The Difference Between Flames and CC

[Keira]

Let's face it - not everyone who writes and/or leaves a review is skilled with words. Neither do some of us have a natural ease at delivering criticism in a kind manner. Some reviewers don't review for the benefit of the author, but out of courtesy. And true, there are a good chunk of reviewers/flamers who feel that the act of leaving a review is beneficiary to themselves - an attempt to fill some vapid black hole they've got residing inside of them, that pleasures at trying to break someone else down.

And whether or not any of those ought to be a factor when it comes to reviewing, it undeniably is. The delivery of a critique, whether that critique be positive or negative, can always be done in a pleasant way.

In what ways do you, or you notice that other people, do to refrain from leaving a flame? What can we do to pull the plug on damaging, hateful reviews?

In my own experience, I've found that leaving no review at all is typically the best route to take. However, if I feel compelled to let the author know what it was that bothered me about the story (in hopes that it'll help them to achieve a higher level of skill)... that has to be dealt with delicately. That's for sure.

My rule of thumb is to leave a critiquing review that I would personally want to receive. Not what I wouldn't mind receiving, but what I would want to see. Authors deserve to know what they did wrong and where they can improve, but being nasty about it is truly uncalled for.

[Keira]

That's a good point, Mars. There are also plenty of young authors who write for fun, not to be critiqued - and I think it's important for people to remember that. I also think it's important for those said authors to understand that they are posting on site designed for writers, by writers, for the purpose of critique. It's a shame that we have to censor ourselves because of that - however, I do agree with you. Criticism can be damaging and drive a lot of young authors away from the very idea of writing.

[printandpolish]

I had a nasty, nasty flame in one of my stories. The reviewer disliked the sister fic and the premise and didn't think it was well written. Honestly, that's fine, if s/he had said that, but she said I was immature and ridiculous and perhaps someday, I might write better, because the writing itself wasn't so terrible, she supposed, but really, what was I thinking?

As much as I hate to admit it, that kind of stuff really throws me for a loop. I was reading that thinking, "I'm a magazine editor, I'm good with that, thanks." Then I felt like a conceited schmuck.

I honestly love real constructive criticism. Liz and I have sent original work back and forth, and Tens has helped me with some of my original stuff, and it's been fabulous to have someone actually respect you enough to say, "Hey, this doesn't work" or "Wait a minute, I don't believe this character would do that." If you're open to that, it makes your stuff better.

[Tensleep]

I have to agree with Artemis. When you write a critiuqe or review or whatever you want to call it, your tone says a lot more than your words. My Dad says the same thing about body language and I hate it when we get into an arguement over that. There is something to be said for the web in that regard. At least you don't have to face the person you're critiquing. It makes a lot of people pretty brave.

I've had both good and bad reviews and if they have a point I either apologize because I can't swing my story any other way or I make some changes and just shake my head at myself. Some people act like it's the end of the world to get a flame and I can't get upset over it. I'll brood and ponder it, but there is no big cry fest because one person wants to feel superior becase they can pick apart your hard work with none of their own to show you up with.

I think that should be a prerequisite to flaming. If you have nothing to show, you shouldn't be allowed to talk. Man, that would be swesome...

See ya in the funny papers!!!

Tens

[fairlane]

Like Keira, I also try and leave the sort of review I would like to recieve myself. If I review at all it's because I'm enjoying the story so I always comment on what I like.

If I have any critism I try and be specific about what I don't like and why. I think that the explanation and maybe a suggestion for improvement is where the constructive comes in.

I've had a couple of reviewers comment "I don't like this chapter" or words to that effect and I kind of wish that they would have told me why, even if it was just one line "Becuase it's boring" or whatever, as then it would be more usefull.

[These Trick Questions]

marsonfire said:

I realize a lot of the authors are young and may not want the criticism, however well meaning.

I guess that just shows how different "young" people can be. I realize I'm probably a lot younger then y'all, but I absolutely LOVE it when people criticize my work. I got really upset with my friend once because she only corrected capital/comma errors on a reserach paper for school and none of the actual writing. And it aggrivates me because I mostly get "I love your story!!!" in reviews and really, I want more. I guess I'm greedy. Lol. : )

On the other hand, I have trouble reviewing other people's work, because I don't like being mean. (I've been told several times by various people that I'm too nice, lol.) I try to point out grammatical errors and be constructive, but...I dunno, I'm just not good at it.

[zevie]

Yeah, I agree, "young" people aren't always resistent to criticism. (And they aren't the only ones who ARE, lol.) I think experience does play a key factor in how well you recieve criticism though, and the longer you live, the more likely you are to be criticized, lol.

[latch22]

Well, to play Devil's advocate, those of you who have seen me around elsewhere know that I am, well... young... and yet I'm actually bordering on obsessive about constructive criticism. (That may be because I am, perhaps, extremely critical.)

I suppose that you can get used to hearing constructive criticism and therefore grit your teeth, but I really think that it's ingrained in your personality whether or not you are truly open to it.

I've always personally appreciated it, for the most part. It means that I have something definite to improve on and I can see the change taking place and have something to be proud of. Progress. I don't actually get any of it, for some reason, but I'm hoping...

For another thing, those who are living out their fantasies aren't there to write, and they have little to no interest in the craft.

But sometimes, I don't think there is a way to get used to it. You accept it or you don't. You learn, and grow as a writer, or you just don't. In that sense, I don't think experience plays much of a role, and age becomes irrelevant as well.

Cheers!

[zevie]

Hmm...you do make a good point. I usually love CC but I'm not sure why that is... I think, as with most things, if you catch it early enough, or if you're determined enough, you can learn to deal with CC, uh, constructively, even if you're not pre-disposed that way. But, yeah, personality probably has an influence. (Nature versus nurture anyone?) In my training, I've been taught that if it's good, you don't need to mention it, it's the bad stuff that you need to look at - so compliments are unbelievably rare, and criticisms run rampant. If people criticise you, it means that your work is worthy of their notice, so criticism is a good thing. Unfortunately, this means a lot of people get put off the process. I'm not sure if it's a good line to take or not, but it works for me. Generally if I give CC I like to balance it with compliments so the writer doesn't feel like I'm attacking them. Specifying that they like CC makes this process about a million times simpler though. I hope this actually made sense...

[Nittanylizard]

Maybe what happens is that, especially in the Outsiders section, the newer and inexperienced writers also tend to be young writers, some of whom aren't very receptive to criticism. Voila, a generalization is made ;D. On top it it, newer writers usually make a lot of the same errors (I'm going to offer Ten Years Later as an example, which is full of all the kinds of errors that many writers make when starting out). For someone who's been reading on the site for a while, though, it can be easy (even without realizing it) to read yet another poorly written story and feel that all the mistakes should be clear as day to the writer, despite the fact that they may have only just started writing.

I myself am very open to helpful advice. In fact, often when a reader tells me that something in the story didn't work too well for them, I find that they have either pinpointed or reaffirmed something that was also bothering me. I have to admit, though, there are some things that bug me, both in my reviews and when I see them on others' review pages. While I don't take these things personally, seeing them in a review automatically makes me think much less of the actual criticism, even if I happen to agree with all or most of it:

1. The reviewer moves from making comments about the story to making comments about what they think of me and how they think I should feel. This is the only point that I mean only in the negative sense, and that I hate seeing on others' (especially new writers') review pages - while I think it's fine to tell an author they should feel proud of their writing if it's good, it is poor form to tell a writer they should be ashamed of their writing. The writing can always get better, but it won't if the comments make the writer feel bad enough about themself that they stop writing.
2. The reviewer makes comments about the story that appear to be for their own amusement or to amuse other readers of the review, rather than to actually help the writer.
3. The reviewer makes assumptions about how I feel about my story, how I will respond to criticism, and/or how I feel about other readers' reviews, rather than just focusing on their own take on the story.
4. The reviewer implies that their opinion and comments about the story trump, rather than add to, those of anybody who either didn't notice, or didn't comment on, what they felt was wrong (or right).
5. The reviewer passes judgement on other legitimate reviewers (including both positive and negative reviews).
6. The reviewer implies (or outright claims) that their interpretation of the characters is the correct one, or much closer to correct than mine.

Note that none of these has anything to do with the actual writing, with the exception of #6. My opinion is that if you add that kind of stuff to your review, you either make the writer take you much less seriously, or the writer takes your comments to heart and believes that they are truly a bad writer rather than an inexperienced writer. I think a well written critique (and I'm not saying I'm positive how to write one will make a writer feel more excited to write, rather than discouraged.

My thoughts on young reviewers who don't offer much more than "luv it plz continue!" is that they are my target audience (I write young adult novels), so if there was something they liked, then I'm going in the right direction. I find that less experienced (and often younger) readers are much more forgiving with respect to the technical/mechanical portion of the writing, so I'm not expecting their critique there, but no matter how well constructed a story is, if they don't connect with it in some way, then I'm doing something wrong.

Liz

[zevie]

Wow, fantastic summary. I really like that. I like what you said about assuming that everyone can see these mistakes - when I first started, I didn't know the term "Mary-Sue" existed, much less know what it was. My first fic...oh, boy. I re-read some chapters from that every so often and take back every nasty thought I've ever had about another person's fic.

nittanylizard said:

I think a well written critique (and I'm not saying I'm positive how to write one will make a writer feel more excited to write, rather than discouraged.

For sure. I'm not positive on the how-to either, but there are some good things that have been said here about how to write a good critique. I also love it when someone else can pinpoint exactly what's wrong in my work when it's something that I've felt, but was too close to the work to spot. That, and I love discussing characterization; when someone tells me all about their interpretation, I find that really helpful, because I can compare it to what I'm trying to get across. I especially love giving this kind of review, because it's not intentionally negative or positive about the work - it's up to the author to figure that out, lol.

P.S. I may be repeating myself. Sorry. I babble.

[latch22]

I think that I know how to write a well-balanced critique, but I find that I have difficulty in choosing what to mention and what to just let lie, and so I tend to just not mention quite a bit.

I still say that it depends partly on how you are predisposed to be receptive to CC or not.

But perhaps I was a bad example. I've been writing for a long time, I think, and so I wouldn't say that I'm inexperienced just because I'm young. So I think that you have all made good points. When you're starting something for the first time, you tend to be unsure, and a review will either make or break you. A lot of new writers tend to be around that age. I never said that I didn't see the parallels. I was just pointing out the anomalies. Lol.

Maybe this whole flame versus CC thing, and its connection to age and experience, is just a big ol' algorithm.

Cheers!

[Nittanylizard]

latch22 said:

I still say that it depends partly on how you are predisposed to be receptive to CC or not.

When you're starting something for the first time, you tend to be unsure, and a review will either make or break you. A lot of new writers tend to be around that age. I never said that I didn't see the parallels. I was just pointing out the anomalies. Lol.

Cheers!

I agree, I think there are some people who are sensitive and/or protective about their work, regardless how nice or impersonal a reviewer is, and it would make sense that it's linked to personality.

I'm sorry, I wasn't targeting anything you said with that first paragraph in my last post, if that was how it came off . I had read the responses earlier, did some thinking, and came back later with what my brain had mushed it all into.

I guess what I see a lot is that people have all different views on what constitutes constructive criticism; so when a newer writer gets upset about somebody claiming to be trying to help when what they are really doing (inadvertently or not) is making personal attacks, it looks like the author is incapable of accepting criticism. Sure, it's better to just keep your mouth shut and say thanks for the input, but it can be frustrating when the author tries to call them on it and rather than owning up to their attitude, the reviewer hides behind the "I was being honest, so you should be thankful" mask. I think this is part of why a higher percentage of writers on ffnet appear to be against criticism. It's like there's not always respect for the author when somebody has something negative to point out about the story, and that comes across in the review.

At the same time, I have seen a few authors who recieved good solid advice that was delivered in a friendly tone label the review as a flame and move on to request "only good reviews".

One of the things about ffnet, especially when you're looking at a section that's made up of so many authors who haven't been writing for very long or who were just inspired by this particular book to write, is that many of them use the site and the reviews as a resource for learning how to write better, whereas a lot of readers only want to read stories that have been written by authors who already know how to write well. So there's an expectation from the reviewer that the author should already be at a certain level of competence, and from the writer that readers will understand that she/he is new at all this and hasn't learned it all yet.

[latch22]

Liz, I didn't feel targeted. And even if it was directed at me, which it didn't seem to be, isn't that how conversation goes? Personally, I look someone in the eye when I'm talking to them. Of course, you can't do that over the Internet, but directing responses is about as close as you can get without body language. Don't sweat it--you didn't do anything wrong.

Another thing that I've noticed is that old, "You probably won't like this," or, "You probably won't listen to this, and you'll continue with your evil ways, but I'm right, and you *should* listen to me, you immature amateur." (Say "immature amateur" quickly.) People are too defensive because, although we think that it should be simple to tell, it really can be difficult to predict how your comments will be perceived. Anonymity can be a safety net, but it's not without its flaws; how can you tell how something was really intended? Never trust anybody who thinks that body language, inflection, and the like are overrated.

Someone can write a poor review because they don't know any better, or because they type without thinking, but I think it's as simple as the intent that separates flames and CC; the problem with that is that the intent itself can be difficult to discern, and you never know what was running through someone's mind.

You made several excellent points.

By the way, just so there's no apprehension, you can even disagree with me, and call me out on it, and I'll have no problem with it, and that's not because I'm defensive. I love intelligent conversation, and I'm not afforded as many opportunities as I would like to have it. It's kind of rare, around here. Someone disagreeing with me doesn't send up a red flag--voicing opposition just brings the discussion full circle and examines the subject in a new light. I have a habit of playing Devil's advocate for that very reason.

... Do I sound like a pretentious, pompous ... rhymes with "mass"? I'm just curious, 'cause I don't try to be condescending or anything... I actually make more of a habit of dumb-ing down most of what I say (although I've since stopped doing that, mostly)...

[Nittanylizard]

Now see, I rarely get offended by anything either, but I do exactly what you're saying - I start thinking that without body language or other visual mannerisms in place, I'm offending people left and right. So for the record, and I'm saying this just once - if any of you think I've said something to offend you, you're wrong!

Oh, and Lara, I completely disagree with everything you said. Ad infinitum. ;D ;D ;D

Bring on the intelligence...

(I spend my days with little children, so I'm kind of having a brain-starve here; I'm depending on you people to throw me a bone every now and again)