's no rule saying you HAVE to be true.)

Heh, personally I write for myself and post my writing only because I know that there are people who enjoy my stories. I remember when I posted the first part of my Kane and Edwin story here and I was worried about how it would be received, since I’d never written a slash fic for the BG fandom before. Obviously some people liked it and that’s why I still post it here, but even if a lot of people had disagreed with the concept, it wouldn’t have stopped me writing it. I would have still written it exactly the way I wanted and just put it up elsewhere.

Obviously, the Slash is a rather central part. Take away the Kane/Edwin and you've torn out the heart of the fic. But if, for example, you'd get a huge negative feedback on one fo Kane's actions, as in people couldn't enjoy the fic because Kane just crossed certain lines. Wouldn't you make slight adaptions 'for your audience'?

I would think that criticism would be less helpful than having an idea challenged. I agree that saying a hated it is not much of a criticism more telling is (using the example provided by Silrana) “I didn’t like your story because I just don’t believe that Keldorn would sexually molest a child” if someone were to write such a story they would have to work VERY hard to get me to buy the idea behind it.

I think you would have to be more specific than that in order to be useful for the writer. It is always possible that he just sees the character so differently than you do that he is not going to convince you of it no matter what. I would say that in my case it would be quite likely.

But sometimes it's reassuring to the writer that people aren't avoiding the work because of a personal dislike of the author. So, it's worth saying, once, that "this part of the story is why I don't want to read it."

Heh, personally I write for myself and post my writing only because I know that there are people who enjoy my stories. I remember when I posted the first part of my Kane and Edwin story here and I was worried about how it would be received, since I’d never written a slash fic for the BG fandom before. Obviously some people liked it and that’s why I still post it here, but even if a lot of people had disagreed with the concept, it wouldn’t have stopped me writing it. I would have still written it exactly the way I wanted and just put it up elsewhere.

Obviously, the Slash is a rather central part. Take away the Kane/Edwin and you've torn out the heart of the fic. But if, for example, you'd get a huge negative feedback on one fo Kane's actions, as in people couldn't enjoy the fic because Kane just crossed certain lines. Wouldn't you make slight adaptions 'for your audience'?

Possibly...though it is quite difficult to say. It would generally depend on various factors: what sort of actions we were talking about, whether it was an in-character way for Kane to behave and how relevant such a thing was to the main plot.

Example 1: Kane brutually slaughters a whole village of innocent people for no reason than one of them has said something to annoy him. I get quite a bit of negative feedback for it. So I might think about it and decide that, yes it is a bit extreme and not really relevant to the plot, so I perhaps adapt it a little or tone it a bit.

Example 2: Kane, while in the Underdark and half insane from the Bhaaltaint and the loss of his soul, viciously attacks Edwin and hurts him quite badly. I get negative feedback for this, but I decide not to change it because I feel that Kane's actions are a) in character for him given the circumstances and relevant to the main plot. In which case, people can give me as much negative feedback as they like, I'd stand firm and refuse to change it.

Another thing is that if the values and worldview of the author and the reader clash too badly it is likely that the reader won't like the story no matter what. If the reader finds the basic premises of a piece reprehensible, there is not much to do to make him like the story better. (A case in point: Life Expectancy by Dean Koontz. I have liked him before but I found this book so morally distasteful that I can't imagine what Koontz could have done to salvage the story in my eyes if that was his goal). Some people hate my favourite theme, redemption - and if their criticism is that there is redemption in my redemption story, it is not very useful for me. I am writing it for people who do not dislike the theme (or like some aspect of my writing so that they can stomach a little redemption as well).

I wouldn't comment on a story unless I basically liked it, and if I thought the theme had some value. I'm very slow at writing and commenting and I don't have much time for it; why would I spend it on commenting a story I didn't enjoy?

Is it possible for a writer to benefit from having the very idea he is writing about criticized? I'd say that it depends. "This suxz" variety probably isn't helpful. Well, we do get to know that someone isn't a fan, but that's about it. We all know that most people have a natural aversion for certain genres or themes. I think it is pointless for them to criticize someone for writing what they are not interested in. A sci-fi hater trying to persuade a passionate sci-fi writer to write a pseudo-medieval soft-porn romance novel instead to suit his tastes would not help anyone, himself included.

I've been heavily influenced by a book called "Writing without Teachers" I read years ago, by Peter Elbow. Mr. Elbow described the writer a sort of chemist who was trying to get a certain reaction going within the reader's mind. He argued that the main difficulty a writer had was that the readers mind was a sort of black box, which made it difficult for the writer to find out what worked and what didn't. So the best way you could give feedback to the writer was by giving him your own internal responses to what you read, so the author could find out if the writing was having the effect she or he'd intended. His point was that you didn't have to be a great literary critic to give helpful feedback; you just had to give the writer a glimpse of what was going on in your own mind. A consequence was that a negative reaction on your part didn't mean the writing was necesarily bad; and a positive reaction didn't mean it was necesarily good. Your job in giving feedback wasn't to assess whether the writing was good or bad, but to accurately describe your own internal responses.

With that in mind, I think if a reader has trouble with a certain theme or idea, it could be helpful to be upfront about it, so that the writer could take that into account in interpreting their responses. For example, if I just can't stand Valygar no matter how he's written (no-good magic hating barbarian), if I'm upfront about that, at least the author won't worry when their long dialogues involving Valygar never seem to work for me. Maybe there might even be value in getting a feedback from someone who disliked the whole premise of a story. For example, someone who didn't generally like redemption stories might give feedback that would give you a different perspective that was helpful in writing a better redemption story. But of course there'd have to be more to what they said than "I just don't like redemption stories."

--Rick Taylor

Pretty much everyone knows I come down on the canon side of that divide. I'm more reasonable about it than some; I don't expect everyone to have memorized every detail of all the Realms publications, novels included. I don't have everything memorized. But getting a major point of history or culture wrong when the information is freely available for the effort of a Google search will bounce me out of a story. I once compared such a faux pas to an historical novel that claimed Belisarius was a Gaul.

But you don't have to tell me twice that you don't intend to stick to canon.

*nods* My approach is that diverting from the canon should have a point. Doing it just because it is too much work to find out how it is sucks. If I were to write a historical novel, I would strive to write something that *could* have been. I would take the same approach to a Realms piece.

been pretty awful compared to the Attic. To be fair, the writers seem pretty young in comparison, though.

Darkrose used to say the same thing when she was still fairly new to fandom. Then she became more active in HP fandom, and she learned that an awful lot of those "young" stories were being posted by 30-somethings and up.

But... I mean the people who throw hissy fits, write terrible MarySues, have abyssmal grammar, use teenager-queenish expressions... (surely they can't be in my age group, can they...?)

Pretty much everyone knows I come down on the canon side of that divide. I'm more reasonable about it than some; I don't expect everyone to have memorized every detail of all the Realms publications, novels included. I don't have everything memorized. But getting a major point of history or culture wrong when the information is freely available for the effort of a Google search will bounce me out of a story. I once compared such a faux pas to an historical novel that claimed Belisarius was a Gaul.

But you don't have to tell me twice that you don't intend to stick to canon.

*nods* My approach is that diverting from the canon should have a point. Doing it just because it is too much work to find out how it is sucks. If I were to write a historical novel, I would strive to write something that *could* have been. I would take the same approach to a Realms piece.

There have been some disputes that the other person saw as interpretation differences, where I saw them as blatantly wrong. Realms societies portrayed as the more repressed than the Victorian US (which outdid Victorian England by a long shot), forex. Sexual mores don't figure in the canon sources because of the Lorraine era's idiotic content code, but it doesn't take much research to dig up the creators' post-Lorraine comments on the subject.

been pretty awful compared to the Attic. To be fair, the writers seem pretty young in comparison, though.

Darkrose used to say the same thing when she was still fairly new to fandom. Then she became more active in HP fandom, and she learned that an awful lot of those "young" stories were being posted by 30-somethings and up.

But... I mean the people who throw hissy fits, write terrible MarySues, have abyssmal grammar, use teenager-queenish expressions... (surely they can't be in my age group, can they...?)

Heh. Yep. Some of them, at least. They learn the teen queen stuff from their kids.

The difficulty is that it all depends on what people are hoping to get out of writing fan-fiction. Most people I suspect just do it as a hobby and have a bit of fun. They'll be hoping to write well and get better over time, but getting too heavily criticized might just discourage them.

People who are hoping to become published authors one day might write fan-fiction as a way to experiment with ideas/develop a style. If they think they have a really good idea for a novel though, than it's probably not a good idea to post anything about it here. And anyway, ultimately those people will leave fan-fiction to start developing their own characters/settings and start seeking out advice in books and dedicated workshops. While they are here of course, they'll appreciate any tips on grammar/description and consistency within their settings.

If you're hoping to write for TSR, or for any game's company or for television etc. Then it's important to show that you understand characters and settings provided by other people and fan-fiction might be a good a way to learn those skills.

I can't think of any circumstances where saying 'you're a bad writer etc' would be of use to anyone. Like any argument, that needs to be backed up with valid reasons. And if the author considers those reasons and finds that they are valid, then they can work to improve. Like I said though, a lot depends on what you're writing fan-fiction for.

I can't think of any circumstances where saying 'you're a bad writer etc' would be of use to anyone. Like any argument, that needs to be backed up with valid reasons. And if the author considers those reasons and finds that they are valid, then they can work to improve. Like I said though, a lot depends on you're writing fan-fiction for.

I absolutely agree. I really am puzzled how it is possible that we are having such long and tedious arguments here about that how you say things matters a lot in what you are going to achieve. This is a community of writers, and I think that it should be self-evident for us. It usually is even for people who don't fancy themselves verbally gifted.