i'mnot sure where I stand on the public crit debate. On the one hand, I totally want and do public analysis, but, just like in the 'real' world, I rarely bother to spend too much time on things I genuinely dislike. If I waste my time discussing a story in detail, it ought to be worth it, y'know.
which is very differnt for me from betaing, where I totally emphasize the negative 9pretty much at the exclusion of whatworked), but that's not public.
I'm trying to figure out who and what's helped here? Yes, I get that it might be useful to say, mpreg in general can do X really well but is in danger of Y and here are examples for both. But I wonder whom you'd ultimately be writing for.
I mean, you bring up OOC debates that are too abstract. But look at how utterly subjetive and ultmately useless the debates get when we do get into specifics (*points to case studies Transcendental and Hindsight). The folks who thought Rodney was OOC in either won't budge and neither will those that thought the show's version could extrapolate to include these versions.
And in the end people were upset and i'm not sure anyone learned anything. And the only reason this could even be done was that the stories were good enough to withstand this. Do you really want to take some random wraithbait fic and tear it apart?
But then I don't think English *is* about evaluating. other than my bizarre "which story is better" exercise I cite in my latest post that happened a good two decades ago, I haven't ever judged or evaluated. I've analyzed, look at the way gender functions, the way voice is used, whatever. But that's ANALYSIS not EVALUATION.
Andyes, I know that the author might still get upset, but there are ways in which an analysis has both a tone and focus that refuses to judge.
[OK, I have done it once and maybe that can be an example--or maybe not--in my <a href='http://cathexys.livejournal.com/169827.html">celebrity</a> paper, I discuss, what many might consider a Mary Sue story...and I think I address some of the aspecects surrounding that, esp. its particular appeal.
B/c ultimately, we don't really want to criticize the utterly bad. We want to figure out why a story we hate is beloved by others, right? Noone runs in open doors and states what we all agree on. What we are desperate to do is explain in exhausting detail why story X was really, truly bad...b/c half our flist is in love with it!!!
[and yes, I know not every single person is in that 'we'...i'm sure plenty of people have different motivations...i should have possibly said I?]
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-05-21 01:33 pm (UTC)From:i'mnot sure where I stand on the public crit debate. On the one hand, I totally want and do public analysis, but, just like in the 'real' world, I rarely bother to spend too much time on things I genuinely dislike. If I waste my time discussing a story in detail, it ought to be worth it, y'know.
which is very differnt for me from betaing, where I totally emphasize the negative 9pretty much at the exclusion of whatworked), but that's not public.
I'm trying to figure out who and what's helped here? Yes, I get that it might be useful to say, mpreg in general can do X really well but is in danger of Y and here are examples for both. But I wonder whom you'd ultimately be writing for.
I mean, you bring up OOC debates that are too abstract. But look at how utterly subjetive and ultmately useless the debates get when we do get into specifics (*points to case studies Transcendental and Hindsight). The folks who thought Rodney was OOC in either won't budge and neither will those that thought the show's version could extrapolate to include these versions.
And in the end people were upset and i'm not sure anyone learned anything. And the only reason this could even be done was that the stories were good enough to withstand this. Do you really want to take some random wraithbait fic and tear it apart?
But then I don't think English *is* about evaluating. other than my bizarre "which story is better" exercise I cite in my latest post that happened a good two decades ago, I haven't ever judged or evaluated. I've analyzed, look at the way gender functions, the way voice is used, whatever. But that's ANALYSIS not EVALUATION.
Andyes, I know that the author might still get upset, but there are ways in which an analysis has both a tone and focus that refuses to judge.
[OK, I have done it once and maybe that can be an example--or maybe not--in my <a href='http://cathexys.livejournal.com/169827.html">celebrity</a> paper, I discuss, what many might consider a Mary Sue story...and I think I address some of the aspecects surrounding that, esp. its particular appeal. B/c ultimately, we don't really want to criticize the utterly bad. We want to figure out why a story we hate is beloved by others, right? Noone runs in open doors and states what we all agree on. What we are desperate to do is explain in exhausting detail why story X was really, truly bad...b/c half our flist is in love with it!!! [and yes, I know not every single person is in that 'we'...i'm sure plenty of people have different motivations...i should have possibly said I?]