fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3273 ]

[ SECRET POST #3273 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3273 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 051 secrets from Secret Submission Post #468.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - picture with random french lyrics ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

So I participated in a beta matchmaking thing that arranged me with a beta. At first she was okay but then I started noticing that some of her advice started becoming less about what was good writing and more about her particular views likes, and preferences. Like she told me that I should change one of my characters because the character was "unsympathetic" and "no one's going to sympathize with a girl like that no matter what her excuse is". Because apparently the character didn't match up with her views of a what a "good girl" should do or something like that.

Also one time I got an annoying review on an AU story I wrote where the reviewer basically said the story was 'written well but ruined by the au. If you want it to be good, get rid of the AU". When I mentioned this and told the beta that I politely told her, "I'm sorry you feel that way, but the AU is a big part of the plot. You might want to find another story."

She went ballistic and said "No you don't tell a reviewer you're not going to take their advice. They're trying to help and you should be grateful that they're leaving reviews. You'll just look butthurt and nobody likes authors like that."

That was all I needed to make the decision and sometime after I decided to no longer work with her. When I told her that I thought we probably weren't a good match, she was pretty angry and told me "Go ahead and show it to your friends. they'll all tell you it's great, and your writing won't get any better." I'm glad to be rid of them, but their words left me a little insecure (also I was disturbed by her "you'd be nothing without me" attitude.)

Did I do the right thing? Is it bad to disagree with your beta reader's advice?

Sounds like you did the right thing. Authors are NOT required to take every single piece of advice that comes their way, that's just ridiculous. As a writer, you consider the concrit you receive carefully, and decide how much of it you want to apply. Sure, there are plenty of authors who refuse to listen to any concrit whatsoever, but the solution isn't "blindly follow whatever your beta and/or reviewers tell you to do".

Your beta sounds like she's no longer able to distinguish between "good writing" and "writing I personally like". A fic can be technically well written with good plotting, characterization, etc. and still not be something she personally enjoys. Her job as a beta is to help you make your fic the best version of YOUR story, not HER story, the way she thinks it ought to be.

You were right. She is not a good match for you, and frankly, her level of involvement in a story makes me think she isn't a very good beta, period. Good luck finding another one who better suits your needs, and don't worry about her.

You did the right thing. Now I hope you can find another beta who knows their job.

I think you did good, from what you've told us you weren't a good match.

That said, I have to slightly side with the beta on the comment thing. Obviously you don't have to change your story to please a reviewer, that'd be stupid! However, I'd recommend you try to reply in a more diplomatic manner to the review. Not necessarily because your reply was rude, but because there's this culture that fanwriters must be super deferential to reviewers or face the consequences (ie drama, being accused of being entitled, readers leaving even less comments on your stories, etc). I would have replied something like "I'm glad you enjoyed how the story was written! The AU aspect is a big part of the plot, so I can't change that, but thanks to the suggestion!".

"Not necessarily because your reply was rude, but because there's this culture that fanwriters must be super deferential to reviewers or face the consequences"

This doesn't seem like a good reason IMO. I would agree with "could have worded it better" but I don't think "because fanwriters need to be super deferential to reviewers because culture is a good reason for that. It seems like it boils down to "you should do this because people may not like it" rather than something like "you should do it because it's taking the higher road."

Honestly I would find it unhealthy for writers to always defer to reviewers because reviewers might...accuse you of something or stop reading. Now I'm not saying they should be rude, but the way that was put it almost seems like "be a doormat or they'll leave you" which is not a healthy way to interact with people. If your main reason for always being super deferential to people is because you literally fear what they could say to you, well that's a problem.

Authors should be polite but also have a backbone.

DA

1) I think you wrote a very diplomatic reply.

2) Is this culture for fanwriters actively involved in the fandom? Or...how does that work? I never really know anything about the authors beyond the responses they may choose to leave for a review I've left.

As a reader who occasionally reviews, I tend to tell the author that I enjoyed the story, can't wait, etc. or ask if they're planning to address certain issues their plot brought up/give my general opinion. I don't think I've ever expected an author to take my suggestions/inquiries to the fic itself. If they respond, that's usually it. But I never enter a fic expecting it to turn out the way I, the reader, necessarily wants it to be. As a writer, I let the story play out. And while I'm curious to know how readers think the story should go, and I'm glad they're enjoying the story, if they think I'm going to cater the story to them...That won't really happen unless I make it explicitly clear--i.e. "A/N: what do you think should happen next? Review!". Besides, I usually have the story vaguely planned out before I begin to post. I just always hope people will enjoy it.

Not trying to start any wank. Just curious and sharing my experience on both ends.

If some reviewer came to me with "the writing is good but the whole genre/plot needs to be changed" I'm sure as hell not going to be deferential to them.

People who demand shit like that are being genuinely entitled, and they need to be called out. Because that shit is rude and childish.

I don't think authors should go out of their way to be rude, but reviewers demanding the whole story be changed shouldn't be deferred to. Maybe if less people deferred to them they might do it less.

We aren't generally sympathetic and tolerant to the author who acts demanding and like they're owed asspats and sugarcoating, so why are we tolerant of readers who essentially have the same attitude?

but don't you know readers are always right and you're supposed to update promptly and write about the topics they want without asking for anything in return!!!

Her response to the reviewer was fine. As for this super deferential culture toward reviewers, that's some entitled BS right there and if someone doesn't agree with it, why support it? The review was being an ass. If they don't like AU, then they shouldn't read AU. No sane person reads an AU fic then tells the writer that oh, they should change their fic because they don't like AU. There is absolutely no need to coddle special snowflakes like that, because if you do, all you get is more entitled reviewers.

Anon's reply was diplomatic, considering that the review wasn't very reasonable. While I'm not sure I agree there's a widespread culture of being super deferential to reviewers for fear of negative consequences, even if there is, why engage in that? Why should writers have to bow and scrape to reviewers who make bad suggestions? That sounds like giving in to what is basically extortion.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3273 ]

Disagreeing with your beta

Re: Disagreeing with your beta

Re: Disagreeing with your beta

50/50

Re: 50/50

Re: 50/50

Re: 50/50

Re: 50/50

Re: 50/50

Re: 50/50