Current Size: 100%
Reviews to authors, and their replies . . .
Posted on: Tue, 09/21/2010 - 06:13
Offline
Reviews to authors, and their replies . . .
I'm curious to hear from the authors here -- or even other, active readers -- what they thing a proper review style is for a story, or how an author should deal with reviews. What is the fine line between non-squee review and honest commentary?
A couple of examples. I read FFnet sometimes, and try to leave reviews that are more than "awesome" or "flame". I tried to read "Necklace of Menat" by sybyll tres-looney, and found it rather . . . challenging in setup and characterization. So I left two reviews while reading it, before stopping.
Review #1:
Well that's interesting. Two mature, adult people that have had other relationships and are friends are incapable of speaking to each other? Moreover, this inhibition manifests as a handicap in any form of communication? Seems a bit of a paradox.
The writing is fine, the pace is fine, but the characters . . . With this one chapter, at least, the story would be more appropriately changed from "Romance" to "Angst" and "Melodrama". It strongly smells of forced plot syndrome, where the characters are forced to suffer situations that wouldn't naturally arise just to satisfy some plot bunny.
I'll keep reading for the moment, but these kinds of Adult-Yet-2-Years-Old stories are incredibly tedious to read.
Review #2:
Annnndddd . . . with the introduction of plot device rape, my ability to read this story comes to a full and complete halt. Throwing on a child as an outcome of said rape is like icing on the cake.
People that have rape in stories with the main characters and fail to have the characters act appropriately for what happened to them - immediately and for their entire lives afterward - clearly have no clue what they're doing.
Having front-row experience with the repercussions of such acts, I would encourage you to stop, and find some other way to make the story work the way you want it to.
Good luck with the rest of it, whatever you choose to do. I am far beyond my limits of tolerance.
I didn't give it much thought, as the second review summarized my thinking of the entire story arc and efforts at plot that the author was willing to show up to that point. I then find out, several days later, that (a) I've been sent a very lovely email, (b) have been blocked from reviewing the story, and (c) have been blocked from replying to the author's email.
The response from the author was:
Subject: re: Your review to Harry Potter and the Necklace of Menat
how sure are you that i am not writing the story as i wanted to? the fact that
you are reacting to a story that is only partly written should clue you in
that your "reading" of the story is flawed at best. i've read your profile and
it is very clear that you think yourself as the only one who is capable of
giving "intelligent" reviews. for goodness' sake, this a fanfiction site. you
are not going to find the next 'war and peace' here and yet you waste your
time nitpicking works of this site's writers. be careful though, most of the
writers here are teens trying their hands at writing. they don't need
self-satisfied, egotistic persons like you to quash their nascent talents.
and since you seem to fail to comprehend some of the few points in the story,
why don't i spell it out for you? actually, i rather trust the readers'
ability to think that's why i never hesitate to elaborate or skip aspects of
the story. first of all, "as if they were friends" meant that h/g have never
been close. if you only have the ability to comprehend this story, then it
should not have escaped your notice that i quite emphasized this point several
times.
secondly, you said you have front-row experience when it came to rape, but in
this story, ginny has to deal with more than the 'rape' or her unplanned
pregnancy; she also has to face the possibility that she can die at any time.
she has been pushed to the wall, and if you've only been capable of reading
between the lines, then you would have realized that ginny has sort of thrown
in the towel. but i guess, certain things are just beyond your intellectual
abilities?
lastly, though you did not spell it out loud, it is obvious that you believe
yourself as quite intelligent which means diddly-squat. the world has been
recently put down on its knees by the geniuses at wall street and other math
wizards. it's what you do that proves your intelligence is worth something to
the rest of the world. you don't have to go around whacking people on the head
trying to prove just how brilliantly intelligent you are.
in this fic, harry has to learn not to make judgments when you don't have all
the facts in your hands. it would do well for you to learn that lesson as
well.
Aside from reconfirming my belief that this author is one to avoid reading anything from in the future, I'm curious . . . did my reviews really warrant such a flame-laden attack? Where is the fine line between valid commentary from readers, and flames? While I'll admit that my first review was probably a little more blunt than was warranted, it wasn't attacking of the author in any way. It did raise my concerns that the plot was going to suck, which apparently were rather justified, but . . .
A second example would be Mutt-N-Feathers, who is writing the story Continuum. I tried reading it, but the characters and plot started acting so OOC relative to their canon basis -- bearing in mind that the author deviated from canon at the Christmas point of Book 7 -- that they were essentially characters-in-name-only. It went so far that Ginny was emotionally abusive to Harry, and the actions were conducted over multiple weeks without cease. It was added to the absurd notion that two people that were newlyweds could live in a very small apartment for over two weeks with no words or physical contact exchanged. Ginny did not "tolerate" Harry's presence until he bought her a stupidly expensive gift. I pointed this complete OOC setup out in a review, quoted below.
It's interesting to see the portrayal of how the characters deal with their failures, and what they imply about their mind sets.
For example, Ginny clearly believes that abusing Harry is proper, and Harry having been raised by the Dursleys accepts what's clearly a ridiculous, over-the-top, and completely impossible author-contrived-without-the-faintest-notion-of-reality-intruding "punishment" as what he deserves. No human being deserves to be treated this way, nevermind the mechanical and personal impossibility of carrying out the acts described.
Ginny also clearly gives the message that Harry can buy his way out of the doghouse with expensive presents, implying that she is - on some level - for sale. That may not be the point you were aiming for, but that is exactly what her actions and words deliver. Once more, Harry having been raised by the Dursleys will know to look for any act that can get him out of trouble, and carry it out to a fault. It's impossible that he did not immediately make this conclusion at a subconscious level, if not directly at a conscious one, and draw the appropriate line between the presented dots.
Let's ignore the complete impossibility of what you have the characters doing here for a moment. (If you think it's not impossible, it shows how little you understand living with another human being, especially one you are married to and the other specific factors of their situation.)
Is Harry blameless? Of course not. He made a major mistake in not including Ginny in his plans or telling her who the ally would be. Does he deserve an iota of anything beyond that? No. Ginny knows his history, and knows he accrues zero - if not negative - value to his own birthday. So Harry acted improperly on procedure, despite getting a good conclusion, and he needs to both apologize and admit he will need help in not doing the same again. Once he apologizes, there are two options for her: accept and move on, or hold a grudge and kill their relationship. If he is unable to recognize his failings, it's part of being in a relationship - and she has much more experience than he does at this, so once again, the burden is on her - to help your partner come to understand your PoV and comprehend what you perceive to be a problem. Equally as important is putting yourself into their PoV, to understand exactly why they did what they did. Without understanding each PoV as fully as one can, there can be no hope of moving forward.
The way Ginny acts in the cave is abysmal - it smacks of my nine-year-old snidely getting the better of my three-year-old. If the words and themes were changed, it reads exactly the same way as I see my children behave when left without guidance. Harry might have a slight excuse for it, given how he was raised and lack of real guidance in his life, but Ginny has no excuse.
Any self-respecting male or female treated by their spouse as Ginny has done here - the 13 days of ignoring him alone, with the cake icing of what she did in the cave - would be seriously thinking about such a recent marriage being a gigantic mistake, and divorce or other means as a good thing to look into.
When taking Ginny's abusive treatment of Harry, then tossed on top everything else she is handling or reacting to, her behavior does not seem to match canon-Ginny, but rather fanfic-cliche-Ginny.
In canon, for what little we see once she's beyond the Chamber, she's shown to be compassionate, caring, and capable of standing up for herself. In fanfic-cliche, she has an unstoppable temper, acts like a twit, and is abusive. Which character am I left with in your story?
You had an interesting story premise, but it looks like you're riding that cliche train and lack of understanding of other humans right over the cliff into the miasma of fanfic drivel. I hope that you can resuscitate the story, but at this point, the prognosis is not good.
The response I received was again to be blocked from reviews on the story, and then the next chapters A/N went on and on about personal attacks against the author and how characters were acting "in character" rather than as caricatures of themselves. After reading other reviews, the only likely review to trigger such an A/N was mine.
Again I'm left wondering . . . what's the point of reviewing, if you can't leave a valid set of comments on the plot line as presented by an author? What's the fine line I should be walking between being candid and honest, or just not saying anything?
What would the authors on this site want to see in a review? Was I that far out of line?
Comments
. . . but I would say that your reviews were a little on the harsher side than you may have meant to make them.
That said, the flame response was hysterical. I will say that I've had strings of bad reviews (some quite the flames) for everything I've ever written, and sometimes it just adds up, so I tend to be a lot snarkier when I reply than someone may actually deserve.
Even with that caveat, though, I can't find any way to excuse the email you received. That's really just too much. What's your FFnet profile say that's so . . . interesting?
Strolling Along,
You ask a good question here. What do authors expect from a good review? However, I would phrase the question differently as the concept of "a good review" is as varied as there are authors. Rather I would ask the question, how do you write a review that is useful to the author?
A simple useful review is much more advantageous to an author than the most elegantly written praise of any story. So what is a useful review? Well, to review is, according to Webster, "a. to go over or examine critically or deliberately b. to give a critical evaluation of ." In essence, a review is a deliberate examination of a work in order to point out areas that are lacking or in need of improvement and areas in which the work excels.
A review is a critical evaluation, which means that the review should contain specifics not generalizations, be constructive not destructive, and be analytical not emotional.
As you posted several reviews above, I will use your reviews to demonstrate the three items above.
Specific vs General
A specific review will always focus on a point, or arc, of plot, character development, or grammar rather than a broad generalization of any of those. For instance in your first review you stated: "It strongly smells of forced plot syndrome, where the characters are forced to suffer situations that wouldn't naturally arise just to satisfy some plot bunny."
This is a broad statement that offers no specific point to help the author improve or even defend what they have done. Which plot in the chapter feels forced? What unnatural situations are the characters forced to suffer? Why are the situations unnatural? Without answering those questions as you write the review, you are not offering the author any ability to understand your concerns. Rather, it becomes at best a review that lacks substance or at worst an attack on the author, depending on how the author views it.
Your third review does well in focusing on specific issues. For instance you stated: "Ginny also clearly gives the message that Harry can buy his way out of the doghouse with expensive presents, implying that she is - on some level - for sale. That may not be the point you were aiming for, but that is exactly what her actions and words deliver."
This is an appropriate comment on character development. You have stated an action a character has taken, provided a view that action implied to you, and then offered the chance for the author to explain the reason behind the characterization. By doing this, you make the author think about their reasons behind actions.
I often do this when editing. I ask the author what the intent of a scene or a conversation or an action are and how I perceive them in the story. Many times, the author has a good justification for it, but other times they do not. However, in either instance the dialogue leads to a better story as the author often modifies the language to provide less ambiguity.
Constructive vs Destructive
Reviews should always be constructive, or helpful. A review should point out what is working and what is not working in a story and offer suggestions on how to improve the author’s writing or story. In general, many of these suggestions will be personal opinions because just as every author has a vision for their story, each reader has an expectation.
Fanfic writers are not professionals, so there will always be dross among the gold. As a reviewer, you need to offer authors criticism that helps them improve their writing and does not chastise them for doing something you disagree with. Pardon the analogy, as I am not implying any particular author, but an untrained dog responds better to firm and consistent correction of bad habits with rewards for good behaviour rather than angry voices and swats from a newspaper for misbehaviour.
Personally, I found all three of your reviews to be much more deconstructive than constructive. To me, your criticism often come across as sarcastic or insulting. For example, you said: “. . . Ginny clearly believes that abusing Harry is proper, and Harry having been raised by the Dursleys accepts what's clearly a ridiculous, over-the-top, and completely impossible author-contrived-without-the-faintest-notion-of-reality-intruding "punishment" as what he deserves.”
From a characterization point, without having read the story, I would also have pointed out that Ginny being “abusive” to Harry is well outside of the standard characterization for Ginny and that without a well written and conceived trigger/backstory for such behavior, I would have concerns about the characterization and plots the author is using. However, by using words like “ridiculous”, “over-the-top”, and “author-contrived-without-the-faintest-notion-of-reality-intruding”, the author could assume you are attacking him/her. In my opinion, the words are inflammatory and offer no helpful criticism to the author and thus invalidate your previous point as worthy of consideration as a useful criticism.
I would have written something along the lines of:
“In this chapter, you have shown Ginny acting abusively toward Harry, as shown in Example 1, Example 2, and Example 3. To this point in the story, you have provided no character development of Ginny that would allow such a Jekyl and Hyde shift in her character. I cannot help but feel that this sudden shift in character is done more for plot convenience than because it has been developed and planned from the beginning.
“Perhaps you wish to explore the complex residual issues Harry has from his upbringing with the Dursleys. This is a valid character arc, but to arbitrarily devolve one character to showcase another’s weakness does not, in my opinion, help both characters develop together. Rather, I’d have Ginny simply get mad over the and have her lash out in a single action of anger, either verbal or physical and have Harry become scared of her. This would allow Harry to retreat and show that abusive childhood and through Ginny’s horror at what she has done, allow her to come to grips with her own past and the realities of building a relationship out of trust and love rather than childish fantasy. I’d be more than glad to discuss this privately with you and hear your explanation for this character development.”
Constructive criticism, at its core, is an introduction to a neutral dialogue between the reviewer and the author. At no point should it become insulting, personal, self-righteous, or derogatory. A reviewer should use phrasing that is empathic and acknowledging rather than accusatory and commanding. Phrases like “in my opinion,” I feel that,” “I see your point, however I think,” and “my concern is” should dominate the review. Phrases such as “you’re wrong,” “you don’t know how to write,” “I’d never do that,” and “what were you thinking?” will automatically make me bin a review.
I know this sounds like I am advocating handling authors with kid-gloves, but I always remind myself that a review is an opinion. Yes it needs to be honest, but just because you enjoy the anonymity of the internet does not mean the author is less than human. Put yourself in the author’s shoes. Would you appreciate someone berating your hard work, telling you that you have no clue what you are doing, and generally lording their superiority over you? I know that I don’t.
Analytical vs. Emotional
This is one of my largest issues with reviewers. The world has become very instantaneous and the ability to respond instantly and anonymously makes even the best of us sound like jack-asses. Caught up in the moment, people often respond emotionally rather than analytically. I am quite sure I don’t need to provide examples as everyone has come across emotionally charged reviews and comments.
As an author, I will thank someone who “squee’s” over my work and ignore someone who rants against it. Although I am flattered by praise, it doesn’t help me improve. Emotional rants also have no substance to them and often force me to restrain myself from responding.
Why not respond, you ask? Well, in general, an emotional response is a line in the sand. It offers no opening for a give and take dialogue because the response is based on anger, hurt, embarrassment, scorn, etc . . . Once emotion is involved, there is no middle ground. It becomes who is right and who is wrong because an emotional response is always based on a very strongly held belief. You only have to look at religious and political debates to see the truth in my statements.
For example, from your response to rape in the one author’s story, I can see that the subject of rape is very personal to you. As an author, if my story had elicited such a response, I would have simply ignored that review. From reading and interpreting your review, I would have decided that something in my story had so upset you that I could never explain my reasoning behind the inclusion of rape.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying you are irrational about rape or that your statements in regards to that story were off the mark, but rather that if I read that review about my story, I would come to the conclusion that the way in which I approached the subject of rape, even if I had my own very logical reasons for it, could never be acceptable to you without me doing an complete 180 turn and agreeing to every issue you had with the story and making the changes.
Perhaps you would be open to a dialogue about it, but because the review was so emotionally charged, I would not want to even chance getting into an emotional argument with a reviewer. As an author, I am not interested in arguments. I am interested in constructive dialogue. I am interested in an analytical discussion of the story that allows both myself and the reviewer to present our views and have the other person respond with, “I see your point, however, have you considered this angle?”
My last point is about authors themselves. No matter how well a reviewer crafts a review and no matter how well a reviewer stays analytical and constructive, there will always be authors who are egotistical, self-indulged, asses. They are not looking for criticism, but for an unending fountain of praise, or they are writing simply to make people respond in anger to their stories.
A reviewer has no control over the author. If an author brushes you off, snaps at you, bans you, heckles you, or rants against you in responses or their story, just walk away. It is never worth the effort to respond and feed that author’s childish ego.
At the end of the day, I only have myself to look at in the mirror and say, at least I tried to offer a helping hand. In the long run, Strolling Along, there will be authors out there who appreciate your sincere efforts.
best of luck,
Jonathan Avery
- “Perhaps, in those days, there were a few among men, a few of clear sight and clean soul, who refused to surrender that word ["I"]. What agony must have been theirs before that which they saw coming and could not stop! Perhaps they cried out in protest
My impression of te reviews is that they have become about you, rather than about the story.
I think nasty emails and banning is kinda over the top, I don't think they were that bad but I did find them bordering on condescending and absolutely more about you as the reader than about the story.
An author wants to hear about the story, not about the reviewer. They also want to hear what they did get right, not how awful you think it's going to be. (If you think that, why are you here? is always my thought)
There was no encouragement to the author in any of the reviews and the tone and style is very formal and steeped in superiority which many find hard to read.
Review #1
This is a nicely written piece with good pacing. I'm not sure how I'll go with the characters though, they seems a little melodramatic and I hope as it goes on they communicate a little better. I've read a lot of fanfiction cliches so I'm hoping this one won't force the characters into too many of those tried and true subplots.
Review #2
I didn't find the portrayal of rape here to be realistic. it's a subject I am familiar with/close to and I don't find this does the subject justice but it's being used to serve a plot I am uncomfortable with.
Review #3
I've got a lot of thoughts about the characterisations in your story. Do you have a forum anywhere that we can discuss it? because I'd really like to unpack these characters further.
That last one is not a review it's better suited to a forum or discussion board. Also all three reviews are telling the author all the terrible things about the fic and saying how you're not even sure why you're bothering with it almost since you are sure it's going to end up 'going wrong'.
Not very encouraging is all and the condescension is very hard to take.
I think what you are after is a forum environment for your thoughts and ideas.
Well, as someone known to respond negatively to reviewers....
I get negative when the reviewer loses objectivity. Saying 'this and that didn't work for me' is fine (although it might hurt), saying 'you know, you're a crap writer' will get my dander up.
The phrase you are looking for with Continuum is ' this is a worthless piece of XXXX'. Sums up my view. Always struck me as a story where the author really wishes it had been Ginny rather than Harry that had killed Voldemort. No surprise that Harry and Ginny didn't end up togther. I see that there is due to be a sequal, no doubt where Harry is made to grovel and is treated like a dog until Ginny graciously takes him back. I always thought that the dynamic of the pairing is that they were equals on so many levels.
But I feel like that I don't bother to review because if I think its that bad its best to just walk away before you say something you'd regret.
BTW if you review on SIYE you can't be blocked as long as you don't get banned from the site :-)
I would like to say thanks to everyone for their comments. While it certainly wasn't my intention, it seems I've turned into a bit of a jerk for reviewing.
I'll try to fix that.
The phrase you are looking for with Continuum is ' this is a worthless piece of XXXX'.
Tell us how you *really* feel . . .
As I think I said a while ago, I tried briefly to read it, but gave up long before (apparently) Strolling Along did, and it would seem way, way before you did. :) While I wouldn't say it the way others did in this thread, I found the characters pretty much unlikable and untrue to the premise. It's fine if your characters are doing atypical things, as long as the background of the characters warrants it. When I feel the "set up" doesn't justify something going on, I just stop reading.
Oh, and Strolling Along - I don't leave reviews except very rarely. Most people just don't want to hear the truth -- assuming you can learn to critically comment without the negativity, I think you'll still find yourself disappointed in reactions from authors.
Oh absolutely, not many fanfic writers are there to hear real reviews. The vast majority are there for a pat on the back. They certainly aren't excited by analytical reviews.