Fanfic Writing – the Subject of Feedback
Receiving feedback
Value it. Treasure it. Reward it.
Anyone who writes to you is to be respected. The simple fact that they cared enough to offer an opinion puts them in a class apart from those who read and move on. You don’t have to agree with them — and usually you won’t — but at the bare minimum you must send an acknowledgement of whatever commentary they offered, and resist any temptation to engage in sarcasm or slap back if you didn’t like what they had to say.
Why? Several reasons.
- It’s good to get into the habit of courtesy, because the world never has enough of it.
- A mild reply to an offensive review (even an attack) might surprise the offender enough to elicit actual thoughtful treatment … and if it doesn’t, you’ve lost only the time it took you to calm down and compose an answer, both of which you needed to do anyhow.
- You might have misunderstood what was being said, or just been in a bad and bristly mood yourself and overreacted to what were pertinent (if tactlessly framed) observations, and it’s a lot easier to take back nice words than ugly ones.
- And finally, responding to feedback is really just a subcategory of a far more important necessity:
Giving feedback
How many fanfic stories have you read? How many (let’s be generous and say one out of every ten) have provided you with some kind of small enjoyment? How many of those (another possible one in ten) have you really liked? And of those one-in-every-hundred, how many times have you let the author know that you enjoyed his/her stuff, and why you did so?
Some of my most pleasant e-mail correspondence resulted from my doing just that: sending a fanfic author the message that I found a story appealing, and what I liked about it. This was worth doing for its own sake (they provided me pleasure by their writing, I gave back some of it by offering recognition), but let’s not ignore a not-uncommon side effect: three out of every four wound up offering some analysis of one or more of my stories, and this usually was more in-depth, perceptive, and rewarding than the usual run of "Great story, I really loved it" posts that constitute the majority of feedback. No surprise here: people who write well in their stories are going to write well in their e-mails, and someone you’ve given an intelligent and careful review is going to have a little motivation to do the same for you.
Besides, they deserve it.
Proper feedback
The first rule to follow — and if you remember nothing else, this one might be enough by itself to carry you — is to think about what you wish you could get in the way of feedback, and supply it. We want to be told we’re good, no question there; but we also want to be recognized for exactly what we did well. So focus on the elements of the story that made the strongest impression on you, and say so and why. Some areas deserving attention are plot, pacing, characterization, dialogue, use of language, originality of theme and approach, faithfulness to canon or effectiveness of departure from it. Feedback doesn’t have to come in the form of an essay (though some do), but it should address something specific.
Then we come to the question of your intent as a provider of feedback. Do you just want to reward the author for entertaining you and/or doing quality work? Do you want to interact with an intriguing mind? Do you want to make actual suggestions, in the hope that your insights might improve the story? There are other possibilities, but the underlying fact is that you should adjust the style and tone of what you say, depending on what you want to accomplish.
Merriam-Webster’s defines criticism as “the art of evaluating or analyzing works of art or literature” … but this is a secondary definition, common usage having given criticism a negative connotation. Nonetheless, we need to think in terms of evaluation and analysis, and how to present ‘critical’ observations in the most palatable form. In the particulars, follow the same approach, for those things that dissatisfied, disappointed, or confused you, that you would for praise: point out what affected you, describe how it affected you, and offer some opinion on why it had that effect (which can then be followed by suggested change, though there are times when you can recognize that something isn’t right, and why, without being able to offer an alternative). In the context of critiquing the overall story, one of the best structures is that used by corporate supervisors in employee performance reviews, and by some teachers: open with positive, do a quick summation of any ‘negatives’, then close with positive. In other words, give praise, follow with an overview of which elements didn’t work or could use improvement, then go back to summarize the many things that did work (because you wouldn’t be going to this much trouble unless there was something about the piece that affected you strongly).
One last point to remember: detailed analysis and counter-suggestion are best suited — and in that case, absolutely necessary — for a work-in-progress, or one submitted for review before being ‘published’, but that doesn’t mean they’re ever irrelevant. At the very least, you’ve gotten a clearer picture in your own mind of what works well; more probably, the author whose story you evaluated recognizes that his/her efforts were significant enough to elicit some response; not improbably, the author will incorporate some of these concepts into later work; and possibly — just possibly — the author will revise the work itself in response to your opinions and suggestions.
If the latter two come about, then you have yourself become part of the creative process. That is not a small thing.
GO back to the Nonfiction Section
Send comments to the author