You learn something new every day.
I have been following The Great Writing Meme with great interest, hoping to glean some more knowledge about my own writing and how I approach the always sticky subject of Concrit (Constructive Criticism). I found the extravaganza rather late so I didn't play because it seems to have petered out, but I read through most of it last night due to a bout of insomnia and learned some very interesting things about myself.
1. I have received very little concrit to my fanfic.
2. This is not because my fanfiction is the best ever written, but I suspect because people are hesitant to give concrit (which I accept but only via private email because I personally believe that is the best way for it to occur) for fear that their often valid critiques will be held against them.
3. When I do receive concrit (again, it has not happened often because, re: #2), I should strive to not cross over the line from explaining my motivations and writing process into defensiveness. Defensiveness is unpleasant and will only result in readers not feeling comfortable in giving me any further feedback at all. I was impressed by how some writers (most of whom I did not know and whose work I am not familiar with and have never read) that participated in The Great Writing Meme responded to the concrit they received. I was less impressed with how some writers responded (again, most of whom I did not know and whose work I am not familiar with but would probably not extend my readership to based on the way they've responded to politely, if sometimes bluntly worded, critiques--and honestly, it is so unnecessary and immature to jump in if you're friends with a writer and/or love that writer's work to shout down critics. Fandom in general needs to learn that people can and should fight their own battles instead of contributing to a disagreement between two parties and exacerbating it into a huge shitstorm of wank. I really dislike that sort of pack-attack mentality--it's so childish, and behavior that we all should have left behind on the elementary school playgrounds.)
4. I apologize to those who have extended me the honor of their readership if I have ever replied to their feedback with defensiveness. I am not immune and I know that while sometimes concrit masks a more unpleasant agenda, most of the time it DOES NOT. Sometimes when I try to tease out and understand concrit by examining my own motivations/writing process which is usually done through explanation to the person offering the concrit, it can come off as defensiveness. It's a fine line and I'm constantly trying to figure out how to tread the line without stepping over it.
5. I hope that people do their part with regards to #4 and realize that a crucial element of concrit is that it should be CONSTRUCTIVE (it's right in there: CONCRIT stands for Constructive Criticism/Critique). This means pointing out what worked, what didn't, offering suggestions for how what didn't can be improved. A tall order, I know, but simply saying 'your writing sucks' is not constructive in any way and when you offer that sort of feedback you cannot disguise it as legitimate concrit--that won't fly because a comment like that is just a blatant insult.
1. I have received very little concrit to my fanfic.
2. This is not because my fanfiction is the best ever written, but I suspect because people are hesitant to give concrit (which I accept but only via private email because I personally believe that is the best way for it to occur) for fear that their often valid critiques will be held against them.
3. When I do receive concrit (again, it has not happened often because, re: #2), I should strive to not cross over the line from explaining my motivations and writing process into defensiveness. Defensiveness is unpleasant and will only result in readers not feeling comfortable in giving me any further feedback at all. I was impressed by how some writers (most of whom I did not know and whose work I am not familiar with and have never read) that participated in The Great Writing Meme responded to the concrit they received. I was less impressed with how some writers responded (again, most of whom I did not know and whose work I am not familiar with but would probably not extend my readership to based on the way they've responded to politely, if sometimes bluntly worded, critiques--and honestly, it is so unnecessary and immature to jump in if you're friends with a writer and/or love that writer's work to shout down critics. Fandom in general needs to learn that people can and should fight their own battles instead of contributing to a disagreement between two parties and exacerbating it into a huge shitstorm of wank. I really dislike that sort of pack-attack mentality--it's so childish, and behavior that we all should have left behind on the elementary school playgrounds.)
4. I apologize to those who have extended me the honor of their readership if I have ever replied to their feedback with defensiveness. I am not immune and I know that while sometimes concrit masks a more unpleasant agenda, most of the time it DOES NOT. Sometimes when I try to tease out and understand concrit by examining my own motivations/writing process which is usually done through explanation to the person offering the concrit, it can come off as defensiveness. It's a fine line and I'm constantly trying to figure out how to tread the line without stepping over it.
5. I hope that people do their part with regards to #4 and realize that a crucial element of concrit is that it should be CONSTRUCTIVE (it's right in there: CONCRIT stands for Constructive Criticism/Critique). This means pointing out what worked, what didn't, offering suggestions for how what didn't can be improved. A tall order, I know, but simply saying 'your writing sucks' is not constructive in any way and when you offer that sort of feedback you cannot disguise it as legitimate concrit--that won't fly because a comment like that is just a blatant insult.