lady_karelia (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
lady_karelia) wrote2006-07-16 07:36 pm
lady_karelia) wrote2006-07-16 07:36 pm
Entry tags:
Reviewing stories and sockpuppets
I've written 600 words today, so don't give me glares, okay?
Lately, whenever I've felt the need to procrastinate and couldn't find a story to get sucked into, I took to reading reviews of stories by new authors. And I noticed that those who leave a not so positive review are usually the ones who don't have stories on either Ashwinder or The Petulant Poetess. And I'm not talking about constructive criticism here, either. I mean basically bitch arse highly subjective opinions often written in a rather patronising way. Something like "The subject matter is far too complex for a one-shot, you really need to elaborate on the backstory" or "I really don't like song fics" or "This is way too angsty!" I mean, never mind that I thought the first accusation was utterly ridiculous, the second story stated right at the beginning that the inspiration for the story came from a song, and the third one was in the category of angst. What really gets me is that some people seem to wait for a new author and then they lash out.
I know that one of this kind of reviewers has been known to be the bane of some archive admins. Are they just vindictive? As in "Well if I can't get into the archive, I'll simply foulmouth anyone who can" kind of thing. It's a well enough known fact that fanfic authors and new authors don't have the linguistic freedom that a lot of authors do. We don't get away with omitting a comma just to keep the flow going. We don't get away with spelling 'headmaster' once uncapsed and the next time capsed. With a good beta, we don't even get away with screwing up the timeline of our stories. We are required to fanatically follow the rules of the English language, and I'm not even talking about those archives who beta-read instead of simply admin'ing a story before validating it. It is a generally accepted standard that if your story does not follow the general rules of the English language it won't be validated. And I think that's a good thing. For me at least, it taught me one hell of a lot about writing. Just reading stories on the afore-mentioned archives has improved my vocabulary, writing, grammar, punctuation, you name it. Very often these days, I find that books don't do that any more. Have you read a fiction lately? How many typos, non-sentences, lacking commas, superfluous commas have you found? I do not believe in rules in general. I do believe in communication, though. And in order to be able to communicate, we all need to agree on a form of communication that is universally comprehended. Because otherwise, that communication goes down the route of the panda who eats, shots, and leaves. And that would be a damn shame.
Another related issue that comes to mind is the sockpuppet in archives. I read one author's profile who actually proclaimed that she has a different ID that she uses to review for whatever reason. Now, I can't quite understand it because to me, it would be way too much effort and a waste of time if I have to keep switching my ID according to whether I read or submit, but that's me. And besides, I have no reason to hide my real identity because I'm not a nasty person, I'm merely blunt. But it left me wondering if it's a common trend to have another ID under which one leaves reviews so if one leaves a not so benign review it won't backfire. Or whatever other reason.
Thoughts?
Lately, whenever I've felt the need to procrastinate and couldn't find a story to get sucked into, I took to reading reviews of stories by new authors. And I noticed that those who leave a not so positive review are usually the ones who don't have stories on either Ashwinder or The Petulant Poetess. And I'm not talking about constructive criticism here, either. I mean basically bitch arse highly subjective opinions often written in a rather patronising way. Something like "The subject matter is far too complex for a one-shot, you really need to elaborate on the backstory" or "I really don't like song fics" or "This is way too angsty!" I mean, never mind that I thought the first accusation was utterly ridiculous, the second story stated right at the beginning that the inspiration for the story came from a song, and the third one was in the category of angst. What really gets me is that some people seem to wait for a new author and then they lash out.
I know that one of this kind of reviewers has been known to be the bane of some archive admins. Are they just vindictive? As in "Well if I can't get into the archive, I'll simply foulmouth anyone who can" kind of thing. It's a well enough known fact that fanfic authors and new authors don't have the linguistic freedom that a lot of authors do. We don't get away with omitting a comma just to keep the flow going. We don't get away with spelling 'headmaster' once uncapsed and the next time capsed. With a good beta, we don't even get away with screwing up the timeline of our stories. We are required to fanatically follow the rules of the English language, and I'm not even talking about those archives who beta-read instead of simply admin'ing a story before validating it. It is a generally accepted standard that if your story does not follow the general rules of the English language it won't be validated. And I think that's a good thing. For me at least, it taught me one hell of a lot about writing. Just reading stories on the afore-mentioned archives has improved my vocabulary, writing, grammar, punctuation, you name it. Very often these days, I find that books don't do that any more. Have you read a fiction lately? How many typos, non-sentences, lacking commas, superfluous commas have you found? I do not believe in rules in general. I do believe in communication, though. And in order to be able to communicate, we all need to agree on a form of communication that is universally comprehended. Because otherwise, that communication goes down the route of the panda who eats, shots, and leaves. And that would be a damn shame.
Another related issue that comes to mind is the sockpuppet in archives. I read one author's profile who actually proclaimed that she has a different ID that she uses to review for whatever reason. Now, I can't quite understand it because to me, it would be way too much effort and a waste of time if I have to keep switching my ID according to whether I read or submit, but that's me. And besides, I have no reason to hide my real identity because I'm not a nasty person, I'm merely blunt. But it left me wondering if it's a common trend to have another ID under which one leaves reviews so if one leaves a not so benign review it won't backfire. Or whatever other reason.
Thoughts?
no subject
I've had what I perceived as a seriously rude email from one of the admins originally, but as far as I know, she is no longer active. I find, in general, the archive has improved no end. Not only in terms of quality but also in terms of submission replies in terms of courtesy.
Which is exactly why I get so mad about reading reviews from non-authors (sockpuppets or not - who'd know anyways) who simply bash the writer.
Yah. I totally agree. Which is why I posted my gripe in the first place, LOL. So many brilliant authors have not produced anything in two or three years. If we want to continue reading HG/SS fiction, then it really is in our interest to leave positive reviews for anyone who posts a promising fic.
And no, please don't get off the soapbox! It's valuable, ya know!