Author:
The following musings are not specific to this particular site, but to all sites of the genre. Actually, it has more to do with a discussion I was part of in a chatroom, said discussion having left me a bit irritated and in need of a soapbox to publicly expound upon. This, then, is my first blog entry.
I find myself wondering about the purpose of story comments. Most sites that publish amateur fiction and encourage readers to comment say something to readers like "give writers feedback in return for their stories" and "don't just say that you liked or didn't like a story, but say why."
The implication, or sometimes the explicit amplification, is that reader feedback can help authors see where they are succeeding and where they are failing, and thereby improve their craft and the quality of the end-product.
To this point, this sounds straightforward. As we have amateur authors, so shall we have amateur literary critics. Personally, I think it's a cute idea and works out rather well for the most part. Unlike professional literary critics, amateur literary critics are much less jaded and vicious. Viciousness in professional literary criticism is a badge of distinction, a competitive advantage in getting your criticism published. Here (speaking generally of all of the amateur tg fiction publishing sites with which I'm familiar), there is no such motivation. The soapbox is democratic, open 24 hours a day and not space-constrained. There is no need to be vicious merely to be published. Remarks can be as kind and insipid as the commenter desires, without getting the commenter booted out of a job.
To some extent, the comments can become a focus group, amplifying the kind of stories the readership finds fulfilling and encouraging the writers to provide more of. (Yes, I know that's a dangling preposition, and I don't care.) Writing for a ready-made audience, and writing to please them is going to skew the nature of the stories being produced, but as it's a symbiotic relationship, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It might be bad if it impinged on creativity and encouraged self-censorship and a flight to "safe" themes and characters and the tried-and-true. But, this is true in the world of "real" publishing as well. The true artist is either totally brilliant in forging new ground or starves to death, or as is often the case, both, only becoming recognized posthumously. Most published authors have to content themselves with honing their art within the boundaries of tried-and-true formulas with ready-made readerships.
But, back to the subject at hand. Reader comments on open tg fiction publishing sites. What are the purposes and parameters for those comments? How do or should those comments be adminstered for maximum benefit and enjoyment by all concerned? I'll admit right now that I don't have any answers, and that it's clear that the site administrators for each site have to answer those questions for themselves. But, this is my chance to share my thoughts and reactions, so I will.
Part of the purpose of encouraging comments is to encourage authors to produce more stories. As comments are the only currency that change hand in this form of publishing, the theory goes that authors who receive more comments will be more encouraged to produce more stories. Part of the stated purpose of enabling reader comments is to show new authors where they can improve, so future stories will be better. A further function of allowing this commentary is to build a vibrant community of readers, who can interact with each other and bring something greater to the site than a bunch of disconnected individuals can.
That's the theory of it all, anyway. The practice of it is a bit different. In reality, the desire of most site managers seems to be to encourage authorship and protect egos. Comments are to be fan letters. Any negative thoughts are to be carefully buffered with broad praise and encouragement to continue writing. Numerous near-flame-wars have appeared in the comment sections of some stories (here and elsewhere) where insensitive remarks garnered hurt feelings.
In the chatroom conversation I mentioned at the top of this musing, I found myself being criticized for having the audacity to suggest to an author how I thought a story could have been improved. A friend, whose opinion I value and who does quite a lot of voluntary proof-reading for authors, thought that reader commentary should stop at the point that a reader might tell a writer how to write their story, or how THEY would have written the story. I understand what my friend was trying to say, although I disagree with her interpretation of what I was trying to say. Suggesting how an ending didn't seem to fulfill the intent of a story, or how a plot development was excessively distracting would seem to be valid reader observations and well within the parameters of appropriate feedback. At least, to me. From my own experience in trying to write, I can assure you that those observations are NOT enough to enable one to write their own story as opposed to simply reacting to someone else's. So, telling a reader who wishes to make suggestions to an author that if they are going to do that, they should go write their own damned stories (and my friend did NOT use those exact words), seems a bit unwarranted in my humble opinion.
By themselves, my friend's comments wouldn't bother me. We're all entitled to our opinions, after all. But, added to recent comments by some site administrators and some angry reactions to other reader comments that I've seen, I think it would be useful to discuss just what we see as the purpose of allowing readers to post comments to stories. Are we a community? Are we a fan club? Are we consumers? Are we a group therapy session? Frankly, I think we're a bit of each, myself, and that it's a good thing. I also think that, just as one might wish to encourage authors with comments, so do you have to encourage readers to make those comments by making their comments welcome.
Comments
well..simple, isn't it...
Comments are welcome
Without comments and commenters there would be no reason for sites like this to exist. Authors make the meat and matter, but commentary is the blood of fiction sites. People like Bob and I supply skin and bones. :)
If you look at the heart of most of the comment threads that have ended up with me as referee, you will see overt or implied moral criticism, not literary criticism. When people want a story changed for reasons of morality, that's going to cause a problem and bruised egos ain't the half of it.
A handful of times I have stopped threads for "laundry listing". No author needs to see a catalog of faults, it serves no purpose whatsoever except ego for the critic.
When I am choosing between egos, authors always get first choice because that is the way it must be. As you said, commentary is currency and this is a sellers market. Literally, it isn't, though, because authors make up the bulk of donors here too. Only a handful of fiction sites online make a profit from charging readers (I can think of only one) and there are several commercial sites set up to charge authors fees.
Why? It all depends on your verb. Authors must, critics will, readers can. And so we do.
Here on BC we have the situation that most of the comments, over half, are made by authors. I've seen that elsewhere, too but it isn't a general rule.
I've also noticed along the way that critics love to be free to criticize but do not take criticism about their critical technique well themselves. :) Human nature, innit?
Hey, I never got around to mentioning the sandwich theory of effective complaints, did I? :)There's lots more I could say about commenting but who has the time to read it when you all should be cramming for the story contest quiz next week?
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Commenting and a Thick-Skin
I personally love receiving comments and emails because whether a comment is positive or negative, it tells me at least one thing- someone read my story. I don't remember who said it but I feel the quote applies: "The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about."
As most of us are authors here, I think we all can relate to how much work we put into our stories. Our soul goes into our characters and sweat into our plots. Reader commentary helps validate our efforts and make the whole endevor feel worth while.
I have to agree with Erin on how literary criticism rarely sparks bad feelings but moral criticism does. One, you're attacking how something was written or described. The other you're attacking an idea the reader had. While we are all free to state our opinions, we don't want things to turn into a debate.
Authors have to be ready to take some hits with comments. They put themselves out there and negative comments that sometimes hurt will be said. It's part of what happens when you put yourself out there. When you publish a story you're taking that risk. And there will be people who comment who seem to want to start a flame-war with you (I've had my share on a different forum) but you just got to ignore them. People who are like that feed off of negative energy- they like to start a fire then look around and ask who started the fire. Just put out the flames and don't add to them.
I'm not saying you ignore anyone who does't give you glowing praise of your story. You simply got to try and discern the person's intentions. Most commentors have no malicious intent and should be treated with respect.
I have been a great benefitter of comments. They have helped improve my story writing much more than I could have alone. That which doesn't kill me makes me stronger, right? I know of no comment that has ever killed an author so overall, I'd say comments have great potential to make us stronger!
Without comments...
"Without comments and commenters there would be no reason for sites like this to exist. Authors make the meat and matter, but commentary is the blood of fiction sites. People like Bob and I supply skin and bones. :)"
Well, exactly. If it wasn't for comments I'd only put my stuff out on my own site, where I don't get many comments and can turn them off completely if I so choose.
I love comments. To know my work is affecting people, and to know how or to know why not is why I do it. (It's certainly not for the money!) I don't need them to be 100% gushing. For instance, I needed to know that at least one reader couldn't finish some chapters of Game Theory because it was disturbing her. It probably wouldn't have changed what I was doing, but I needed to know about it. (In that particular case she was able to catch me in IRC private chat.) However, that person was afraid that to say so in the comments here would get her attacked by others coming - unasked - to my defence.
I did it!
I am one the biggest offenders of leaving a "This is Great do More" comment and not say why it was great or why that story should continue. In most cases as has been pointed out we are amateurs at criticizing. I don't know how to say "Okay, this was well-done, but this needs work." I do know that when I receive an comment even if it only said "I liked it" that must mean that "I" am at least blundering in the right direction! There is another factor here and at similar sites. Kristina L S mentioned some of the motivations for writing and here's where it get a little sticky, I know that I do some Demon Exorcism as well as wishfulness in my writing. It is sensitive to me and I think that others here do some of the same. No one likes to have "things"they feel is very dear or hurtful to them belittled as unimportant or otherwise. Just try to be thoughtful and keep the comments constructive!
My ramble was NOT cause by too much coffee, but by an overdose of suger and Mountain Dew! (soda pop!)
Hugs!
grover-
I Love Comments...
When you write something that compels readers to comment...good or bad...it is gratifiying. It tells the author that they've managed to connect with the readers enough to make them care about the characters and the situations they find themselves in.
It wasn't that long ago I was at the center of one of the longer comment threads to have appeared here. I suppose it would have been easy to take some of the comments as mean spirited, but they didn't really strike me as such. There were of course some negative comments, but to me what that meant was the readers liked the character enough that they took offense at what happened to her. In order to get to that point, I must have been doing something right.
To me, lack of commentary is far more concerning than negative comments and I would think most other writers would feel the same way. If you don't inspire the readers to comment, then there must not have been that kind of connection between character and reader. At least, that's my take on the subject.
Never let it be said that I don't enjoy the occasional delusion of grandeur
Never let it be said that I don't enjoy the occasional delusion of grandeur
Comments...
I can't understand why sometimes I get lots of comments and then sometimes I don't, yet the reader statistics seem to show that the story is popular enough.
I realise that some people are still on dial-up, which means to read the story on-line is a costly thing and unfortunately, neither the author nor the site owner benefit from that.
It means that a story may be read and commented on at a later date, but I still feel that too few comment.
Without feedback, we don't know whether as authors we've hit the spot or missed by miles.
Please, please, please leave your comments. They're the only things that keep our delicate and precious little egos afloat!
Yours expectantly,
Nick B
well, not quite
To exclude 'moral' criticism is to conveniently create a false 'safe zone' for content. A story can be criticised for more than proper or improper language usage or syntax, it can also be criticised for content, of which 'moral' is just one aspect. Subject, background, theme and message are fair game to discuss how a story was appreciated or not appreciated by a reader, and yes, Virginia, that includes 'moral' messages.
An author puts out a whole story, and it is a representation of the author in this strange cyber-world. So criticism of the story can be taken persoanlly. I would prefer that to a policed 'safe zone' where offending an author by discussion of how I react to their story is Verboten.
And, as an added bonus, some author's painful threats to quit when receiving a 'bad' comment are some of the best writing they ever do.....we would be poorer for not having all that melodrama..
Safe zone
Yes, this is a safe zone for content. It is deliberately designed to be exactly that. Why? Because I chose that rather than deal with what a moral free-for-all can become.
Criticism based on moral content quickly becomes criticism based on personal taste disguised as moral arguments. Too many people think that their personal taste is justified by their morality. Whether it is or it isn't is bnot a problem I have the time, inclination or personality to be able to deal with.
Moral arguments on a site that is just a bit outside what the mainstream of morality is considered to be in our modern western society is just asking for the display of some really egregious hypocrisy. I wouldn't be able to resist puncturing a few bloated opinions so I remove the temptation. :)
This doesn't mean that the moral implications and moral impact of a story are off limits topics. Just no direct, indirect or implied morality-based criticism of PEOPLE who enjoy reading or writing certain stories.
And who gets to decide if a moral discussion has crossed the line into implied criticism of people? I do.
That's fair, isn't it? :)
I use the same method my grandma used to see if the wood-fired oven she had was hot enough to bake bread. She stuck her hand in and if it made the tiny hairs on the back of her arm curl, it was hot enough.
- Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
LOL
"Criticism based on moral content quickly becomes criticism based on personal taste disguised as moral arguments."
Facts not in evidence, dear Erin. That's like saying all differences of opinion end in serial murder....
Cantankerous
*Ouch!*
And yet, I agree. Comments are the feedback of the reader, which can take, perhaps, three main forms: an impartial critique of the mechanics, suggestions on how they might have made it better, and the reader's impression of the story: his feelings (good or bad) and any jarring discrepancies with his world view that influenced his enjoyment.
Naturally, unless one's impression is all praise, the last is the touchiest, and how the response is couched is important.
My personal opinion on the matter:
Saying that a character or plot was bothersome to the reader because it was, to him, amoral, immoral, unrealistic, or unfair politically is fine -- and it would be best to include an example or two. Unless the reader has his facts wrong, there really is no legitimate comeback for an author: the reader took the time to state his honest opinion; he gave his honest impression after reading the story. As an author, if you don't like it, you can always say that you don't agree, and thanks, but you can't tell him that he's wrong for his impression of a story. That's like saying, "How dare you not like my story!"
Where I draw the line is with name calling or criticism that is so pointed that it directly attacks the author, such as: "Your story is racist/bigoted/obscene/perverted/disgusting/etc." That leaves the realm of opinion and makes a statement of fact using subjective terms even(!), when, in fact, the reader isn't a mind reader, nor can he know (for sure) why the author writes a certain way. Shades of the Thought Police! Sometimes one can let such a comment stand to be tsk'ed or laughed at, but mean-spiritedness, in general, begs for a response, and an author shouldn't have to defend his morality or integrity in the comments section.
If the commenter feels strongly enough about the subject matter to start an argument, then he can take it offline, IMVHO. :)
Of course, some authors are more sensitive than others, unwilling to differentiate between an opinion and a statement (do you think my butt is too big?), or get up on the wrong side of the bed occasionally (I've done that once or twice), but authors should try to have a thick skin because if a commenter is bitten for his opinion, he will think twice before leaving comments, or critical comments, again -- and that ain't good. I want to hear the good and the bad.
Aardvark
"A little revolution now and then is a good thing; the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson, 1787
"Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."
Mahatma Gandhi
How it's received
I'm a great fan of the maxim that 'the author is not always right'. I probably have to be, given all the incandescent arguments I've had with Ellen about my writing of Valerie. ;-) I love the idea that the written work is not the complete work. The complete work is how it's reconstructed in the mind of the reader. It's always a fascinating and unpredictable and uncontrollable process. How boring it would be if it was predictable, if everyone read your work exactly as you intended! It's always the most exciting thing if I read a comment on my work where someone has picked up on something wholly unintended by me. Sometimes it reveals to me things I hadn't thought of that are wholly valid. (And it makes me seem a lot smarter than I am!) At the very least, even if someone reads something not only unintended but in my mind completely wrong, it's still exciting.
Received
Yup, with different minds come different brain cells and experiences. It is surprising hard to get across complex concepts -- especially when the author barely knows what he or she intends to write in the first place. :)
I'm with you about the "author is not always right" maxim. Certainly, no one will get the exact same "experience" reading the identical story. I've had the same experience with a commenter who praised me for deliberately writing a sort of modern-day Odyssey in Sappho, and listed a few indicators he'd picked-up on. Danged if I knew at the time what he was writing about; all I was trying to do was write an entertaining story. At that moment, I felt more like a monkey at a typewriter than an author with a "plan". But looking back, it was helpful to look at it from a different perspective. It prodded me to think consciously of the importance of a coherent theme. If I had one in that tale besides "love conquers all" or "The Perils of Pauline" I lucked out.
"Happiness is a banana."
Cheetah
"Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."
Mahatma Gandhi
Interesting
Dear Aardi,
As with all views, "unwilling to differentiate between an opinion and a statement" is also a condition suffered by the commentor. There is thick skin and then there is Masochism.
I would ask how many authors here have believed that the commenting "opinion" was the commentors "statement",as in the "statement" in my "opinion" regarding one of my stories, "not a single character worth caring about"?
Three points here; First,I am not responsible for what the reader arrives with in their fevered brain. Second, if my story does not match up with their feverish condition that is not my problem either. Third, the commentor may be correct but the tone and intent is offensive and unhelpful.
How difficult would it be to type; "Gwen, you really did not flesh out the characters as well as they deserved, if you would like some assistance on this I would be pleased to help. I am very good at that, I like doing that in my stories." or, something else.
When "commenting" becomes "axe grinding" then the commentor should stand back as I do not take this for a room full of Turkeys. I know, as usual, I have been too subtle and demure but you get the idea out there?
Gwen
Gwen
Gwen Lavyril
Gwen Lavyril
Opinion vs. Assumption?
I believe there is a world of difference between "not a single character worth caring about" and "not flesh(ing) out the characters as well as they deserved." The first statement is clearly an opinion -- a judgment on the part of the reader, based on her perception of the story, stating that she felt there was no one in the story she connected with as an individual well-enough to care about his or her fate. Strongly worded, I grant you, but an opinion nonetheless.
The second statement has the reader assuming that the author did not intend the characters to be the way they appeared to the reader, and her offer to help fix a problem that the author may not believe exists could be viewed as an insult, since the reader clearly believes there is an error or fault where the author might believe there was none. This is not necessarily implied in the first example, since the author could have wanted none of the characters to be sympathetic to the reader.
As the person who might be writing the comment, I would consider myself in a "lose-lose" situation if i were forced to choose between the two alternatives. Either way, I could potentially hurt or anger the author of the story. I would probably default to the first example, since it is a comment on the story and not on the author's talent or ability. If I thought about it too much, however, I might decide not to comment at all, and the author would lose some insight from a reader, however insignificant that insight might be.
I must be getting bold in my old age to reply to a comment about comments. *grin* Apparently, I have exchanged caution for recklessness once again. I know this tendency will turn and try to bite me eventually, but am I still young enough to dodge the teeth?
Only time will tell. *smile*
Randalynn
Ah, language
As with all views, "unwilling to differentiate between an opinion and a statement" is also a condition suffered by the commentor. There is thick skin and then there is Masochism.
True enough. Communication is all about using language effectively. I offended quite a few people early on with my criticism without meaning to until I started to append a disclaimer to the effect that: "...all of the above is my opinion, which you can take or leave as you feel necessary." It was an admittedly extreme measure, but clear enough, hopefully, and easy enough to do.
Still, like Noam Chomsky, who has been known to state that he doesn't mean to attack the US, and then does so for pages, it can be about context. One can legitimately argue semantics of what an opinion is and when crosses over the line into making a statement or attacking, all you can practically do as a commenter is to use common sense, perhaps go the extra mile with assuring words to avoid the appearance of an attack, and then let 'er fly. :)
I would ask how many authors here have believed that the commenting "opinion" was the commentors "statement",as in the "statement" in my "opinion" regarding one of my stories, "not a single character worth caring about"?
Did I miss something? I wasn't around for the comments war, returning only after Erin deleted whatever it was. But all that aside, "not a single character worth caring about" is potentially a valid comment given the right combination of story and reader. I've said something like that a few times -- normally in an IM -- but once or twice openly, as when the protagonist is neither likable nor interesting, the story is shot, as far as I'm concerned. It's one of the writing "rules" that you violate at your peril. If the reader doesn't care about the main character, the person he is "living" through, then the tension is gone, and then what's the point of continuing?
This is, incidentally, a place where the reader might legitimately write that the protagonist is acting in such an amoral/immoral way as to completely turn them off: mean, cruel, too supine, etc. The reader is, in effect, saying that he can't get inside the character's head. The author, IMHO, should try to see it through the reader's eyes, and then decide if the characterization or the plot was at fault, or if he wrote the story the way he wanted to write it, and it was simply a case of the wrong story for that particular reader. It ain't no big thing. I've had my characters criticized for their actions. If they're acting in ways I didn't intend, I want to know about it.
How difficult would it be to type; "Gwen, you really did not flesh out the characters as well as they deserved, if you would like some assistance on this I would be pleased to help. I am very good at that, I like doing that in my stories." or, something else.
Yikes! Talk about major commitment!
Wait, wait, no -- that could be misinterpreted. *grins* As far as I know, you don't have problems with your characterization. I've read a few of your stories, and, although they aren't up my particular alley, I thought they were well written, especially your later stuff, so you must be using that as a generic example of how commenters can sometimes be more helpful with specific examples and so forth. Valid point.
"Women are unfathomable. It's hard enough to know yourself."
Herth Tarr, Philosopher of Zhor
"Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony."
Mahatma Gandhi
Commitment :)
Aardi, I am giving you back the engagement ring. If you can't commit, well, I am just not that sort of girl.:)
You always have something useful to read and your comment on this is no exception. Still, I do think that it is unfair to expect someone to commit to writing and "publishing" a story but that the commenter is absolved of same. I mean "quid pro quo" means something in some language, somewhere, doesn't it?
I guess what I am asking is, if one writes something that somehow enrages a reader can they just dump on you and make no further "commitment"? Yikes? BTW, that was not what happened in the example that I cited earlier. What I did learn was that receiving private messages does not necessarily help (sorry Angel) if the sender is intent upon pushing their point via sarcasm or at best a very questionable "tonality".
Obviously any argument requires two sides and this is beginning to get polarized. So, just like my gender issues I am going to lay out my views from "both sides of the net", so to speak. I trust that my flirty tennis outfit will distract you enough to endure.
First, as a "suppossed" author and recipient of comments here I would say that most are pretty reasonable. Many actually very helpful. It will never be the case that all are, nor should we strive for that in my mind. "The best iron goes thru the fire" (oh, literary quiz?)
I have learned from the comments and not just about writing. I am pleased that you noticed Aardi, although you did not notice my new hairstyle. :)
As for commenting; Well, my skirts are not too clean there and I have the dubious honor of having one actually "unpublished". Not proud of that and I thanked Erin for Saving me and you from me in a very weak momment. It was directed at Randalynn and I apologize for that as I should have much earlier.
As a reader this is my problem. The site says that it is a "TG Fiction" site yet time and again the authors rage about personal attacks because the story was really (we learn too late) all about their life. Huh? Excuse me, that is autobiography, not fiction. I think that is where a lot of this commenting issue really is, you don't write autobiography or erotobiography or any "ography" on a "fiction" site. You are just asking for it.
I give the transformationalists, Anime and the Magic folks here their due, they write fiction and while I don't always "get it" I know what it is. I would argue that in many cases we TG types are trying to have our cake and eat it too. Write fiction or write about yourself, fine, but it is a lot to expect the reader to sort out what the author can't.
Having said that, the readers are often just as guilty of personalizing the fiction on "behalf" of the author.
I received a very sweet and cute email suggesting that I enjoyed writing the BDSM aspect of "A Dolly For Christmas" a little too much and true enough I probably did. I thought it was a wonderful way to dispose of that character but it was fiction. I don't own a whip,a corset or any chains and I know that Aardie is now very dissapointed.:) In retrospect that story may have offended anyone into the mask wearing scene so I apologize for that too.
I guess my bottom line is; what I know and write about is not necessarily me and if what you write about is "you" it isn't fiction and any comment has a much greater potential to hurt "you". That is not the commenters fault and you as an author should "proceed at your own risk", as the traffic department says.
Now, Aardi, do you think that my pink sweat bands are too much, oh, its not fair you are hitting the ball too hard....Aardi you are so mean! :)
Gwen
Gwen Lavyril
Gwen Lavyril
Tact
Someone once told me that they ket to effective, constructive criticism was tact, not attack. Tactfully wording your comments can provide an author with a valuable tool for possible improvement. Attacking the author, whether on a technical, literary, moral or worst of all, a personal level, will only cause emotions to flare.
Scott
Writing is not necessarily something to be ashamed of--but do it in private and wash your hands afterwards.
Lazarus Long
Robert A. Heinlein's 'Time Enoough for Love'
Bree
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.
-- Tom Clancy
http://genomorph.tglibrary.com/ (Currently broken)
http://bree-ramsey314.livejournal.com/
Twitter: @genomorph
LOL!
I am not sure just how I feel about comments. I notice that no negative comments appear on the dust jacket of books so those can't be too highly prized in the market place. Since, as far as I know, we have no "market place" here does that make all comments valuable? Probably not. Some comments are just stupid, I know, I have made more than my share. Some stories are just stupid, I know, I have written more than my share. So, all in all it seems a pretty even arrangement but the trick is to align the stupid comments to the stupid stories! Erin is working on the database to do that, so watch out!:)
I do know that what comments I receeve are often surprising to me, whether they be of the "moralistic" or "technical sort". Of the moralistic sort I have learned that I am at times; amoral (maybe worse),insensitive and dark of perspective in my efforts. This from concerned readers who wish to redeem me from my fallen ways and those who just like to read that sort of perspective, but undeniably true.
I was going to point out that one can write from any perspective one chooses, which is the fun of it all, but I became scared because so many here claim to write from their heart and must be taken at face value with total seriousness, so, I comment a whole lot less! I would feel terrible if something I said stomped on your heart or any other vital organ you used to read or write with.
On the technical side, wow, never use cars as a vehicle for your story! :) I have learned a great deal about the Corvette! I was in ignorance and all that was pointed out was deserved and I received a very sweet offer of assistance in the future that I thought was not only gracious but very nice as cars were important to the offerer and they were willing to educate me. It is hard to be annoyed with someone who is sincerely interested in something you did not portray correctly and only wishes that be corrected in future. Now, I am wondering and concerned if I got the gun right in my latest effort? Those NRA folks...hmmm? :)
I guess that is what seperates the two types of comments for me? I get all pissy when people offer to assist me in correcting my moral fiber, or my writing perspective but get feeling all warm and fuzzy when someone offers technical assistance or honest suggestions for improving how I deliver the story. Go figure?
Oh, regardless, I do reserve the right to just ignore you and go on about my business. :)
Gwen
Gwen Lavyril
Gwen Lavyril
Scott
Scott was on the right track I believe. Comments are fine as long as tact and consideration is used. Having a thick skin helps but learning how to take criticism is a lesson in of itself. Applying it even more so. Without comments none of that can happen. I was told by two different authors that a work could be improved by doing X. I was very happy with the story as is, but hey TWO Different Authors? I tried it and I think that their advise did work. It made me look at my writing differently. The most important thing they did though was say it in a way I was willing to listen to.
Hugs!
grover
Party On, Dudes (and Dudettes)
When writing comments we should emulate Ox in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure."
He wrote, "Everything is different, but the same... things are more moderner than before... bigger, and yet smaller... it's computers... San Dimas High School football rules."
Be concise, cover the more important issues, and end on a positive note.
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
I'm "gun-shy" ...
... and NOT proud of it.
I sent the comment below to Pippa as a private message this morning, and she said it was a shame that I didn't feel I could comfortably post it, since my trepidation was exactly the effect she was worried about in her initial post. So I decided to leave my petty cowardice behind and just put the thing up. If any of what I said upsets someone (and again I don't see how, but it's happened before), feel free to respond.
I'm sending this as a PM since posting it publicly might incite some folks to take exception somehow, and I don't want to make anyone angry. I can't see how what I say will make someone angry, but that's gotten me into trouble before, so I'm keeping my response private.
I view the comments I get as a way for me to make sure i'm not making some horrible mistakes with the things I write, just by virtue of being so close to the work. I admit I love it when people tell me they enjoy my stuff, but I need comments as much for criticism as I do for the ego boost. I often send stories or chapters to several people to read for me, not from an editing standpoint but as a reality check -- am I going astray? Does it all make sense to someone who isn't me?
In my comments to others, I try to be constructive when I feel I need to say something negative about a story. Sometimes, I have delivered moral criticism, just because it hurts so much to see even fictional people get hurt -- but when I do this, it's not an attack on the writer, although I can see how it could be taken as one. Lately, I've tried to keep my mouth shut (or my fingers immobile) when it comes to commenting in any way that could be taken as a moral criticism. I've also been working very hard to not read anything that would prompt me to make a comment that could be viewed as a moral criticism, but that's much more difficult to do.
Sometimes I offer literary criticism, because I feel some stories could be made even better with a few judicious tweaks. Some have taken some of my literary criticism as moral criticism, and there's nothing I can do to change their perception of my comments, because it's THEIR perception and only they can change how they see things.
Overall, Pippa, if you have suggestions for any of my stories, or see somewhere I might have gone astray, please pass them along. I may not agree with them all, or I may welcome them with open arms. But PLEASE please please please please comment - it lets me know someone is reading my work and cares enough about it to write back.
There's this line stand-up comedians used to use when their acts were dying on stage, pleading with his or her audience to react and respond. "I know you're out there, I can hear you breathing."
Please keep commenting -- I need to hear you out there, breathing. *smile*
Randalynn
de ja vu all over again ..
A readers personal moral beliefs have no place in...
the public comments section for a particular story. If you want to stand on your soapbox and proclaim your personal morality then do so somewhere else!
TG Fiction writers tend to put a bit of their own lives in their stories. I know I do, and I also know a lot of my own heart and soul goes into my stories. You can call me one of the more sensitive writers if you want, because I am. I am sensitive to the comments that have no real value other than to the reader passing a moral judgement on my story or part of it. More so especially when it is just a chapter or part of a much longer story.
Anyone has the right to comment in any way they want is just BULL! The only people that I know that advocate such a stance is the very same people who stand on soapboxes in chat rooms and leave comments that practically crucify a writer for what that commenter believes is a moral wrong or wrongs, GEEZE!
Anyway, who made them the God Almighty Superior Judge of Humanity anyway? They did, that's who! Self proclaimed, egocentric, moral bible thumping, and passing slanderous judgements on writers in chat rooms and in comments publicly viewed, to me is a moral wrong in itself!
No, these types of comments and personal opinions belong elsewhere! Send them via private message or by email. (Even though this is exactly what these type of commenters do not like to do. They need and crave the battle of moral opinions in a public setting. They can't get off on their own moral superiority in a private message or email.)
Message boards and chat rooms is where these type of people thrive! They throw their zingers and hope someone responds. Funny thing is if no one responds, they get all in a tizzy and throw a hissy fit. Giggle, giggle.
Accusing an author of writing pedophilia when the author isn't even there is about as low as a person can go in my humble opinion. To not even write to the author with their concerns and then make a public announcement such as that in a chat room filled with other authors and readers is just wrong in any view you want to look at it! At least write to the author about your concerns before crucifying them publicly! Give them at least that little bit of courtesy, GEEZE!
No, constructive criticism is what we authors crave! Reality is filled with the dark and light sides of life. I write about both! I firmly believe that one without the other is just half of the REAL Story. I have lived my life through both the dark and the light, my early years had more than its share of both and now I am what I am because of all my yesterdays.
Criticise my writing all you want, be negative, be positive, but keep your personal moral judgements to yourself. That is what they are, YOUR PERSONAL feelings and beliefs on morality. They have no place here. Go to one of those sites filled with the type of stories you condemn or find offensive and stand on your soapbox there!
Go to the sites that specialize in the degradation, public humiliation, and subjugation of little boys and men by girls and women! The so called "SISSY" genre. Go to the sites that specialize in the glorification of sexually abusing boys and girls! That is where you want to be isn't it? Not here, not where we have a web-mistress and people who really care about what gets posted here!
Your moral stance is misplaced here. If you must stand on the soapbox and declare your moral superiority over others, then go where it is most needed. Go to the devils playground. The Big Closet isn't it.
Huggles ALL
SINCERELY AND RESPECTFULLY
Angel
Be yourself, so easy to say, so hard to live.
"Be Your-Self, So Easy to Say, So Hard to Live!"
Angelic viewpoint
Angel is always Angel. :)
While the views expressed by Angel have bearing on my policies here, they aren't completely congruent with them. :)
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Just an "a" Away
You are so blunt and define truth so specifically, how is it people get confused between Angel and Angela.
I find myself agreeing with much of what you said.
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
A complex issue
Part of the issue is that there are two different, and sometimes completely incompatible, conditions that exist with any story: the intent of the author and the perceptions of the reader. Communication between the two is problematic at best.
The goal of expression is to get all of the message through. The way our human minds work, there is so much opportunity for misunderstanding (error) in both the coding and the parsing.
As a proof reader, I focus principly on the technical aspects of the story I am working on. When I read a story, I am tolerant of technical errors up to the point where it becomes just too hard to read. When I encounter such a story, I will write a personal message to the author. From my point of view posting a public message that essentially says, 'learn to write,' is not acceptable.
The other thing I look for is consistency. Characterization, story line, adherence to the 'rules' of the particular universe... I will only comment on something if it seems to violate those criteria. There needs to be great flexibility with that judgment. Just because a character 'never swears' doesn't mean that under the right set of circumstances they might not say, 'Holy sh*t!'
The only moral criteria that I feel is valid for criticism is that of consistency. Is the moral character of the work internally consistent?
Statements like, 'I didn't understand why character x did y,' are acceptable. Statements like, 'character x is an evil sinner and will burn in Hell,' or worse, 'the author is an evil sinner and will burn in Hell,' are really irrelevant from a critical point of view. Making such statements are also wrong from many theological points of view as well, but this is not a theological debating society.
There are a number of reasons why I usually don't post comments. Telling someone that the story wasn't to my taste is not constructive, it just takes up space. Telling someone that a story is good/great/wonderful without saying why seems to me to be somewhat gratuitous. If I can't say why, it seems hollow flattery.
My thoughts, for whatever they're worth.
Janet
The evil blond proof reader
Janet
Mistress of the Guild of Evil [Strawberry] Blonde Proofreaders
To be or not to be... ask Schrodinger's cat.
What Is Fair Game For Comments?
My therapist is always looking for emotional moments in our sessions. She says that that is where the answer, or at least the question, lives. I don't know how good a therapist she is, or how much or even if I've made any progress in therapy, but I must admit she seems to have a point. Those emotions that she's been able to detect have proved fruitful ground, at least for her professional skill in picking things completely apart.
Angel has brought us a ripe emotional moment to focus this discussion, and for that, I am grateful.
Angel posits that readers who comment negatively on themes, developments, characterizations or the ending/results/moral of a story are not entitled to do so if that negativity is due to a different world-view, whether religious, moral, or whatever. And, that such comments either constitute or rapidly escalate into an ad-hominem attack.
In my opinion, if Angel is happy about her stories, she shouldn't be upset that some others may not be. She knows she has many fans here, and those fans won't be swayed by the opinions of non-fans. Her readership is secure, and so should she be. When someone claims to be unhappy with a story or stories, their reason for it shouldn't make a difference (as later discussed in this response, as long as the comment that's posted is civil.) As a matter of fact, by allowing them to openly state their true reason, it becomes easier to evaluate whether you even care. If someone said, "I hate your story because it's particularly offensive to my Zoroastrian* world view," others could know to calibrate their response, or lack thereof, appropriately.
From her statements on this thread and elsewhere, Erin seems to concur with Angel's opinion on comments, stating unequivocally that it is her goal to protect authors from (insert assorted verbiage roughly expressing anything which might hurt their feelings) and to keep them happy and producing more fiction. I sympathize with Erin in her desire to keep the author base happy, productive and growing. I enjoy their end-product as much as anyone. I aspire to join their ranks some day myself, if I can ever overcome the impulse to pick my stories apart even before I write them, and if I can ever house-break my muse.
But, should that be the only pivot point in this machine? I firmly believe that the authors do, to a large extent, outrank the readers on this and every other site. Yet, at the same time, none of these sites exist or will survive without their readership. And, like it or not, readers of genre and sub-genre fiction may tend to seek each other out to build a sense of community, just as authors may. My point, such as it has been in posting my blog entry, was that the ideal place for this community is in the comments, forums and blogs of a site such as this. Does the community need to operate under any rules? Probably. Should there be administration of the interchange of ideas so that truly offensive, abusive, and disruptive material is prevented, or at least taken down asap? Well... That's where things get complicated. Yes, someone like Erin does need to keep things from getting out of hand. Chaos will drive people away even more surely than censorship and dictat. Of course, those who remain will organize the chaos as best as possible, learn to ignore the disrupters and shame or chase them off the site as best they can on their own. That's what happens elsewhere in this virtual megaverse. But, we are NOWHERE near chaos here. This is as erudite and sophisticated a bunch of random people as you're going to collect out here on the digital "street," as it were. The number of intentionally abusive and disruptive people and even the oafishly clumsy is minimal for a group like this. Personally, I think they deserve, and need, a looser grip on the reins.
When I was actively administering a large online group myself, my goal got simple. Find and keep as many members as possible. It's a simple goal, but not a simple formula. There are many things you must do to grow a group. Provide therapy, handholding and assurance for the insecure. Retain the valuable and productive contributors to the conversation. Expertise, enthusiasm and active participation draws new members to the flame like moths. And, reeducate the problem members as best you can, or chase them away. The good of the whole group was my guideline, whether or not it was the way I envisioned it should have been. Once you establish a community, and a sense that it "belongs" to its members, you've succeeded. It took me a while to disengage my ego from it, but once I did, the joy of watching it live and breathe and walk on its own more than made up for the loss of "ownership".
Erin laments the lack of financial buy-in and support from the readership of this site. She cites the fact that the strongest contributors are the self-same people who are providing the stories, the authors. I do not pretend to have any answers, but I will ask this question: Is it possible that the authors are providing more financial support because they feel more part of a community than the readers do?
To take down comments that someone may have invested some time, effort and personality in, to prevent others from discussing things they may wish to discuss about a story by setting content-restriction guidelines, and to frequently assert one's ultimate authority is going to not only ruffle feathers, but disrupt the thin bonds that might otherwise grow into a strong web of community.
Angel notes that hurtful comments were apparently made in an open chatroom somewhere about her or her stories. Whether or not site administrators wish to admit it, there IS a community of readers, who DO have opinions. Just because you bottle them up in one place doesn't mean they won't pop out somewhere else. Authors who are going to be hurt by comments attached to their stories are also going to be hurt by comments made elsewhere. The difference is, that comments made away from the story are not so easy to respond to.
I really, really believe that reader comments regarding stories should be tolerated, regardless of their motivation, as long as the commenter is civil and coherent. Let me stress that civil means polite, adult, temperate and respectable. I believe it's a mistake to content-restrict the nature of comments. Enforcing civility rules, however, would be totally appropriate. Other commenters can dispute, correct, amplify or otherwise modify those comments as necessary, but only if they're posted publicly.
Is this valuable to the authors? Maybe not, other than to toughen hides and strengthen their centers. But, I think it's valuable to making the readers feel welcome and to give them a sense of community.
It really breaks my heart to see people who have thoughtful, educated reactions to something, such as my blog post, who are afraid to post them in public for fear of being abused. Besides Randalynn's, who reposted hers here yesterday, I received another private message today which should also be here, not sitting in my mailbox. It belongs to the public discussion, although its writer disagrees, citing what could only be described as a perceived lack of support for those who wish to publicly discuss things.
Civility? By all means. Verboten aspects of opinion? I don't think so.
Respectfully,
Pippa
~~~~~
(* Just to pick a random religion I know absolutely nothing about and have nothing whatsoever against.)
Seeming
While I may seem to concur with Angel's views as perceived by you, I have to say, I think you got us both wrong.
What I said is that express or implied moral judgements of the AUTHOR OR FANS of a particular story or story type are grounds for pulling a thread. The joker there is the implied because I get to infer what is implied. :)
I really mean what I say and I take care (usually) to say what I mean. I emphasized important words above that seem to get overlooked when my policy is discussed.
Another point I've mentioned here before. I don't own most of the stories posted here; I only own the website and such works here as I've produced myself. The authors own the stories. I only have permission to present those stories in accordance to the author's wishes. If an author objects to ANY comment attached directly to their story, well, legally, morally, ethically, I MUST remove that comment or the story. I'd rather remove the comments.
In order to avoid this situation arising (which it has), I have a policy of proactively removing comments when IN MY JUDGEMENT (who else?) the comment or the comment thread has become heated enough that name-calling has or is about to break out.
I'm not heavy handed about this, I don't think I am but the red flag goes up for me when commentary ventures on moral grounds. Too often, moral criticism of the actions of characters in a story becomes moral criticism of writers or fans, express ("Who ever wrote this is evil") or implied ("Stories like this should not be posted here.")
This isn't a free forum. The bills come to me even though a lot of people help me pay them. The stories belong to the authors. Comments belong to the commenters but their presentation becomes my responsibility to the authors.
I ignore a lot of stuff on the edge. Really, I usually pay attention only if it goes back and forth with the temperature rising. If the author is involved, I ask if I should intervene. If the author is not directly involved, I may take one of several actions, up to deleting a whole thread or even marking a story, No Comments, until things cool off.
Comments are important, I've said that many times. But the tail does not wag the dog. The stories come first and the rights of authors in those stories outweigh the rights of commenters to say anything they please.
Judging from the rather heated misunderstandings in this thread, I think the reason for my policy should be clear. :)
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Civility
Civility is the key. I think we're both agreed on that. Without civility, any community falls into chaos, or at least gross unpleasantness. We only differ in proposed means to that end. Now, as you point out, it's your server and you have ultimate responsibility for making things work. I'm certainly not attempting to challenge you for that responsiblity, only offering a viewpoint that differs slightly from your own but might achieve the same results with some additional benefits. Further, just in case I haven't said it enough, or recently, let me reiterate that I am extremely grateful for all you do for all of us. What I'm proposing is not intended to make your life harder, or to harm Big Closet. In the long run, in fact, it might even lower the overall stress level of what you have to subject yourself to.
If we're agreed that the overall aim is civility, peace, harmony and a happy community centered around Big Closet, the only question is how to achieve that. As of now, you see preemption by restricting the subject matter of comments as the only way. This requires you to make a lot of decisions, review a lot of material and occasionally risk getting in a personal conflict. Definitely stressful. I propose simply punishing the incivility itself as a better solution. Everyone knows what incivility looks like, and it's easier to implement a policy against it, especially easier emotionally. You don't have to stay ahead of the situation, only deal with the occasional complaints. Those wronged by someone being incivil will be calmer, knowing that the solution is on its way. And, to some extent, the resolutions to those complaints will prevent future ones. Un-rehabilitatable participants end up kicked off and can't make any more trouble. Everyone who learns how to play nice together and carry on discussions in an adult fashion gets to stay and participate.
Having civilized discourse is one of the most adult and intellectual pursuits there is. Has been for a long time, too. To restrict it, simply on the basis that it may somehow make someone behave in an infantile fashion is unreasonable, in my humblest opinion. Your current policy is solving the problem, but at the expense of what, again in my humble opinion, could be a much more vibrant community. Rather than attack the solution from the top, why not seek out the true cause of the strife, uncivil behavior?
As for your assertion about "the rather heated misunderstandings in this thread," I don't claim to be the most discerning person around, but I just don't see it. I see one snipe, one angry tirade about something outside this thread, and a couple of harmless attempts at wittiness. That's out of 28 comments. Believe me, I have seen flame wars, and I have seen heated misunderstandings, so I think I know what they look like. What I see above is generally thoughtfulness, good will, honest exchange of opinion, and yes, community.
Please
Your quote below:
"As of now, you see preemption by restricting the subject matter of comments as the only way."
Is not my policy. Actually, what I do bears a resemblance to what you suggest except that I don't "punish" anyone, I just carry out the burning pieces of runaway discourse. :)
I don't read all comments, I said that above somewhere, too. I can't, I don't have the time, just like I don't read all the stories.
The misunderstandings in the thread are that I've been misunderstood, perhaps from early strong statements I made but even after repeated restatements people seem to think I'm going to read each comment and decide if it can stay up. I don't do that. The bit about the "heated misunderstandings" was a little bit of levity but I was halfway serious because any thread this long with this many people talking at cross purposes IS heated in the way I measure heat.
Here's another quote, I think from your earlier post, "Erin laments the lack of financial buy-in and support from the readership of this site." Did I mistype something? I never said anything like that. What I did say was that most donations come from authors which is not at all the same thing as expressing negative emotion about the lack of response from readers. I do get a lot of anonymous donations and several known donors are not authors. Please don't paraphrase me all out of recognition, Pippa. :)
You said this: "I really, really believe that reader comments regarding stories should be tolerated, regardless of their motivation, as long as the commenter is civil and coherent. Let me stress that civil means polite, adult, temperate and respectable." We agree on that. I never step in on comments until they get uncivil. Period.
But I'll have to say that your line, " Everyone knows what incivility looks like..." seems like wishful thinking to me. :)
As for people hesitating to post things for fear of my reaction, I can't do anything about that. I assure everyone that civil discourse is welcome. The problem has been that when people get into moral topics, civility seems to go out the window. I'm speaking from experience.
Again and again, what is against policy here is not discussion of morality but attacks, express or implied, on authors or fans on moral grounds.
People who make statements like, "Stories involving underage sex should not appear on this website," are making a moral judgement constituting an implied attack on authors and readers of such stories. As if fifteen year olds were not having sex in thousands of places around the world right now. :)
But I don't yank such a post immediately. For one thing, I might not see it. But I do wait to see what happens. What usually happens is one or two people join in taking sides and things escalate toward name-calling. And name calling includes the accusational "you". If it's one person getting hot under the collar, I email them and suggest that they either retract or rephrase, with my help. If it's more than one person, I post a warning on the thread to keep it civil. If accusatory tones persist, I close the thread or unpublish some posts.
This really doesn't happen this often.
I'm comfortable and happy with the way I'm doing things. I've only ever banned one person from BC and that was an egregious case of out and out blatant personal attacks on multiple BC authors with the express purpose of annoying me.
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Comment vs Debate
The comment section beneath a story section is not the same as a forum and yet it is sometimes treated that way. Praise or critique or question or simple disagreement is great in this spot, but I do not believe it is the best location for debate (that to me belongs in forums or blogs).
If comments pass into debate where commenters are trying to prove the author is wrong or a bad author or screwed up a character/plotline or is immoral or is someone from whom the community should be protected then I believe a line is being crossed. When the comments become debate then there is a chance for the story to encompassed by the comments and personally I think this is disrespectful to the story and the process of writing which is the foundation of this site.
Yup
Another way of saying what I've been saying. Thank you Arcie for the parallax. :)
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Angels We Have Heard on High
You're so right. You can't judge a book by its cover, or a stories moral vector by what occurs in the first few chapters.
You were going a long so good, with that brand of righteous indignation that comes from your ethics being firmly rooted in compassion, but then you stumbled.
Pippa doesn't have to be a great writer (like Erin) to understand how it feels to be humiliated. Unless Pippa lives in a different world than I do -- I'm sure she has friends and family willing and eager to humiliate her, to say nothing of her enemies.
Humiliation means to reduce someone to a lower position in one's eyes or other's eyes. Attacking a person's ideals is an aggressive move to humiliate.
Carry on Angel -- just a slight nudge from your "a" buddy.
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
It wasn't the humiliation but the knowing, the actual experience
It is the actual experience of after pouring your heart and soul into a story, (something we authors know well) to get it proofed, edited, and reading the suggestions for your creation by other creative people. To then make a few changes and post that story. Only an author knows that feeling, the actual experience of seeing that story posted and being read by others.
And then, the experience of reading the good, the bad, and the ugly comments left for that story, you with the help of one or more others created from within yourself.
The good comments make you feel good. They make you want to continue writing so you can feel "THAT" good again!
The bad comments, they are not really bad, they are constructive criticisms. They point out the flaws, how you can do better and you learn from them! They make you improve, they help you see your story through other readers eyes and minds. They don't hurt, they criticise in a constructive way to help make you a better writer.
The ugly, now here is where things hurt! They are not helpful at all! They are judgemental and are usually written by someone with high moral values and a keen sense of right and wrong honed to a very sharp edge. Nothing helpful is written in these comments, just condemnation and accusations aimed at the author. These comments make the author retreat, they hurt, no one wants to feel that pain repeated!
To have these ugly things in print, in a comment viewed by many others is not a pleasant thing to experience at all. How many people who really want to write a story are stopped dead in their tracks reading such comments? One, two, more? One is to many! They do not belong in the comments section for a story, PERIOD!
How many authors have stopped writing after getting these ugly comments? I'm not talking emails or private messages, they hurt, but they are read by you and not by many others. Have one or two good writers stopped writing? Three, four? One is to many!
Only an author who has posted a story online knows what it feels like, has had those experiences. We expect the good and the bad comments, but never do we expect or are ever prepared for the ugly comments. To a new author, someone posting their first story, those ugly comments are devastating! Ask me, ask Erin, ask any author who posts here. They alone can tell you about that actual experience. All the readers, the proofers, the editors, they can have concepts of what it feels like, but the actual experience is only really felt as deeply to the author. No one else can feel it the same way.
Huggles Angel-a-...Giggle, giggle.
Angel
Be yourself, so easy to say, so hard to live.
"Be Your-Self, So Easy to Say, So Hard to Live!"
Yep -- Been There
Like the time a reader told me my story "My Cherie Amour" was causing her to consider suicide. She said the loving family I portrayed that acted compassionately toward the TG hero was so different from her family that she no longer wanted to live. That "ugly" incident caused me to shrink away from writing for nearly a year.
Good people make hurtful comments. I've done. You've done. It's hard to judge how the author will take what you say. I've had authors react poorly to a private message regarding a correction in spelling.
Should comments always be positive, yes . . . especially the critical ones. Should comments ever comtain moral judgment? Why is that even a question? No. No. No.
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
Commenting, Good, bad and ugly...
As tracyhide said earlier "the intent of the author and the perceptions of the reader" can equally be applied to comments. A well meaning person can post a response to a story and think they were supportive in what they said. They may have phrased something poorly and been perceived as bashing the story author. In this faceless medium of computers it's not always easy to see the intent of the person who posted.
On the one hand I think authors before being offended personally should maybe take the time to private message or even publicly respond and just ask "is this what you really meant, this is how I read/perceived it"
Bad comments, can simply be "This story sucked, I hated it!" Hey you can't please everybody and shouldn't try. While a useless comment, it shouldn't be personally offensive.
Ugly comments are just that ugly. Using Angel's example, to accuse her stories of pedophilia, is to obviously not understand the word. In her stories there may be actions that are abusive towards children, but not in any sexual manner. To say she is a pedophile is slanderous as there is nothing in her writings to back such a statement up. Now if someone puts that into a comment on her story, a prospective reader might never bother to read her story thinking it's something sick to be avoided. That is cruel and something that can stick to a person no matter what the real facts are. It could also attract the wrong kind of person who is looking FOR pedophilia to the site and we wouldn't want that either (I hope).
What I don't understand is how someone can, by the very nature of them being here, be closed minded and of "higher" moral authority that they feel they can judge other people as moral or immoral. There is so much hostility in the world towards TG even more than to the gay community that attacking from within is akin to self-sabotage.
Alexis
On Comments
I feel I have opened, "Pandora's Box."
So I won't contribute any more.
It's gonna kill me cause I love opening my big mouth and putting my 2 cents in.
BUT I'm outta money! No more cents (sad).
Yuppers the bank is broke!
(Good Bye Cruel World)
"Be excellent to each other,
And PARTY ON DUDES" & Dudetts
Bill and Ted had it correct.
When will you?
They're gone ...
...and I apologize.
Randalynn
Thank you, Randalynn
I apologize, also.
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
I apologize as well to all I might have offended by my...
misinterpretations of what they have said in their comments. Alexis is right! We as authors can and do misinterpret commenters words at times. I know that I have been guilty of doing the very thing I worn against. That is, to reply right away without taking the time to try and read the comment from a different perspective.
Randa, I apologize to you several times over. I hope you can forgive my misinterpreting your words to me.
Huggles
Angel
Be yourself, so easy to say, so hard to live.
"Be Your-Self, So Easy to Say, So Hard to Live!"
Forgiven, Angel *hugs*
We're both driven by deep caring, and that often makes us leap before we look. *smile*
Much love, always,
Randalynn
Just want people to note..
I'm RIGHT :D Please someone tell my other half, she'll never believe it!!
Huggles!!
Alexis
My point
And I do wish to say that a comment - even this one - is always just my point. It is naturally affected by what is in the story and what other comments has already been posted. My point is that one shouldn't take comments too seriously. They also vary from just feelings "loved this one" to criticism "didn't like this or that part of the story because" and to readers "hopes" (eg. suggestions) "ooh this is an exciting story. Perhaps X will next do this or that..."
I personally use more positive comments "love your story because..." and also at times express my hopes for the story. I leave a negative comment if I really feel bad about something in the story. Worst stories (for me that is - they can be very good in someone else's opinion) I don't comment at all - I may not even finish reading them.
I have myself written few stories way back and I always loved to get positive comments but negative ones weren't that bad either (if they are not "I simply hate this" type - which for me is no comment). I don't know if any of you follows Margaret Jeanette's stories in Fictionmania, but she does get a lot of very negative comments. To some extend they are justified - she is a repetitive writer who doesn't change her basic themes much. But I like most of her stories. I have often wondered why those people who only have a very similar comment to make to her every story even read her stories. But at least she will know that people read them! So even a negative comment can be somehow positive. But they shouldn't be too personal!
As a reader I think a comment is fun for me. I get to say something and I hope that writers do read them. It somehow makes the story even closer to me.
Hugs,
Sissy Baby Paula and Snowball (my toy puppy)