6/25/23
Fair and Unfair
This is number sixteen in the blog series, “My Life In Erotica.” I encourage you to join my Patreon community so I can afford to keep writing.< /p>
CRITICISM: Ya gotta love it, right? Without good constructive criticism we are unlikely to grow and improve as authors. Probably even as human beings. In both life and writing, however, it seems few people have remembered the ‘constructive’ part of that phrase.
I consider myself to be pretty open minded. If it lights your fire, go with it. I look at the codes in stories, however, and there are certain keywords that I know indicate things I personally don’t care for. Here are a few examples: Ma/ft, Ma/Ma, mt/mt, Blackmail, Coercion, NonConsensual and Rape (the same thing in my book), Bestiality, Zoophilia, Father/Daughter (or any intergenerational incest), Gang Bang. They are simply things I know I wouldn’t be interested in, because I’ve tried reading some and it just does nothing for me. So, I avoid them. But I don’t read the tags on a story to see if it has a tag I don’t like and immediately go to the end of that story to vote it a 1 of 10.
Much like other people’s sexuality, right to marry, ability to determine their own body choices, or gender, they don’t affect me.
On SOL, there are many tales among authors about the ‘one bomber.’ I have no doubt that this person or people exist. There have been days when I’ve looked at my story scores and have seen a third of the scores (out of 58 stories) drop -0.01. Someone decided they didn’t like what I wrote so intensely that they voted everything I’d written down. It doesn’t really make much difference in the long run. That -0.01 will usually be made up by actual readers within a few days. And the scoring system has some safeguards built into it that mitigate an outlying vote to some extent.
On the other hand, I don’t give a damn what race is involved unless I’m trying to make a point of combating racism. I could rank story types I prefer, but something low on that list wouldn’t cause me to automatically reject it. And I like coming of age stories—if you are familiar with my work, you know I write a lot of that.
So, when I’m talking about constructive criticism, I’m not suggesting ranting about everything you don’t like about a story or an author. I’m suggesting that if a story is in the ballpark of things you usually like, it is just fine to disagree on a subject and express that, and even suggest the author look at a different viewpoint. Especially, if you can tell the author how—in your opinion—he could improve the writing.
It is equally important, as an author, to understand that people will criticize them unfairly. They will judge an author by a standard that is their peculiar squick. They cannot tolerate even fiction that disagrees with or challenges their world view. I have begun putting a disclaimer at the beginning of each of my stories.
ALERT: This book contains content of an adult nature.
This includes explicit sexual content and characters whose beliefs and actions may be contrary to your religious, political, or world view.
Adults, in my opinion, should be just as able to handle characters whose beliefs and actions are contrary to the reader’s religious, political, or world view as they are explicit sexual content. If they can’t, I guarantee that something I write will offend them.
When I began publishing “The Transmogrification of Jacob Hopkins” in January of 2019, I saw an immediate uptick in readership and patronage. There were nearly 9,000 active readers of the serial. But near the end of Double Take (chapter 44 of 47), I revealed that one of the characters was transgender. A character people loved was undergoing a sex change! I have never seen such an instant outpouring of vitriol in comments and email in my life. One quarter of my readership left that day. Gone, except for the vile comments they left behind.
Now, there were some constructive criticisms that came out of the event. I did not debate nor encourage the debate as to whether a transgender girl is a girl. I still won’t. The way I revealed it might have had some improvement, though. The slap in the face was definitely something that could have been eliminated and still expressed the absolute devastation of the girl. And Jacob could have been more explicit in expressing this from his eighty-year-old calcified personality—as were so many of the commenters—rather than the fifteen-year-old he was supposed to be in this life.
But throughout the next four volumes—Double Time, Double Tears, Double Twist, and Double Team—I continued to develop the characters and their relationships. Believe me, in a work this length, there were other things that people found to be offended by.
Number One on Lazlo Zalezac’s list of “Facts of Life” (The Millionaire Next Door) is “Life is not fair.”
Nor is all criticism fair. You remember the golden rule? Something about doing to others. I strive not to criticize others in a way I would not want to be criticized. As it happens, most criticism in comments or email on SOL comes way too late to be helpful for the story being criticized. However, I try to make sure I take it into consideration when I’m writing the next story, or the next one.
I write for readers, but obviously not for all readers. You will never please everyone. And, in fact, I often challenge my readers with things I want them to think about. Maybe I’ll write a story that includes a character who is a vegan, just so I’ll be able to expose people to some of the benefits in that diet! Who knows?
I came across a graphic pyramid of the hierarchy of disagreement. It has eight levels at the top of which is
- 1. Refute the central point: explicitly refutes the central point with reliable evidence
- 2. Refutation: Finds a mistake and explains why it’s mistaken, using resource quotes
- 3. Counter argument: Contradicts and then backs it up with reasoning and supporting evidence
- 4. Contradiction: States the opposing case with little or no supporting evidence
- 5. Responding to tone: Criticizes the tone of the writing without addressing the substance of the argument
- 6. Ad Hominem: Attacks the characteristics or authority of the writer without addressing the substance of the argument
- 7. Change the subject. “You can’t talk to liberals about anything without offending them.”
- 8. Name-calling: Sounds something like “You’re an asshat.”
In criticism, let’s all strive to reach number one on that pyramid.
As I was re-reading some of the comments from the end of Double Take, I saw a comment about character development and cardboard cutouts. The subject could be an entire blog by itself, but I think I’ll jump into it with a post next week: Character Arc.
Please feel free to send comments to the author at devon@devonlayne.com.
