How the other half lives...

[selenak]

If you're written fanfiction for some time, you're bound to encounter, sooner or later, feedback along the lines of "usually I don't care about character X, but you've made me think about him/her" or "your story really made X work for me". Actually, that's the best version. Sometimes the feedback sounds more like "X is scum/ I've always hated that

Comments

[svilleficrecs]

I feel you. Except most of mine are usually "I never like het, but yours works for me." Which... I don't even know what to say to that.

[selenak]

:) That rather reminds me of "I don't like sci fi, except I loved Farscape, Battlestar Galactica and the new Star Trek movie, but that's totally not sci fi, right?" which I've seen a lot in lj dom....

[nomadicwriter]

My personal bugbear is the, "This is sooo much better than canon X," review, which manages to technically be a huge compliment to my writing while at the same time assuming that I automatically agree that the canon I loved enough to write fic for is an irredeemable crapfest. Since I (a) write a lot of epic AUs and (b) tend to swim against the fandom tide in my character preferences, I seem to get this one quite a lot.

I do wonder if this sort of thing arises from a conflict between different schools of fanfic writers: people who see fic as a way of fixing flaws in canon vs. those who see it as a way of producing more of the things they like about canon. A reader in group A gives what they consider a high compliment - "you wrote this so well that it works better for me than canon" - while the writer from group B hears it as, "you wrote this so badly that I didn't think it matched canon". It feels like the reviewer is saying, "Well, you know, I don't like her when she's in-character, but your OOC version was good." Um... thanks

[astrogirl2]

I do wonder if this sort of thing arises from a conflict between different schools of fanfic writers: people who see fic as a way of fixing flaws in canon vs. those who see it as a way of producing more of the things they like about canon.

I dunno. Maybe that's the case for some people, but I don't think it's the only explanation. I mean, I am very big on canonical consistency and loathe OOCness like burning, but I've had people say things like that to me and felt entirely pleased about it.

I think the way I see it is... Well, canon is canon, sure, but people have very different reactions to and interpretations of canon, and the impression you come away with of a particular character (or relationship or whatever), depends a lot on which aspects of it you focus on and regard as important vs. which ones you pay little attention to or don't regard as central. Do the things you like dominate in your mind, or is it the things that annoy you? If it's the former, you're bound to like the character and either gloss over his faults or

[nomadicwriter]

I don't think we necessarily disagree; I certainly always take the intent of such things as a compliment, I think it's just that the wording can go awry between fans who are coming at things from different places. Really, I suspect the biggest issue is people treating their own opinion as objective fact or automatically assuming it's shared, like in canons where "everyone" agrees that season Y sucked or character Z was annoying or that the entire show is worthless drivel that we only watch for the pretty actors. ("Everyone" being a subset that rarely seems to include me.)

There's a world of difference between, "Huh, I never saw this side of X before you pointed it out," and, "X totally sucked in canon so it's neat that you made up this better version". I think sometimes people are trying to say the former and communicating the latter. Which can raise the hackles if it's a character/pairing/plotline that you're fond of and already accustomed to seeing bashed left, right and centre.

[astrogirl2]

No, probably we don't completely disagree... I've been lucky enough not to really get the "X totally sucked in canon" type of comments, or at least not the ones that carry that "and of course this practically goes without saying because everybody agrees" implication, but I have seen that phenomenon in other contexts, for sure. (Sometimes in ways that really, really make me want to roll my eyes and slap my forehead.)

I do think that things can go awry on both ends, though, either with people meaning to pay a compliment but being thoughtlessly annoying in the process, and also with people reading in criticism that really isn't there. Because, y'know, we're human, and it's probably understandable that fans can be a bit touchy when it comes to beloved characters who do get the character-bashing treatment.

[ETA: I just realized that it might sound here like I'm accusing selenak of being overly touchy or something, which is definitely not the intent. I know I've found myself becoming defensive about a character or show I love in other

[bagheera_san]

I do "I usually don't like this kind of thing, but this" sometimes with manips, because it has to be really good (and manips even better) for me to enjoy. Probably that's bad because some creators think that I'm devaluing all fanart. I'm not, I'm just saying that it isn't my kind of thing, but it might be misinterpreted.

Everyone hates it when commenters bash characters you wrote in a positive or neutral way, but I also hate the reverse - when you write about a character in a negative way and people still respond in a sickly sweet "aww. poor woobie" way. SV fandom is particularly bad when it comes to both these things.

[astrogirl2]

(Sorry, my first reply to this comment was in the wrong place. I moved it.)

I but I also hate the reverse - when you write about a character in a negative way and people still respond in a sickly sweet "aww. poor woobie" way.

Yeah, that can be a bit... weird. Also deeply annoying to me is when you write a character in a dark or a shades-of-gray kind of way that's entirely supportable from canon, and then have someone complain because the character isn't portrayed as perfect and wonderful. I've been accused of character-bashing characters that I personally love deeply, but love deeply in part because they're flawed and a bit dark. It's... bemusing, to say the least.

(And, um, OK, I've just responded one heck of a lot on a post I read only a small part of. I'll stop now. :))

[selenak]

I also hate the reverse - when you write about a character in a negative way and people still respond in a sickly sweet "aww. poor woobie" way. SV fandom is particularly bad when it comes to both these things.

I don't think this has happened to me in its pure form - maybe because I was never into SV? - but I remember being defriended over Five in One (aka the story about five of Spike's victims). Someone questioned Roslin getting Ishay to abort Caprica's baby in Quality of Mercy, but that wasn't phrased in an upset "how dare you slander my Laura" manner, but in a matter of fact "I don't think she would" manner. Which I disagree with, but fair enough. The closest I got to the reaction you describe was to an AtS story about Holtz, by a radical Lindsey fan who used to feedback all my Angel stories with an "but where is the Lindsey in it?" manner, and in that Holtz story, "Unforgivable", went on how Angel and Darla totally deserved what Holtz did because they were mean to Lindsey, and surely Holtz was in heaven, not in hell. Given that

[violaswamp]

I remember being defriended over Five in One (aka the story about five of Spike's victims)

*snorts* Seriously? But we know each of those things happens in canon--that's the whole point of that fic! How very silly of them.

[astrogirl2]

I didn't read the Merlin-related bits of this post, since I'm hoping to watch it at some point in my life and would rather avoid spoilers, so I can't comment on most of this. But, personally, unless it's phrased in a way that is pretty clearly disparaging, I've always taken that particular type of statement as a great compliment. I've also left comments of that nature a few times, meaning them in an entirely complimentary fashion, only to feel a bit distressed, later on, at hearing that many people do find it irritating, to say the least. I've always had a little trouble understanding that reaction, to be honest, but the way you spell it out here, it does make more sense to me. If you read it as character-bashing -- and I imagine there must be times when it is sort of intended that way, although I don't think I've encountered that much -- then it must make you want to grit your teeth and go "grr

I love your thoughts on Merlin

[zahrawithaz]

Re Merlin: HELL TO THE YES

Re: I love your thoughts on Merlin

[selenak]

No apologies necessary! As I said in the post, Gaius I have mixed feelings about myself, and partly wrote about him to figure out his motivations for his questionable decisions, so it was thrilling to find out it had such an effect on you. (Hence my conclusion that a kneejerk protective reaction on my part probably depends on whether or not I originally loved the character in question before ever writing anything.)

Re: Morgana: I'm personally bemused by people who complain about the show writing Morgana inconsistently, because while I have many, many beefs with the way she's written, she's probably the most consistent character on the show, writing-wise.Yes, as the kids today say, this. I, too, wish Morgana had been written differently (my golden standard for "sympathetic character goes darkside - and back!" arc remains Londo Mollari on Babylon 5, and I tend to compare all other attempts with this, especially on the "does this character get to make active choices which in addition to circumstances contribute to his/her downfall,

Re: I love your thoughts on Merlin

[uranus_ge]

*surfs in* Thanks for the rec! =)

This is such an interesting post; I’m so glad I’m reading it <3

she's probably the most consistent character on the show, writing-wise.

I thought that title would’ve gone to Merlin *looks at you quizzically* Granted, they did push the ‘reset’ button on Arthur. He went back to his jerk-y ways (at the beginning of Season 2)… It would seem like Morgana would fare better in the ‘consistency’ department, in comparison.

she personalizes conflicts rather than viewing them as matters of general principle (in contrast to Arthur and Gwen).

How are the two different (Morgana, and Arthur and Gwen)? I’m confused, I don’t see the distinction you’re making between Morgana, and Arthur and Gwen. Here’s me, hoping that you’d shed some light on what you’d said =S

~Eva