(Untitled)

[pottersues]

I skipped a story that had a Sue paired with Semus in it because while it had over nine thousand words, it also lacked substance of any kind. And it is a one-shot. That reminds me, don't forget about the contest. :D

Comments

[yemi_hikari]

...cont...

“Once they finally noticed that Mrs. Weasley wasn't going to allow anybody to eat at that time, all of them sighed defeated, and left the kitchen, so Mrs. Weasley could continue with the cooking.” is a bad sentence. Something like “They decided to leave the kitchen so that Mrs. Weasley could continue cooking once they noticed she wasn't going to allow anybody to eat at that time.” Even then there are some better word choice for certain words.

There is also this sentence here. “Lynn giggled and said: "Yeah, of course I will!" should be “Lynn giggled and said, "Yeah, of course I will!" There are many, many other examples where the writing could have been better. So no, contrary to what you say the writing isn't good.

Also, please stop accusing those of us following the blog of being jealous of this writers story. The problems this story has... character bashing, the characters being OoC, blatant self-insertion as well as not paying attention to canon... we avoid these things in our own writing because we know its bad writing. On top of this criticism of ones work is what one gets when they publish something, and posting to the site is indeed publishing.

[yemi_hikari]

All of you are really arrogant and self-centered. You all complain about bashing characters, yet you all back amateur writers. You all are just contradicting each other's words. There's a reason why it's called fanfiction. It should be constructive criticism, not bashing and mean criticism. That's all you all are doing. Hurting writers who have potential to be good. If you Want to help, then, be nice and suggest to be a beta reader to them or suggest new ways to construct their writing. Don't say the writing was "toxic" or "bad". They could be trying their first story or trying the best they can. All of you are just bringing down the writing, and they could easily loose motivation in writing. Is that what you all want?

[yemi_hikari]

I'm hoping that you weren't trying to imply that all fanfic writers are amateur writers, because such a statement is not true. However, I think you had a typo there and you're trying to say that pulling someones writing apart is equivalent to bashing said writer when it is not. I'll repeat the fact bashing the actual writer isn't allowed here.

I'm also quite sure by “mean criticism” you mean any form of criticism that hurts the writers feelings. Truth of the matter any form of constructive criticism that pulls the writing apart has the possibility of hurting the writers feelings. I say this having seen writers get their feelings hurt over simply being told they needed to use spell check and proper end punctuation.

In the long run being told the truth is the exact opposite of being mean. Saying that it is mean is no different then saying a parent is mean for grounding their child when said child gets into a fight at school or doesn't do their chores like they're supposed to, or a teacher failing a student because they didn't turn in any work or giving them an F on an assignment because they didn't follow the instructions.

There is also nothing wrong with telling a writer that the writing is “bad writing” or “awful writing”, particularly when the person backs it up with actual problems that the writing has. If the writer doesn't want people pointing out the fact the writing is “bad” or “awful” then they shouldn't publish the story on the net in the first place. As for why the lowest rating is “toxic”, Pottersues has featured a story in which a journal made from Snape's skin existed. Another paired Hermione with the squid from the lake.

If a person happens to lose the motivation to write, they happen to lose the motivation to write. Question is what was the persons motivation to write the story in the first place? If they actually enjoyed writing in the first place and/or used writing as a form of escape they won't let a critique stop them from writing. If the person loses motivation because they find out its not a game, not everyone will praise the work, and/or that writing good stories is harder then they thought the person doing the criticizing is not to blame.

Also... please stop bringing up the argument “it's called fanfiction for a reason”. This is the third time you've tried to do so and I know you are referring to your inaccurate definition and not the real reason fanfiction is called fanfiction. Which, if you knew the history behind why the term originated as well as where it originated you would understand why saying “it's called fanfiction for a reason” is a bad argument against bad writing and doing anything you want in a fanfic without criticism.

[yemi_hikari]

No, I wasn't implying that all fanfiction writers were amateur writers. I'm not that stupid, thank you very much. There are writers out there who have been writing for more than 5 years who are still writing terribly and still get reviews and praises. What I was trying to say was that amateur writers should get constructive criticism right when they publish their first fanfiction, so they don't continue making the same mistakes. Instead of posting on a website that their writing is bad, you or the publisher of this trashy blog post, should help out the writer.

The motivation that writers have is the motivation to impress other people with the satisfaction of their work. If there are people out there saying really bad things about their writing, they'll lose their motivation because they didn't achieve their goal of impressing people with their work. That's why as I repeat how many freaking times that people should give constructive criticism. That's what I do and people instantly start getting better with plots, chapters, grammar, etc. Therefore, they keep writing and don't lose their motivation.

Also, this is what I found on the Internet about the origin of the word "fanfiction."

"Fan fiction (alternatively referred to as fan-fiction, fanfiction, fanfic, fanon, FF, or simply fic) is a broadly-defined fan labor term for stories about characters or settings written by fans of the original work, rather than by the original creator. Works of fan fiction are rarely commissioned or authorized by the original work's owner, creator, or publisher; also, they are almost never professionally published. Because of this, stories often contain a disclaimer stating that the creator of the work owns none of the characters. Fan fiction, therefore, is defined by being both related to its subject's canonical fictional universe and simultaneously existing outside the canon of that universe.[1] Most fan fiction writers assume that their work is read primarily by other fans, and therefore tend to presume that their readers have knowledge of the canon universe (created by a professional writer) in which their works are based.
Fanfiction is what literature might look like if it were reinvented from scratch after a nuclear apocalypse by a band of brilliant pop-culture junkies trapped in a sealed bunker. They don't do it for money. That's not what it's about. The writers write it and put it up online just for the satisfaction. They're fans, but they're not silent, couchbound consumers of media. The culture talks to them, and they talk back to the culture in its own language."

~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_fiction

Seems like we're both right. So stop arguing about it. You don't know everything.

[pottersues]

Apparently your comment went through a spam filter because you added a link and I just realized it was still under the filter, so I will let Yemi know about your comment. I don't appreciate the fact you're misquoting Wikipedia like that though. It should read...

"Fan fiction, or fanfiction (often abbreviated as fan fic, fanfic, or simply fic), is a broadly defined fan labor term for stories about characters or settings written by fans of the original work, rather than by the original creator. Works of fan fiction are rarely commissioned or authorized by the original work's owner, creator, or publisher; also, they are almost never professionally published. Due to these works' not being published, stories often contain a disclaimer stating that the creator of the work owns none of the original characters. Fan fiction is defined by being both related to its subject's canonical fictional universe and simultaneously existing outside the canon of that universe.[1] Most fan fiction writers assume that their work is read primarily by other fans, and therefore tend to presume that their readers have knowledge of the canon universe (created by a professional writer) in which their works are based."

" 'Fan fiction is what literature might look like if it were reinvented from scratch after a nuclear apocalypse by a band of brilliant pop-culture junkies trapped in a sealed bunker. They don't do it for money. That's not what it's about. The writers write it and put it up online just for the satisfaction. They're fans, but they're not silent, couch-bound consumers of media. The culture talks to them, and they talk back to the culture in its own language.' -Lev Grossman, TIME, July 07, 2011"

[yemi_hikari]

Thank you for letting me know about this. I'll put my comment about the quote they used from Wikipedia here.

Their argument is based around their blatant misinterpretation of the quote from Lev Grossman. They took his quote to mean that fanfiction is simply the reinventing of the original work, when what he said was that what constituted literature would be reinvented because the only way fans could get the next part is to write it themselves.

[yemi_hikari]

Sorry, but arguments don't end because both parties are right. The point of debate is to try and prove ones case to the other, which you are not doing. Debate ends either when one person proves the other wrong or both parties agree to disagree. If you had actually bothered to read the wikipedia article in full you would have found this quote on the same page.

"However, the modern phenomenon of fan fiction as an expression of fandom and fan interaction was popularized and defined via Star Trek fandom and their fanzines published in the 1960s. The first Star Trek fanzine, Spockanalia (1967), contained some fan fiction; many others followed its example.[5]:1 These fanzines were produced via offset printing and mimeography, and mailed to other fans or sold at science fiction conventions for a small fee to help recoup costs. Unlike other aspects of fandom, women dominated fan fiction authoring; 83% of Star Trek fan fiction authors were female by 1970, and 90% by 1973.[6] One scholar states that fan fiction "fill[s] the need of a mostly female audience for fictional narratives that expand the boundary of the official source products offered on the television and movie screen."[7]"

Again... stop bringing up “it's called fanfiction for a reason” when you couldn't even be bothered to read far enough into the wikipedia to know the actual reason.

There is a comment about Kindle Worlds there... but I've put forth the fact Kindle Worlds doesn't call it fanfiction and it in reality is just the new version of tie-ins. It was the fanfiction community that called it fanfiction. (And some of the copyright holders... which are the ones I say writers should avoid writing for.) Yes... tie-in novels are fanfiction, but not all tie-in novels are written by fans and if people are going to recognize fanfiction as only being written by fans then they need to not include tie-ins. And yet they do.

You're also wrong in saying that a writer's motivation is to impress other people with their writing. To imply such is highly insulting. I and many others write for the sake of writing, because an idea is stuck in our heads. When we write this idea, it isn't in mind to impress someone with our work or satisfy some kind of need beyond our own, which pretty much involves getting the idea out as well as possible. On top of this, if we were to impress people we want it to be because we put the hard work in to keep the characters in character, not because I happen to have found the kind of work that gets reviews from people because it feeds their wish fulfillment regardless of quality.

... cont...

[yemi_hikari]

”If there are people out there saying really bad things about their writing, they'll lose their motivation because they didn't achieve their goal of impressing people with their work. That's why as I repeat how many freaking times that people should give constructive criticism. “

(…)

Now your argument here is that it isn't constructive criticism if the “really bad things [said] about their writing” causes them to lose their motivation for writing, but I know from experience that for some writers any negative comment even if it is one spelling error amounts to a “really bad thing” about their writing, and for others like myself the only really bad thing is what we call flames, reviews that cross the line and tell the writer to die or never write again, not to be confused with rewrite the story or try again.

The goal of a writer as I've said is not to impress people with their work and if this is the person's reason behind writing then they are writing for the wrong reasons. Why should people care if a writer loses motivation if they were writing for the wrong reasons? Writing is about writing for the sake of writing. You decided to call us “arrogant and self-centered”, but in reality a writer who only writes to get praise or mostly praise is the one who is being “arrogant and self-centered”.

And... I have the feeling you are the writer. It is possible to find a persons reviews. If you are the writer then I'm going to say that none of your reviews constitute “constructive criticism” despite the fact you say otherwise. There are a lot of “I would prefers”, but no actual pointing out of problems. Which tells me you don't know what “constructive criticism” is, nor do you understand that a writer changing to your preferences is not a writer improving.

Actually... I've dealt with a reviewer in the past who tried passing off their preferences as “constructive criticism” and when I didn't cater to what they want they tried saying such and such a character is OoC... but in reality the way they wanted me to write the character was OoC. They would have considered the change an improvement on my part, but myself and my readers... well, it would have been a step back.

Also... I'm one of the first who will admit that I don't know everything. You're not using information that I don't know though. A lot of your arguments have been ad hominem attacks. When you've actually used information to try and support your arguments you've only proven that you don't know what you're talking about and how very, very limited your research is. I mean... look at the fact the origins of the term was right there in the very article you pointed out.

The “you don't know everything”... it doesn't change the fact I do have information that you don't and it doesn't change the fact you have not once made a solid argument on this entry either. Aka you've done nothing to prove yourself as being "right" by the other party, but by trying to end the argument the way you did... well... I have the idea you know you're struggling to put up a good argument at that point in time.