Feedback In The Hole!

[lebateleur]

switchknife had an lj article in which feeback was discussed. It's here. I commented here and received this reply.

I was going to respond to the reply, but before I knew it, I had a full-blown essay of my own on my hands, and one that doesn't deal entirely with the original comment, so my response is going to live here instead.

The commentor wrote: *at the very least* one thing to remark on to do with the story in particular ('I really liked the way you chose to say this here.' 'It was really interesting how you used that theme.' 'Oh, I so get how you chose to characterise [insert character.]' etc.) then why are they bothering and not doing something more productive with their fannish time?

Which got me to thinking: a rose by any other name...

Basically, I'm always happy when anyone takes the time to leave a comment on one of my fics - even if it consists entirely of 'nice read. thnx' because no one's obligated to do so and if they read the fic and don't review, I'm none the wiser. Of course, if someone takes the time to say why they liked the fic, so much the better, and of course concrit and a dissertation on Why Your Fic Works is gold, but here's the kicker:

It strikes me as disingenious to claim that a reviewer is wasting her time if she doesn't mention why she liked one's work. An author who says, 'tell me why you liked it' is essentially saying, 'tell me why I'm amazing and talented and wonderful.' Nothing wrong with that per se - after all, who doesn't want to be told that they're amazing and talented and wonderful - but it's dishonest to say that you aren't satisfied with readers who don't say 'why' because they're wasting their time, when what you're really saying is, I want you to sing my praises.

Still, that little voice in the back of my is head honest enough to admit that I do prefer the dissertations to the 'why it worked's, and that I prefer both of those to the 'wow grate ficcy!'s. This made me realise that while people in switchknife's thread were quick to note that not all authors are the same, no one seems to have mentioned that not all reviewers are the same, in essence that there is not one monolithic, static The Reviewer.

There's an obvious learning curve when it comes to writing fanfic. And although it's just occurred to me, it should have been obvious that there's a learning curve when it comes to writing feedback as well. Just as most of the first time teenage fanfic authors haven't yet learned to skilfully employ plot, pacing, and characterisation, most of the first time teenage fanfic reviewers have likely yet to learn how to skilfully explain why a piece of writing works and how. Remember, this is what they're currently going to school to learn. Could you write a decent book report at the age of twelve? Perhaps, but can't you write even better reports now that you're seventeen, twenty-five, thirtysomething?

I'm willing to bet that there's a significant correlation between 'good' reviews and the age/school history of the reveiwers. I'm also willing to bet that authors write better reviews than non-authors, because there's nothing like trying to write an IC, plausible, engaging piece of fiction to make you appreciate how much effort it takes for anyone to do so.

Personally, I tend to think of anyone who reads/reviews my fics as another me - no longer a teenager, a fellow writer, college graduate - and this is likely not the case. So it seems somewhat unreasonable, if not ungrateful, to expect all of my audience to respond to and review my fics as if they were another me.

Which is just a very longwinded way of saying that I'm still quite happy to receive any feedback whatsoever, including those pesky 'reeks of early adolescence' reviews.

これで以上です。

Comments

[switchknife.livejournal.com]

Oh, wow. This is so wonderfully insightful and I must must MUST link to it. Off to do so now...

[ourmutualfiend.livejournal.com]

I'm coming over here via Switchknife and just wanted to say how much I agreed with your points esp. the idea of a learning curve. I don't think enough people understand how daunting it is to become involved in fandom period. That no matter what your age, no matter what your status (reader/writer/artist), it takes time to comprehend what is considered standard, what is polite and what is tacky. I really wish more of the established types would understand that, rather than deride others attempts to communicate with them.

I'm not in my readers' mind; I don't know if they will continue to think about my fic a month later, or simply forget about it after hitting the post comment button. Like you, I feel that any tangible sign (counter, one-line feedback) that people are reading my fics is heartening. Seeing as few of us are compensated for our creative work, this is payday, so to speak. I don't feel any shame in saying that a simple "I loved it!" or "Great job" makes me feel pretty fucking good.

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Thanks - fandom can be a daunting place, even for veterans. it takes time to comprehend what is considered standard, what is polite and what is tacky. I really wish more of the established types would understand that, rather than deride others attempts to communicate with them.

And the thing is, what is tacky vs. what is polite vs. what is an author's due and a reader's duty varies from fandom to fandom. I've come over from manga/anime fandoms where communication is expected through email and chat, which is very different from HP or SV, which seem to be largely lj and archive-based fandoms.

I don't feel any shame in saying that a simple "I loved it!" or "Great job" makes me feel pretty fucking good.

And the thing about one liners is that they're the perfect size to be consumed during working hours, which puts a smile on my face and relieves the tedium somewhat.

[paxnirvana.livejournal.com]

Bravo. Yeah, it is kind of arrogant to expect your reader/reviewer to be a beta and writing coach all wrapped up in one. I suppose it all comes down to why one writes fanfiction in the first place... to perfect one's writing craft, for 'fame and glory' - or just to keep the noise down inside one's own head? *grin*

A balance of all three is probably better. ^_^;

And hell, sometimes, I just like to know my fic's being read, which the squeeing or barely literate feedback posts do tell me, at least. That's the hard part, sometimes, finding readers... *sighs* But I certainly appreciate it whenever someone takes the time to bring up things that particularly moved them about my work... or annoyed them or nagged at them. Even if they were my choice and preference to write that way, it's very, very interesting to see how others perceive my words.

May I link to this? I think you summed this issue up very well.

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

A balance of all three is probably better. ^_^;

A balance of all three is why I write. Or rather, it's nice to get feedback and know that the noise in my head makes sense to other people, since most of my RL interactions involve ppl who couldn't care less about fanservice and subtext.

it's very, very interesting to see how others perceive my words.
Which is again, why we write this stuff down instead of letting it run through our heads and moving on.

May I link to this? I think you summed this issue up very well.

Feel free - I'd be honoured.

Came here from another link

[iczer6.livejournal.com]

And I just wanted to say 'great rant'.

I do think to many authors expect way too much from feedback.

Yeah, it is kind of arrogant to expect your reader/reviewer to be a beta and writing coach all wrapped up in one.

I agree, I've often been annoyed by the idea that it's the reviewers job to take you by the hand and teach you how to be a better writer.

I mean I think that should be the author's job, and if the reviewers want to, or can help that's great! But it really shouldn't be expected, or demanded of them.

*thunderous applause*

[stormshaman.livejournal.com]

You and paxnirvna are entirely correct. It is extremely arrogant to expect such things of your readers.

When I ask a reader for comments on a story (or ask what s/he liked), I'm not looking for picky-points of grammar and style. I'm not looking for plot holes or continuity errors. That's why I have betas (and my betas are excellent). What I'm looking for is what the readers liked or didn't like. Maybe there's a particular character they like, or there's a sub-plot that they really dug and are curious about, or there's a character that they want to see that isn't there--I like to draw this stuff out of a reader, because it makes him feel like a part of the creative process and I like that.

But then I might just be strange, because I'm mostly a people person.

[saeva.livejournal.com]

Hi. Excuse me. This is your journal and, of course, you have rights to do whatever you like on it and I wouldn't dream of imposing on that. However, I would ask, as the poster/writer/reader that you just greviously misrepresented, that you either quote the entirety of my point, or not at all.

The beginning of the sentence that lebateleur quoted, goes like this: "So, if they don't have at least one "negative" (and I use that term loosely because my idea of positively constructive seems to be everyone else's negative) thing to say, something constructive beyond giving the author a buzz of joy (which is nice, but... yeah, if it meant better feedback I'd totally trade in for a different model,)..."

So, for those you who put the together the entire sentence I was in no way, at all, beyond a doubt of common sense, stating that I want reviewers to sing my praises. I specifically mentioned NEGATIVE commentary (otherwise known as con-crit) BEFORE I mentioned positive commentary (that's what the whole "or, at least" was about) because I prefer the former. I believe the former is more useful and I'd be jazzed as all get out if the former was included in feedback more.

I feel that I've been incredibly misrepresented here and I resent that, because that wasn't what I was saying -- that's *clearly* wasn't what I was saying or else I would not have mentioned negative commentary, let alone before positive commentary.

Now, to get more to the problem at hand, my objection is to Generic Feedback. Generic Feedback, in my opinion, in a plague on creativity, just like Generic Manners are a plague of human consideration. When so many people ask 'How are you?' just because it's "polite" and the thing to do the words lose all meaning. People ask when they don't care. People don't respond honestly and open up a discourse because they know the other person doesn't care. It's sickening and just another way of removing the humanity and factuality from life.

So, I have a problem with Generic Feedback whether it be "It rocked!" or "It sucked!" I don't have a problem with people not singing my praises (I do have friends.) I don't have a problem with people not ripping my stuff apart (I do have betas.) I have a problem with the inconsideration and apathy of generic commentary.

That's my position. But even though you couldn't have known *that* unless you read my comments on the other page of Switchknife's post, I think it's wholly clear that my position is not 'people should sing my praises' just from my reply to you. Thank you.

- Andrea.

[daisy-drabbles.livejournal.com]

As a non-biased bystander in the discussions (for I do not know you or lebateleur), I for one never entertained the thought that this post was a deliberate misrepresentation, or even accidental misrepresentation of the point you were trying to get across in the Switchblade discussion held previously, but rather a tangent on a subject brought about in part by the conversation itself. Indeed, lebataleur stated initially that the reason she posted this here and Not as a reply was because as her thought formulated, it was less a reply to you, but rather a dissertation on a tangent of what was being talked about - hence your quote was only taken for the part that was pertinent to the idea she had come upon. Not a misrepresentation, but the beginnings of an idea to a further understanding of some of the opinions in fandom. Perhaps this would have seemed less an attack, as you seem to be taking it, had you not been quoted at all, but I do not see where in this post her intentions were other then musings on a subject that merely happened to be brought about in the thread referenced.

Personally, I happen to agree with her ideas, mostly because I am one of those people who does not find a lot of time to leave lengthy comments on fics I read, and will often resort to the "I Loved this!" line to at least let the writer know I read it, and enjoyed it. I have an extremely busy schedule, and I often mark fics I would like to read for my free time, which means by the time I'm done usually, I only have a short time left to comment on them. This isn't always the case, and when I do find the time to leave a more responsive review, I will do so as well as I can. There are also times when I simply cannot point out or specify the why and what parts of a fic I enjoyed, or why. Sometimes I merely enjoy the fic as a whole, with no other reason for enjoying it then it was damned good. Or a fic has left me too flabber-minded to formulate coherency in a reply, hence... another short review of praise.

As an Artist by trade, I Live off of feedback, constructive or otherwise. It helps me to hone my skills for the next gallery piece I may be working on. I understand completely the need of the creator to understand the points in the piece that people liked, and why, and what it made them feel. However, I can also understand when someone looks at my artwork and tells me they love it, and upon asking why they love it, they can only shrug and reply "I'm not sure, I just Do." Not everyone is an artist, afterall, and a lot of times the responses are emotional -- which is a horribly confusing thing to try and explain in words. The same holds true for writers and readers. I've found that pure readers are more apt to leave the shorter "generic" responses to prose; and alot of that is because of the emotional response to the piece provoked, the inability to be able to articulate why they enjoyed it. Does this disavow the nature of their comments? Of course not, it is merely that they do not have the ability to express themselves in a more constructive fashion.

I have to say I find it a bit presumptuous to write off "Generic feedback" as a plague of creativity. To do so assumes you already understand the thoughts and motives behind the people who leave such notes, already understand how their lives and minds work. For all you are aware of, the person leaving the comment "This Rocked" could merely be extremely pressed for time. That they left any comment at all should be enough to assure you that they read the story and enjoyed it. (Or in the negative sense, did not enjoy it.) Perhaps it may seem like a waste of time to you, but to people who are writing the comments.. on the positive side, isn't it safe to assume they did so only from an appreciation of you work? And in that, isn't that a Good thing? On the negative side... well. There is always going to be a negative side, and negative generic comments are things better left ignored. (As well for me, personally, negative explained comments. I have no problem with Constructive criticism, but if the only point to a comment, even one well thought out, was to tear down my work bit by bit without offering up a way to improve it... that almost seems worse then the generic version.)

/daisy

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

I specifically mentioned NEGATIVE commentary (otherwise known as con-crit) BEFORE I mentioned positive commentary (that's what the whole "or, at least" was about) because I prefer the former. I believe the former is more useful and I'd be jazzed as all get out if the former was included in feedback more.

So would most authors, I'm willing to bet. However, expecting Jane Reader to be able to walk into fandom off the street, as it were, and know that a) (some, but not all) authors want concrit and b) how to write insightful commentary on a story, is unrealistic. My whole point is that writing (what an author might consider) useful feedback is an acquired skill. And in order for it to be acquired, one must first realise the need for it, and then practise doing it. If people are being shut down during the early stages, they'll never learn how to do it well.

When so many people ask 'How are you?' just because it's "polite" and the thing to do the words lose all meaning. People ask when they don't care. People don't respond honestly and open up a discourse because they know the other person doesn't care. It's sickening and just another way of removing the humanity and factuality from life.

Actually, no. It's called etiquette and its whole purpose is to facilitate human interaction. Try spending a day at work or in public without using it unless you really do care, and see how successful your interactions are. But politeness in social situations and feedbacking fanfic are two different animals. A reviewer gains nothing by leaving you feedback, while a receptionist having a shitty day may indeed gain something by pretending to mean it when he's polite to clients.

(And for the record, as of writing this yesterday, I'd read all five pages of commentary on switchknife's lj.)

[stormshaman.livejournal.com]

This is somewhat out of order. Please bear with me.

However, I would ask, as the poster/writer/reader that you just greviously misrepresented, that you either quote the entirety of my point, or not at all.

How did she misrepresent? By posting a link to her comment and your reply before replying to the part of your statement that she wanted to reply to? Heaven forbid.

Now, to get more to the problem at hand, my objection is to Generic Feedback. Generic Feedback, in my opinion, in a plague on creativity, just like Generic Manners are a plague of human consideration.

I disagree. Most of the feedback that I get is generic--I deal with it by using it as a springboard to draw the feedback-giver into a conversation, much like Generic Manners are generally used as a springboard to draw another person into a conversation (or just to make the other person feel better by giving the impression that s/he's important to somebody).

When so many people ask 'How are you?' just because it's "polite" and the thing to do the words lose all meaning. People ask when they don't care. People don't respond honestly and open up a discourse because they know the other person doesn't care. It's sickening and just another way of removing the humanity and factuality from life.

Clearly you don't interact with people much, if you truly believe that (referring to the part in bold specifically, and the rest of that comment in general). But then, your comments give me the impression that you are a thoroughly unpleasant person, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

So, for those you who put the together the entire sentence I was in no way, at all, beyond a doubt of common sense, stating that I want reviewers to sing my praises.

I didn't get that from your original comment. I didn't get that from the snippet that lebateleur posted. I don't see that anyone else got that either. But I guess we're just not as intelligent as you are.

So, I have a problem with Generic Feedback whether it be "It rocked!" or "It sucked!" I don't have a problem with people not singing my praises (I do have friends.) I don't have a problem with people not ripping my stuff apart (I do have betas.) I have a problem with the inconsideration and apathy of generic commentary.

Have you bothered trying to turn that "generic feedback" into something more to your liking by asking the reviewer why s/he thought it rocked or sucked? I am guessing no, given the hard twist that your underoos have apparently gotten into over one person's comments.

I specifically mentioned NEGATIVE commentary (otherwise known as con-crit)

How is constructive criticism "negative commentary"? Perhaps it's just my age, but I was raised to believe that constructive criticism was just that--constructive (and therefore positive, i.e. good).

Just my 2 cents--and yes, I've read all of your comments.

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting - you've covered a lot of what I was trying to say perhaps more clearly than I did! Incidentally, I was really intrigued by this bit:

I disagree. Most of the feedback that I get is generic--I deal with it by using it as a springboard to draw the feedback-giver into a conversation, much like Generic Manners are generally used as a springboard to draw another person into a conversation (or just to make the other person feel better by giving the impression that s/he's important to somebody).

Which strikes me as an ingenious way to turn 'generic' feedback into something more. I try to thank all the people who review my stories (though my track record isn't perfect), but I hadn't thought to try asking them questions about what they dis/liked and why. switchknife asked readers to leave one liners if they didn't have the time for anything else; I imagine that if a hurried reviewer got an email from the author asking for clarification, she'd probably be happy to provide it when she's free. At the very least the reviewer knows the author is interested in dialogue, should she wish to pursue it.

And BTW: MACGYVER ICON!!!

[stormshaman.livejournal.com]

Well like I said in Switchknife's journal, I get very little feedback as it is (it's the nature of the hockey fandom (which I write in)--everybody has their favorite teams, and they tend to ignore everything that's written about other teams). So every bit that I get is precious to me, and I try to extend it as much as possible whenever possible.

(and here's another RDA ikon for you--I've got a few) :)

Hockey?

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Did you say 'hockey?' As in NHL? Oh, how I do miss hockey. What teams are you into? Japan's sort of the third world of hockey, so I don't really get my fix any more.

And yeay! more MacGyver loving:)

Re: Hockey?

[stormshaman.livejournal.com]

Did you say 'hockey?' As in NHL? Oh, how I do miss hockey. What teams are you into?

Yes, as in NHL (AHL, ECHL, and the other minor leagues too--some folks even write college hockey fics). :D

I'm a passionately-devoted fan of the Carolina Hurricanes, but I also follow the Vancouver Canucks, Nashville Predators, and Tampa Bay Lightning.

(of course, they all take a back seat to the 'Canes, but I still follow them)

Japan's sort of the third world of hockey, so I don't really get my fix any more.

Do you take in any JIHL games at all? Or do you not live near any of the teams?

Re: Hockey?

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Coolness! I like the Canucks as well, and also the Red Wings and the Pens. When I lived in Indiana, I used to see a lot of IU, ND, and UM college games as well.

Do you take in any JIHL games at all? Or do you not live near any of the teams?

Unfortunately no, as I live in the backwaters of this great, urban country. And the recent 'hockey'-based dorama was horrible, to add insult to injury.

::le sigh::

From the Flame-Bunny

[teal-geezus.livejournal.com]

Now, before I say anything here, I want it to be noted that I am not trying to "start anything" here (for some reason, whenever I post like this, it ends up getting wiley-out-of-control and I end up with a lynch mob after me). That being said, I want to know if I was the only one to notice the barrage of links lined in a neat, little row? If lebateleur was honestly trying to "misrepresent", why would she link every and all readers to the original article, comment, and reply in question? That doesn't appear to be somebody who is trying to "doop the masses". Now, unlike daisy_drabbles, I can't say that I'm writing with with complete non-bias opinions, seeing as I've known and loved lebateleur for over a year and a half now. But then again, that gives me incite that none (or most) of you others don't have. I have never known lebateleur to open a window a write a flame (sadly, I can't say the same for me, but that's a whole different story and lynch mob later), and I've never seen her misrepresent. There has never been a person so analytical with fiction as I've seen her be, not just with other's work, but even more so with her own. The only person trying to "misrepresent" here is saeva. No, I don't know her, so I can't claim that this is at all intentional (though does anybody else find it strange that she verbally pulled her entire statement in her most recent post (http://www.livejournal.com/users/saeva/20313.html)?), nor do I plan to make that claim. This post is just to back lebateleur (see? she has "friends" too. ^.^)

[fantasticmuse.livejournal.com]

Very interesting, especially the part about a learning curve- how true! I'm going to link to this, if you don't mind. This discussion has really spawned some interesting essays, hasn't it?

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it has. It looks like reviewing is as divisive issue as characterisation or RPS or some of the other hot button issues, which surprises me.

Feel free to link if you'd like! (Also, can I steal that link to the KV essay on your page?)

[fantasticmuse.livejournal.com]

It does seem surprising, but I can see how it became so built up. The way I see it, feedback is part of the currency of fandom- fic and icons and feedback all contribute valueable things to our "culture" as it is. It'd be really interesting to see a study done of the sub-culture that fandom creates. We all ready practically have our own language, considering the terms and acronyms we use.

Feel free to link that essay- it's wonderful, isn't it?

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it is pretty interesting. What I especially like is when the culture that is fandom fragments into subcultures all its own - ship wars, canon-freaks, MLs and lj comms all competing for participants. Humans are such pack animals.

And yes, the essay was lovely. But I tend to think that about most things KV's written.

[septemberrains.livejournal.com]

I would just like to support what teal_geezus said about lebateleur putting the links at the top of this post, because I clicked on all three before reading the rest of the post. I don't think anyone is trying to misrepresent anyone else and this is too interesting a discussion to let it get bogged down in personal sniping!

Personally, although I can see saeva's point, I tend to agree with lebateleur. I would rather have a dozen 'Nice fic - I liked!' than no reviews at all, because at least that way I know that people have actually read my fic and enjoyed it enough to comment. More detailed reviews are lovely, of course, but I still appreciate the one liners.

When I review a fic I always try to pick at least a couple of things that I thought were really good, but I don't think I've ever given anyone any uninvited criticism, constructive or otherwise. This is a personal thing for me: I don't feel comfortable criticising somebody else's work. My opinion is personal to me and just because I don't like something, it doesn't mean it's bad. Equally I don't feel I'm sufficiently knowledgeable when it comes to grammatical rules to criticise the faults of others.

If somebody actually asks me to beta a fic for them then I will look at it in detail and point out things that could be improved. But otherwise, I don't criticise. This is not to say that I don't think reviewers should give con-crit, or that I wouldn't like it if someone criticised one of my own fics. I suppose it stems from a lack of confidence on my part, but that's how I feel at the moment.

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

I would just like to support what teal_geezus said about lebateleur putting the links at the top of this post, because I clicked on all three before reading the rest of the post. I don't think anyone is trying to misrepresent anyone else and this is too interesting a discussion to let it get bogged down in personal sniping!

Thanks - I wasn't trying to misrepresent as much as not quote the entirety of the thread on switchknife's page when it's...already available on switchknife's page. But I agree that it is a very interesting subject. What's surprising me is that so many people feel so strongly about it.

My opinion is personal to me and just because I don't like something, it doesn't mean it's bad.

I've been thinking about this a lot recently, and I have to agree with you. If a fic has a wealth of grammatical errors or horrid formatting, or is a bunch of original charas with Snape and Harry's HEDZ PASTEDE ON YAY!, then I stop reading it. So a lot of the gripes I have with fics that I think have weird characterisation are really just that that characterisation doesn't match up with my ideal, not that it's actually poorly done.

: )

[hang-fire.livejournal.com]

Is anybody noticing how these essays are spurning the same reaction as the fictions in question? We have some people stating "nice essay. I agree." and some that are writing full essays back on what they agree/disagree with and why. There's really no point to me writing this other than I found it mildly amusing. :)

oh, and lebateleur...your words have been (http://www.livejournal.com/community/fanficrants/266024.html) spread. (http://www.livejournal.com/community/fiction_writers/248647.html)

Re: : )

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

Heh. So that's your doing. I was wondering why I opened my email to find a whole bunch of ffr names had commented!

Ya...

[evilcourtney.livejournal.com]

Hn. Yes, indeed I agree with how the "I must know WHY you all love me and my magnificent works" speeches are a little...vain.
What I have issues with is the unexplained flaming. I don't refer to con-crit type flames, but to the considerably more migraine inducing "You suck" types. They always confuse me!
All I ask from my reviewers is for them to please tell me why they don't like something. I don't need to know what they liked or why they liked it (although warm fuzzles are lovely) - I just like to know why you don't like something. But thats old news, so I'll just disappear.

Re: Ya...

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

What I have issues with is the unexplained flaming. I don't refer to con-crit type flames, but to the considerably more migraine inducing "You suck" types.

Ooh, I should have clarified. I don't think of 'you suxx!11' reviews as 'reviews.' Why? Well, I can't imagine a motive for leaving a 'great fic thanks' comment if one didn't like the fic, but I can think of a host of reasons why a reader might leave a 'you sux' review.

I just like to know why you don't like something. Agreed, but I've found that the serious reviewers (as opposed to troublemakers) usually do mention why they don't like something, so it isn't really an issue.

Re: Ya...

[evilcourtney.livejournal.com]

*nod nod* Clarification and agreement.

[monkeybarrel.livejournal.com]

You've brought up a lot of excellent points here. If there is any bitterness about receiving certain "generic" reviews, I think it may stem from some writers' beliefs that because they worked on something, they deserve something back- hopefully in the body of a positive, point-by-point review. But there is no formal contract here, and readers don't have to say anything at all, and many don't. Then you have the section of readers who aren't writers, in any sense, and don't like to write more than one line. Should they be punished because their nature is different from someone who can write about themes and details and characterization? Absolutely not. It's their freedom to write (or not write) a review, just as it is our freedom to share our work.

And as you say, I think most writers love feedback, of all sorts, especially fresh after you show it while it still burns in your head as the Greatest Thing Ever. What I've personally learned is that most readers don't say anything when they read (my work at least), and they have that right, and I cannot condemn them for it. What is does teach me though is to appreciate all feedback, because a reviewer is taking a moment to say something when most people don't. And that's not a bad thing, even if I don't agree with what they're saying.

Excellent essay. :)

[lebateleur.livejournal.com]

If there is any bitterness about receiving certain "generic" reviews, I think it may stem from some writers' beliefs that because they worked on something, they deserve something back- hopefully in the body of a positive, point-by-point review.

I guess, but I've always thought that was the purpose of my beta readers. And to be honest, I look forward to getting betas back with the same anticipation that these people seem to look for reviews - I love the detailed feedback and critique that betas give me.

It's their freedom to write (or not write) a review, just as it is our freedom to share our work.

True, and for me, the purpose of reviewing (giving and receiving) is basically to let the author know that her work has been read. It's an entirely different piece of candy from concrit.

What I've personally learned is that most readers don't say anything when they read (my work at least), and they have that right, and I cannot condemn them for it.

Agreed. It's especially tough if you did like the work, because once you've said, "Great description, amazing plot, and spot-on characterisation" what else is left to say? You can't really go into detail beyond that, because there is nothing else to point out. And that makes I really liked it reviews much more generic-sounding than concrit, especially when you're reviewing an author whose works are consistently spot-on.

(That said, I do owe you reviews for some of your stuff I've read recently. Here's that whole I'm putting money where mouth is thing coming into play. Watch for them:) )

What is does teach me though is to appreciate all feedback, because a reviewer is taking a moment to say something when most people don't.

Amen.

Excellent essay. :)

Thanks for the feedback, as it were!

From my rose colored lenses...

[rinoakitty.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to quickly note a couple things.

First of all, I really apprecaite your post and empathize with your sentiments.

I don't get a good many reviews myself, having only one story posted currently, but I get a rush when I do. It is a longer, more fufilling rush when it is a long, well rounded review. The point is, it is the same good feeling and the same appreciation, albeit greater in the second circumstance.
The same can be said for negative comments, although it's a bit different. When it is a short, uneducated-sounding comment it is easy to write it off. When it is a long, well thought out negative review, it usually tends to hold a little more bearing and be a little more signifigant.


I also wanted to say that while I am not a fully educated and fully independent adult, I believe I can leave pretty well rounded reviews. But, as I'm sure some people will agree, you don't always have the energy to do so. I can honestly admit to neglecting to review stories when I'm tired and just wanting to read some good fiction before bed because I felt guilty about having only wanting to leave a few lines.
Then, I started leaving few-line reviews again-- after, as it happens, a rather angry afternoon spent mourning the loss of a long and constructive review that dissapeared after I thought I had posted it.

The point doesn't have to be to give long winded concrit. I know that I, and I am also confidant that others, would appreciate a few lines saying, "Lovely story, the first bit was awesome, thank you."

Anyway, thanks for posting and thanks for your time.