Should we be Fighting Mediocrity? · 4:46am Jun 24th, 2014
Hi guys. I've been thinking lately, and you know how I get when I do that. Some of this is a bit late-night, so excuse if I sound a little weird.
Let's talk!
So, stop me if any of the below sounds familiar.
No, wait, don't. I had a decently long second person anecdote to relate here about stories in the featured box and stuff, but it was starting to sound really cynical and maybe a little rude.
Instead, let me ask you guys something:
What do you think of authors who're popular, but not great? What do you say to them, exactly?
Or, maybe more importantly: What do you say of them?
And how much overlap is there between the two?
I guess the question's there in my mind because I see this a lot on Skype. I'm not going to lie, I've been in some of it myself. Someone brings up a story that's featured, and maybe seven times out of ten, there's a rallying cry: "Ugh. So-and-so."
When elaborating on the matter, the explanations are usually the same. "They're not necessarily bad. I mean, they could be worse at writing. And it's not like I hate them. I talked with them once or twice and they seemed pretty unoffensive. They just..."
"Aren't really that good."
"Always write the same kind of story."
"Never get called out on it."
I'm aware that the following is gonna sound horribly elitist, and depending on your personal views regarding me, maybe even a little hypocritical:
To be honest, I think there is kind of a sub-category of writer on Fimfiction who fits this description. They're technically competent--usually you can't find too much fault in their spelling or grammar--and they're certainly popular. A lot of them have big, big follower counts, and some of them even manage to creep over the thousand mark. But, like... There's something about their writing, or the things they write, that feels kind of off, relative to the praise they often get. Maybe their prose feels kinda wooden and their sentence construction is occasionally weird. Maybe they have some very specific patterns in the types of stories they write... almost to the point where it feels like they're milking it. Like they had one really popular story, and everything they've written since has been writing continuations or spin-offs. Or they do a lot of Human in Equestria stories, which all seem to have the same general format. Whatever.
This sub-category of author doesn't get talked about a lot, as a group. And even individually there's not a lot of public discussion regarding these sorts of people. When it happens, it happens in Skype chats or in private talks, where only some friends will end up seeing it. I'm not sure this is representative of us being "all right" with these kinds of authors--because there's clearly some level of... distaste, maybe? Resentment? I'unno. But it doesn't get talked about much, as a phenomenon. We'll reference the featured box being full of "generic clop" or "mediocre stories" in general terms, but we very rarely move on to "And there are some authors who write these sorts of things consistently." Which is interesting, I guess.
Contrast this with the sort of author everyone loves to talk about. The weak authors, who often make typos and use punctuation oddly. The people who write about alicorn OCs. The authors who blow up when their mistakes get pointed out. People can't wait to jump in on the thick of things for those. They go to great efforts to point out the flaws in these peoples' stories, debate the author and their fans over the real problems in the writing, and pore over it to make sure they've caught as many errors as they reasonably can.
And, I guess I'm left wondering here... Should this be the case? Or, rather, should we be focusing all our public critiques and efforts on the people who're obviously bad and mostly unknown, but leave the authors who're mostly "okay" to their fans in the featured box?
I mean, there are some fairly obvious reasons as to why we don't like to go after more popular, technically decent authors as much. It's not as easy to pick apart a story when it doesn't have glaring flaws like a misspelled title or a Mary Sue main character. And many of these authors have a large number of fans who're more ready to defend the story--because when you get into more abstract concerns like "The prose feels wooden" it's going to be a tougher fight to prove anything. Horrible as it feels to me to say this, there is a level of reader who has trouble recognizing things like weird sentence constructions or problematic pacing, and their defenses of the story will often dismiss these as issues, making it difficult to discuss, or convince people.
When I say 'fighting mediocrity' here, lemme be clear: I'm not saying we should go after these people or attack them. I'm saying perhaps we ought to be focusing our efforts more on giving advice and critique to the more technically decent authors, rather than primarily on weaker authors. Focusing a bit more on how mid-level authors can improve, not just "bad" authors.
I wonder if it's ultimately good--for both the community writ large and the authors themselves--to leave authors who're halfway between "bad" and "good" where they are. If we should just whisper about how they're constantly getting featured for boring generic "Twilight discovers X" stories instead of talking about it with them. Asking them if this is where they want to go as an author. Maybe part of the reason there's so much ennui about the stuff that's "Always Getting Featured" is because we're a little too content to leave these sorts of authors to their own devices, and prefer to throw ourselves at authors who're less decent, less popular, less defensible.
I will always always always be willing to acknowledge that in fanfiction, you're never obligated to do anything but enjoy yourself. You're not under mandate to improve, most certainly. Maybe some of these authors are really just comfortable where they are, and aren't really looking to get lectured about moving on--I get that, I do. But, I'unno, maybe some of them just aren't getting the critique they really need to hear. The kind they aren't getting from the people who'll often lift them into the featured box. It's possible some of them aren't really aware that there still is a next level to which they ought to climb...
And maybe we ought to start discussing that with them more.
Nope
Eh, it's ponyfic. Not really gonna spend that much time/effort fretting about it.
EDIT: To clarify a bit, since I do need to be getting to bed soon: Really, all of this is in the eyes of the beholder. If someone is truly out to improve as an author, they'll ask around and seek out the resources to do so. Those who are simply having fun may ask around after a while, and improve at whatever pace they desire. And lastly, those who simply write what they think will get them the most views/faves/followers with the minimal amount of effort will do that as well.
And all of those approaches are fine. Really, the biggest thing that irks me somewhat with this site is people take it too seriously/personally, and allow that attitude to color their perceptions of other people's stories. Which all in all is quite silly to me
1deep1me
Outside of the small handful of authors I personally really like, I don't pay too much attention to anything but the stories. FimFiction, much as fan-fiction as a whole is a subjective art, and I browse it for those things that appeal to me. Either I end up liking a story and read it, forgiving whatever flaws I find, or move on to look for another. I'll forgive a lot more if the story focuses on a topic that I take interest in, but the basic concept remains the same.
All writers should be able to get critiques. If you get people together to write critiques of "mid-level" fics, that would be good. It doesn't have to be more important than criticizing bad authors to be worth doing.
Don't know what response you'll get, though. I think those authors are doing what they want and having fun.
(Unless you're talking about me. Are you talking about me?
)
I created the Orient Express Explorers with the idea that some people should be focusing their critiques on the best authors. (It's defunct now--if anybody wants to do something with that group, let me know & I'll king you.) A critique should be a reward, not a punishment.
A guy on my Skype chat occasionally complain about an author who seems to be only able to write white knight stories.
The comments on this blog post thus far are unfortunately indicative of what you're dealing with, Obs. :(
If an author constantly writes the same type of stuff without much indication of improvement on their part at writing, I usually just bail and don't read their stuff.
2229860
Yeah, I get this perspective, definitely. I guess most of the observations here are directed a bit more at, like, the culture of reader-authors who like to discuss/review/critique stories, and have ostensible aims of helping other authors to improve their craft.
Sure, absolutely.
I, personally, see myself as being a fairly mediocre writer. It's been a while since I last released anything, true, and I should like to think I have improved in the last few years being on the site. But when I look at the stories I'm working on, none of them seem bad, but they all just look... generic. Aside from a few with, if I do say so myself, rather rad premises, I seem to conform to a bit of a mould when it comes to material. And as for those stories with pretty great concepts, most of those are nowhere close to getting released because every time I look at them I get scared that I won't be able to do them justice. I've got quite a few stories waiting in the wings.
I can't speak for other authors, but, should I release a story in the near future, I would certainly like for the people who read it to tell me if it's mediocre, and then go on to explain why. And then, if they can, possibly suggest ways of fixing the problems.
I feel that we, as authors, are here for three reasons: To entertain ourselves, to entertain others, and to improve. We cannot manage all three if readers are reluctant to tell us how they feel about our stories.
I think I'd count as one of those mediocre authors.
Speaking as an author in general, I don't think anyone should be above criticism. The will to dissect a story's flaws and discuss them can give us a new appreciation for how good the real gems are put together. From a creative standpoint an author should welcome and encourage criticism in the vein of critiquing, so they can learn the flaws of their work and improve them. That said, they need multiple points of view because obviously no one person is write when it comes to a field as subjective as creative writing.
Of course, it comes down to the author's attitude towards their own work. If they write for themselves and don't care what others think of it, power to them for it. If they want to improve their craft, they need to be open to hearing what's wrong with it so they know where to start. Either way, they need to handle criticism maturely.
I think, Obseh, it comes from the desire to see others succeed. When someone is popular, then they've already 'succeeded', regardless of whether or not they're great or not. And for the authors that you think are personally over-hyped, etc... Not to sound like a dick, but why would you WANT them to get better? If you don't like them, you don't typically want your enemy/rival getting better. (Not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just trying to figure out the mentality behind it, and that's my guess.)
You might as well go after the popular authors. Why not? Go after anyone I guess. We put our stories online so they're fair game.
2229867 Perhaps I don't show the gratitude that so many of the authors I enjoy deserve. I get close enough to a few of them to allow interaction, discourse and feedback, but even then it's in response to the amount of enjoyment I've gotten out of their work and how much narrative immersion I've received from their stories. It strikes me as a bit selfish on my part, but I'm somewhat comfortable with that. Not to be cold, because I do enjoy interacting with others on something more than a passive level, but due to circumstances, I find that it requires exhaustive effort. Is it worth it? Emphatically yes, a vast majority of the time, yet it's still something that I find to be a challenge.
Horse, water, drink.
2229890
Meh, I don't think that sounds selfish of you. Just as nobody is obliged to give a critique, or edit, or help a concept come together, or even write a story, nobody is obliged to engage in regular social discourse with the authors they follow or shower then with shows of gratitude. It's all about what you're comfortable with, what you're willing to do, and what you find to be fun. As long as you keep all of these things in mind, you're good to go.
The problem with that bit is, even the most annoying new authors don't really have the power to effectively block reviewers. You block one of us, about a hundred more people swarm to cover us.
But certain "popular" authors, you say one thing? YOU BLOCKED! You get seen criticizing him/her around the site? They're friends with one of the mods and there's a good chance something will happen. Some people will understand who I'm talking about, but you can't criticize him/her if your viewpoint just differentiates even a little. You put one line I don't agree with? You're blocked! The MC is a Mary-Sue and her power is over-exaggerated! You blocked! You just can't criticize him/her. And I have realized that this has turned into a rant that I wasn't aiming for and I'm getting close to making it really obvious who I'm talking about. I'm just going to stop here.
Also, the problem is, when you hit the featured box, it seems to make authors think they're the best! They're so high on the featured box, the featured box might as well be classified as an addictive and hallucinogenic drug. Can we have that as warning on the featured box?
EDIT: In case I wasn't clear (I probably wasn't). I'm okay with "meh". My fics are "meh".
2229866
I guess? I mean, I can imagine this reaction is part of why a lot of people who'd be quick to critique worse stories and authors wouldn't want to tangle as hard with this sort of thing.
On the other hand, I guess the attitude of "Well, I'm not expecting them to improve" is sort of disingenuous with the attitude I often see regarding weaker authors and how they "Need to get critiques and reviews to help them understand how to improve beyond where they are."
I'm not sure that the "need" for this sort of critical eye disappears once you hit technical decency, or if it's really a service to authors of any caliber if we're ready to classify them as "Beyond saving" without at least the attempt.
2229879
Well, which is part of the weirdness about the divide between weaker authors and decentish authors. We see a bad story about an red-and-black alicorn taking Equestria by storm as a sign that the author needs help improving, but we see a technically-competent-but-overall-meh story in the featured box as a sign that the readers need to improve.
I had this rant about how FimFiction might be "too nice" a website for fanfic, but I remembered something Aquaman's said once or twice on the subject of being a visible author here. All you have to do to gain a following is put out a steady stream of content. Ideally, it'd be competently written, but all you really have to do to keep a big presence on this website... is to keep a big presence.
Is that something worth fighting in the name of literary merit and improving the linguistic acumen of bronies throughout the fandom? Beats me. I'll be happy enough finishing some manner of story, showing it to friends whose opinions I desire and cherish, and hope that they glean some entertainment out of it.
I approve of this product and/or message.
2229856
I feel like it's hard for me to sign off on an attitude of "Writers who want to get better will already be seeking to get better" because, as an author myself (and having spoken a few times with people who'd hit quality plateaus in the past), I'm not sure it's that cut-and-dry. Writing more produces greater writing experience is a concept with some merit to it, and "I'd like to get better" isn't necessarily always accompanied by "Wait, am I actually getting any better?"
And, of course, the more praise you get without qualifying criticism, the easier it is to convince yourself you're already "there." The purist mindset might argue that a good author knows they can always improve, but... well, in practice, we're fairly susceptible to believing we're already pretty good at what we do.
Like I said, I'll always defend the right of people to be happy where they are. But I do wonder if there're people out there who'd want to get better who're unaware of where the next rung is on the ladder, due to lack of force-feedback.
The problem with critiquing mid-level or above authors, particularly those who enjoy some sense of popularity, is that the critiques typically devolve from thoughtful and meaningful analysis to opinion pieces because, well, at some point it just starts coming down to opinion. Like, for instance, if someone wrote grammatically and stylistically-correct Human in Equestria stories, and wrote them over and over again while they became more and more popular, you probably wouldn't like them. However, at this point not liking has become subjective rather than objective.
That's not to say that reviewing popular things is useless or unworthy of your time, but the problem still exists that the better the story is that you dislike, the more likely your critique is simply your opinion. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I, for instance, have a great distaste for Cormac McCarthy, though I recognize that he is an incredibly talented writer. Heck, look at Roger Ebert, who built a career on sharing opinions on popular things, while whether he was really "right" or "wrong" on whether a film had merit was up to the viewer.
I guess what I'm saying is that, yes, we should probably fight mediocrity to help better writers and enable them to pursue their craft with more talent and experience, but we should also be careful that we see as mediocrity is only that in our own opinion.
2229900
I use the beyond saving classification when they really show they don't want to be saved. They like their little niche. Writing clopfics about humans, or just LoHAV's, and even some fucking verse stuff. They stick by it and don't try anything different. Sure, this doesn't technically make anything the writer does bad, and hell, they can even write some good stuff with what they're used to, but holy hell does it just look boring and uninteresting when you realize this is all that author writers. And that's usually the bailing time for me.
To put it another way, is there any class of author that you shouldn't give constructive criticism to? Unless the author is reading absolutely nothing, their style and voice should (hopefully) change after they've written tens to hundreds of thousands of words more. Hopefully that change is for the better. In my case I definitely want feedback to nudge me in the right direction, or at least call me out on mistakes that I keep making.
2229860
Pretty much this. I tend to not pay attention to people's names, so I'm always caught in confusion when I hear friends talk about "So-So did scandalous thing" or "What's-It wrote more of that generic crap". If someone wants me to pay attention to them, they need to do something that makes me want to give them mind. They have to earn that little +1 follow, and I've found it's that I either enjoy a bunch of the stories they write, they offer intelligent discussion that I can get into, or are simply good friends. Usually it's some combination thereof.
That said, I'm not quite sure about this "war on mediocrity" you're trying to shine a light on. It shouldn't necessarily be that there's a reason for an author to get critique/reviews/focus/etc., rather it should be a particular story. Pointing out a story's flaws offers up the author the chance to improve the next time around. Of course, whether or not an author chooses to acknowledge any sort of feedback they're given is their choice, and just a few people saying they're doing something wrong as opposed to several hundred apparently saying to keep doing what they're doing, authors would more than likely inclined to do the latter. "If you find a niche, you fill it," after all. Sounds like it's a problem with the readers, not the author.
Most decent authors, I'd think, wouldn't have much room for improvement, at least compared to those who are mediocre. The problem therein lies with getting these relatively unheard authors noticed more, and critique directed solely towards the author isn't going to do that. I can't pretend to know everything, but I'm more for a level playing field, where anybody can get feedback, good or bad. To focus attention towards the good-but-unheard robs the bad-but-popular of potentially getting help becoming good-and-popular. Likewise, focusing on the bad-but-popular robs the good-but-unheard of potentially getting the attention they deserve.
The problem as I see it is actually providing feedback and not being a dick about it. The only person an author is obliged to change for is themselves, and if they don't and want to keep filling their niche, then that's just fine. I'll keep searching for the stories I want to read and then haphazardly express why others should read them too (or not), regardless of who wrote the story.
As one of the Mediocre who aspires to Witty, but has only made it half-way so far, I would like to stand up for the rest of the herd. Discounting clop, I view authors by two grading scales: Popular and Good (and somehow I made it to Mediocre on both scales. Sigh. But I digress)
Popular authors produce interesting stories, plotlines with complex characters that are fun to read.
Good authors produce perfect stories, with exact grammar, precise formatting, and Oxford Commas.
Some of the stories from popular authors are rife with typos, continuity issues, and, weird comma placement. We read them anyway. Their fun⁽*⁾.
Some of the stories from good authors make you scratch your head afterwards and think "What was that?" We read them anyway too. They make our brains stretch.
The intersection of these two sets is a rare subset of true genius. I'm not going to name names, because we know who they are (and it's different for each of us). As metaphorical gardeners in a giant patch of
weedsflowers of indeterminate origin, it is our responsibility to give gentle nudges to the flowers (but not the way Flitter does) to encourage them to the best blooms and proper growth.I'm trying to do my part. I can't write reviews worth a hoot, but I have done a bit of editing assistance. And sometimes two mediocre writers working together can make something a little better than mediocre, just the way two wrongs sometimes make a right, and two Wrights make an airplane. (checks clock) Ok, time to go to bed and recharge the delirious brain cells. Stay frosty everybody, and keep writing.
(1) Sometimes they're footnotes don't match either. And they don't know Their from They're.
Rainbow Bob, you're probably going to comment on this, and let me say, I don't really have a problem with it. People are good at different things. I would never ask Tom Clancy to write a romantic comedy. It would likely be a disaster. If people are good at writing popular not too ambitious stories, and they enjoy doing so, I don't see anything wrong with that.
The problem is that there are some authors who let their popularity alone stand as a testament to their skill, and that's when the ego maniacs are born.
There are some popular authors who are aware that there could be room for improvement, maybe even a new idea, but don't want to hear it, and instead choose to stick to what made them popular in the first place; a "Something-verse" here, a spinoff, there... "X and Y fucked and [insert sex-cliches here]."
Stuff like that comes off as a message that you basically sold your soul as a writer and you aren't writing for yourself anymore (if that was ever their intention in the first place), and instead you're writing for the popularity.
"Oh, but I don't need to change anything! I have over 1,000 followers and X published words!"
That's what pisses me off. Like you said: there's a level of reader who has trouble recognizing weird sentence structure, and, unsurprisingly, that's the majority of Fimfiction.
A.K.A: The followers who will defend their based god author to the death, merely because they can't recognize bad prose with good grammar, and are left wondering exactly what the "naysayers" are seeing that they aren't able to see. It could basically be translated to "Literary Dyslexia."
With these kind of people in the way (which, 9 times out of 10, the author won't be afraid to use as a shield), calling the popular "Meh" authors out on awkward or generic writing is more trouble than the author is worth. So instead, the weak authors are called out much more often, and we leave the arrogant "feature box authors" to their target audience: The ones who can't see the deeper elements of good writing in a story. The naive and defenseless are much easier targets.
...Maybe there is an underlying message to calling out the authors with no one to defend them. For those who are willing to listen to a little blunt advice, it might be subliminally translated as, "There's always room for improvement. Always. Don't let your follower count or 'what this guy said about my story' speak for your writing skill. Let the writing itself speak for your prowess; not a few numbers."
With that hammered into your head, chances are, you won't be the arrogant, generic feature box author with over 1k followers that we're tired of seeing all the time. There's too many of those already. It could be possible that we're just subliminally trying to stem the tide of them by going after the newbies and hammering some sense into them.
...Oh, would look at that. Obs made me think about stuff, and at this time of night, too? Great job.
2229936 This is a good philosophy. I can respect Obs's desire to work in an environment of cooperative learning and improvement (or dare I say it, Harmony), and such efforts are rarely in vain. At the same time I feel that it is less cynical and more realist to say that to deny Sturgeon's law is to think the thoughts of a madman. This is not to disrespect those writer's out there whose standards for grammatical correctness, narrative consistency, alliterative writing, or other qualities are not quite up to mine own. Such things are vastly subjective, and people have far different tolerances for the different emotional highs and lows that come as a reaction to reading a fic. To attempt to impose my own standards upon anyone ... hell, I don't even need to say it, I have a feel for the general consensus on how wise that position would appear.
Some of us mediocre writers are only that way because we don't know how to become better. Some mediocre writers want to improve, but just aren't sure where to go.
Yes, we aren't the one who desperately need help, but there are some of us who are passionate about writing well and getting better. Should we ignore them to help someone who is not interested in what we have to say can be improved?
Now, that is to say that not all terrible writers don't want to improve. I've seen plenty of bad writers who want to genuinely get better. But I've seen a lot of writers who aren't that bad, desperately seek out improvement.
Fighting mediocrity is something that I think this writer thinks we should do. Maybe 'fight' is a strong word. Maybe trying to prevent mediocrity is a better word to use. We want to see writers who have potential reach their potential. Yes, they aren't Deamon of Decay, but maybe they can be something unique or something entertaining.
It's just harder for the average person to pin down what, exactly, is wrong with the writing of mediocre writers, as opposed to the obviously bad ones.
*is guilty
Great idea! I know I'm hardly an amazing writer, and I'm kinda sick of people just being like "nice story" without any reason for why they like it, or "not my type" without any reason to dislike it. That does not help. What helps is when people tell me what they like and dislike; only then can I truly better myself as an author.
I mean, I'm not trying to get to be King, Adams, Orwell-level by writing stories about small magical horses. I just wanna have fun writing dumb little stories with a chance at improving at writing, too.
But whatever you do, let's not war against a noun. Or fight it. These things tend to be difficult enemies, if the War on Terror and Drugs are any indication. Rather, let's work against it by peacefuller means. Yes that is a word.
The number of "meh" stories on this site is unbelievable. I used to just give those stories a thumbs up because the authors didn't write a terrible story. Now I just toss out and immediately forget any story I read that is "meh" and doesn't make it into my favorites. So yes, I agree with Obselescence, we should be fighting mediocrity. Why shouldn't we? Do people on here prefer quantity over quality? Sure having a higher standard for stories in general on here might reduce the number of authors, but if that means more emotionally moving and thought provoking stories, then I'm fine with that. Fimfic.net is sadly one of, if not the most ignored part of this fandom. How many stories from this website are actually known across the fandom right now? Barely any at all. It is sad to know that there are masterpieces on here that will go unread by thousands, possibly millions of fans. But if we strive to better ourselves, to better this site, maybe those stories might not be ignored any longer. Maybe, just maybe, by bettering this site, the word "brony" won't have such a negative connotation to it. I admit, I barely watch the show, but it's things like some of the stories on here that makes me happy to be a MLP fan. It saddens me to think that in the long run, all that this site has to offer will only be appreciated by a few, especially if things stay the way they are now.
2229992
We're talking about fan-fiction here. Yes, you should have a readable story, yes you should have grammar. I mean, just because you're fine with having this doesn't mean it's exactly fair. I'm not someone that's the best writer, most (read: all) of my stories are "meh". But the idea that I'm going to not be allowed to write stories of what I like because some people thought "meh" was bad... it's sickening.
I don't write for popularity, that's just a side reward. I write because I like having my ideas come to life.
You are horribly wrong on that bit. The only (in)famous story I can think of off the top of my head that isn't posted on here is "Cupcakes". All the rest are on here. Like "My Little Dashie".
I agree with this. I know that I am just one of those "meh" authors. One of my stories in particular is actually kind of bad in my opinion, yet that one gets more favorites and upvotes than my other story that is better written. Mediocre stories seem to get all the attention.
Let's see if I can be brief enough that people read my comment.
I think there are a few overlapping issues here. One of the big ones is that "authors who write genuinely good stories" and "authors who are interested in improving their craft" aren't necessarily the same thing. There are very good authors on this site with very little interest in improving, and there are lots of mediocre writers on this site who would welcome help with open arms. Conversely, there are very good authors who really care about the craft of writing, and there are mediocre writers who are just here to churn out words, quality be damned.
When I read stories, I try to provide some decent analysis regardless of what category the author falls in. A few times, I've run afoul of what 2229879 mentioned—namely readers who are convinced that a mediocre story is fantastic, and who will shout down any attempt at providing constructive feedback. This happens on stories where the author doesn't care about the feedback, but it often happens on stories where the author really wants that feedback too.
I think the larger issue, though—again mentioned by 2229922—is that there aren't a lot of people on this site who are equipped to talk about high-level story issues. Let's say you have an unsympathetic OC protagonist, but he/she isn't a blatant Mary Sue. How many critics are prepared to run through a gamut of sympathy-building strategies and pinpoint what is and isn't working? Is the character simply too passive within their own story? Is the character's personality too flat? Does the character lack defined competencies and attitudes? Or is the problem, perhaps, that an author's skill with the perspective they're writing in hasn't advanced to the level of being able to capture character voice outside of dialogue?
Then compound that with the fact that many of the people reading and responding to these comments won't understand how these pieces work, won't be able to recognize how a story can be made better by tackling them, and will blissfully throw around comments like, "Well, that's just your opinion, and since the author didn't already do it and I liked the story anyway, your opinion isn't very good."
I'd love to see more and better criticism on all stories, but I think part of the burden of that lies in the critics working to better concretize their issues with mediocre stories. And I think, at the same time, a lot of us would be well served to look at what these very successful authors are doing right, which I think we can sometimes ignore. Their popularity doesn't happen in a vacuum. I think a lot of it is the consistency factor that 2229901 mentioned. But more than that, they're writing things that are appealing to readers here, for one reason or another.
I've read the first two volumes of Stephenie Meyer's "Twilight" series, and I think they're terrible books with boring plots and unsympathetic characters. That doesn't change the fact that they're hugely popular. I could sit around all day grousing about how they could have been better, but it's probably more productive to look at them and try to figure out what she did right, what it was that connected with readers. That's something I can use. And I think the same holds for the sorts of stories we're talking about here, as well.
ETA: Yeah, that's probably too long for most people to be willing to read it...
2229943 You call yourself mediocre? Whenever I read your stories, one thought pops into my mind: "If I'd only had half as many ideas as Georg!" Also, those ideas are packaged entertainingly. I don't think I noticed a flaw in your writing. So either you don't have ones or hide them good enough, that I do not see them.
On topic: It is difficult to criticize something, if all you can say "I just don't feel that entertained compared to my favorites." It isn't that helpful to author. I mean, a lot of people dislike stories for whatever reasons, so how can this indicate the general quality instead of personal preference?
I don't think you can actually change mediocre things being at the top of the popular lists. It's been that way for... well, as long as things have existed, I guess.
2229915 I cringe at some of the stuff that gets featured and I think I'd have a heart attack if I had one of my stories featured along side them. And not in a good way!
Now, I've tried some originality in my stories as well as followed along some of the tropes out there. Why? It's fun and I want to try my hand at an old hat. It's a great way to work on my writing fundamentals, too.
I'm in that place where my chapters might be a wee bit long for some readers, but I need to remember I'm writing to improve my own skills. I want to be better. To get better, I keep writing and pay attention to my editor as well as how the really good authors present their stories.
I'd like to think I've improved immensely since I started writing again last year after more than a decade of not writing.
I would personally love to have my stories scrutinized and torn apart word by word, as weird as that may sound. I consider myself to be at that "mid-level", where I'm not bad, but I know I'm not god-like, either. No one ever talks to me about the ways I can improve my writing unless I beg for it.
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
I've written several fics now, and while I get plenty of comments, no one ever seems to give me decent negative feedback, even when I post my stories in groups like "brutal reviews".
The only story I wrote that got over a hundred votes was when I wrote a story about an eposide an hour or two after it came out. Heck, it even made it into Twilight's Library, and it only has one down-vote so far. (My OCD...
)
I want to write better, and about things people are interested in, but no one seems to know what "better" and "more interesting" actually mean. I suppose if they did, they would be in the feature box.
But when I liked an idea enough to get the help of some editors, then I realized all of my problems. So, the moral of the story is: write in groups.
Unfortunately for me, I need to finish some very hard projects in real life, and can't get more than an hour of consecutive, lucid free time now.
I honestly don't see it as much of a bigger problem. If the fancic is in your opinion not good, well, then criticize it, leave some thought-provoking comments, pieces of advice, etc. If the author listens, it's great, job well done. If they don't, then there was no place of improvement, so nothing of value is lost.
Let's look at it like this, as I agree with everything you are saying: as many have said, many don't look to improve their skill as an author once they have gained a certain level of skill and popularity. Isn't that the function of this site anyway? I have never seen this site as a place to truly improve my writing until I found the right people that view this site differently. But by and large, this site's function is enjoyment.
So while you have good points, the greater number of competently-written stories that are still somewhat meh are by authors that are, as you said, mid level and most likely not looking to improve. That basically puts any and all critiques useless on two fronts: one because the critiques you give are placed more on style, and two because the author sees no reason to improve.
To sum it up as I collect my thoughts, fighting mediocrity, in the sense you have it, is a fool's venture. It most likely won't help the author nor does it get good reception from said author or others. Why? Because this just isn't the site. Asking why we accept this mid level writing when it could be so much better is asking why we have a site for fan fiction. You are refuting the grounds of which this site was built in many ways.
Honestly, Obs, someone like you, who I respect immensely for your writing ability, amazing attitude, and being just a good person, would best divert your reviews to people who actually want it, to authors looking to improve and make writing a career. This just isn't the site for it.
But I believe that the real problem, as was already said, is with the readers on this site, not the authors. Humans in general are creatures of habit, so it is no wonder why people love to read and write HiEs. Same with every other overplayed story idea. We use and abuse until it is no longer of use. Over time, tradition has fallen away from society in many key areas. But I digress.
The readers popularize these stories, not the authors. I think that if you want to truly fight mediocrity, then focus on the readers AND writers. You have to condition both to expect better stories, know writing mechanics, learn grammar. It is an entire site upheaval of collective thoughts and attitudes, a massive undertaking that will prove to be harder to maintain than you might think.
And this is where I fall back on my previous point. I'm sorry, Obs, but as I said, this site is squandering your talent. You will find no solace here.
2230038
I read it! I did! I did!
2230055
Longer than that, my friend.
2229992
Let's be serious here: no matter how much this site improves itself, it will never be recognized because . . . it's just how it is nowadays. Writing isn't viewed the same way as it once was. Reading was actually, by and large, frowned upon by my generation. Not that it was bad, but because us kids have millions of other things assaulting us and taking away our focus on the written word. I was able to not become like those people, but technology has actually hurt, tremendously, reading as an activity and writing as an art. This had been a thing since this fandom was first created. Our sector is cast aside.
People care more about music, animations, and pictures. Why do you think writing panels are only just starting to pop up? It has taken a long, long time for writing to get recognized in any fashion in the fandom. A hundred years ago? This kind of thing wouldn't happen.
2230121
I agree with your comment so much I found a picture of Twilight for you.
th05.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2013/039/2/0/ijdjiad_by_omycuteness-d5u8x8w.png
2229943
You know, it is interesting that you comment on this. You are one of the few authors that are popular AND good AAAAANNNNNNDDDD make me want to help you in any way possible by giving you good comments that say what was good or what went wrong with each chapter. You are a great writer, but sometimes we all trip. I'll be there with a band aid and soothing words.
As long as there's an author that believes that being in the Featured Box is a mark of quality and success (excuse me while I laugh), you won't get through. It's the ones that still want to make it you want to talk to, but that means catching them early.