Water's October, Right?: House Fanfiction Discussion

Absolutely not in defence of the poster at the pit, but... Going by the strictest possible definitions, all fanfic is out of character and AU and whatever else we might call it by simple virtue of being a fan creation and, to some extent, a question of wish fulfilment. I'll readily admit that the AU aspect is stronger than the OOC, but both are factors. I've read wonderful, beautiful stories that differed drastically from my personal view of the characters, but that's part of the game – and can lead to wonderful discussions of the characters.

Ah, but at least they're attempting to write it in character, even if their view of the character isn't the same as yours. That's something completely different than just issuing a blanket statement that you don't need to worry about characterizations because it's only fanfic. (Same goes for grammar, spelling and cohesive writing.)

Yes, well, there is that. ETA: May I say that I love your avatar. Is that Finding Nemo-girl from Euphoria?

Yup, it's finding Nemo girl. I heart that icon too.

Yep. That's her. "You're a goof!"

House: And you're a perverted three year old, but I don't go off and shove it in your face!!! Hahahaha, just kidding. I have no idea why I said that.

Awesome, thanks. Anyone else get to the medical bits of fics and just write "BLAH BLAH SOME DRUG" in place of the stuff you don't know--for easy findsearching and replacing when you've got the answer? It's really hard to find the right meds that House could have used, or tried, but there is a page on the internet that lists all the possible meds for chronic pain. I think I just googled 'chronic pain' and browsed a little through the sites. I can't find it again, sorry, but if you're really interested I have the file on my HD and can send it to you. Just send me a pm with your email, it's np. :-) I generally stay away from heavy medical plots (says the biochemist). I've done two (maybe three) stories where medicine was important (two about the ketamine thng and No Exit, which dealt with House in rehab and pain management). I did huge amounts of research before I embarked on a course of treatment for House and Silja was kind enough to guide me through some of the choices. There's a lot on Chronic pain out there, so there's no reason to not be at least accurate when dealing with House's pain issues. My medical stuff always has to do with House and not "patient-patient"

I think the rule is that you need to be encouraging. What you need to say is something that will inspire the person to strive to improve whatever it is they lack. There's a difference between feedback for new writers and feedback for experienced writers. Yes, with the people starting out, you should focus more on encouragement, but with writers who know what they're doing and how to get there, I don't believe that there's the same need for affirmation. I'm glad I happened upon this discussion. Now, I'm sure that there are writers new to the fandom who aren't really new writers at all. That is, they've written in other fandoms or have academic experience with writing and possess a strong command of language, and structure, and other technical aspects, etc. I'm sure these writers, while they appreciate encouragement, would like and value the kind of constructive, honest feedback that's more readily offered to veteran writers in the fandom. How can a reader differentiate between a new writer and a new writer in the fandom, so he can respond accordingly? And, how can a reader know when a writer's request for constructive criticism is genuine? To me, this seems like a tricky sort of business.

It is a tricky business, and that's why I will often leave feedback on a story I like, but will rarely concrit for anyone until I feel that I know more about the writer. And that they know enough about me to know that I am harmless. Usually I'll pick up a conversation via PM or email. People love to talk about themselves and they'll generally give me enough information to get a feel for their level of experience and confidence. Some new writers are actually quite confident, and a few experienced ones are nonetheless fragile.

I think it's also hard to judge because it's hard to figure out if they are new or not, unless they tell you in their author's notes. I'm not 'famous' in the fandom, so when I post things, people probably assume I'm new, even though I've been writing fanfic since high school and have been writing stories since about the fourth grade. Also, I'd be perfectly okay with constructive criticism (just as long as it is 'constructive') but you can't know that just from reading my story. So I do try to start off positive, then put in my criticism later. I feel like it's just polite. Like, I've had people send me purely negative remarks on a fic without saying anything nice at all and it makes me wonder why they'd even read it at all. I was halfway done with a long fic and I felt like they'd read every word and just hated it. (Don't people use their back buttons any more? ;) )

(Don't people use their back buttons any more? Wink ) Sure, but then you end up with people bitching because they don't get enough replies/reviews.

How can a reader differentiate between a new writer and a new writer in the fandom, so he can respond accordingly? And, how can a reader know when a writer's request for constructive criticism is genuine? To me, this seems like a tricky sort of business. I just go by the quality of the story. I think you can tell if someone's taken the time to think about plot, characters, spelling. That tells me that no matter if I know the writer or not they have put in the effort and a bit more than LOL BUBS YAY! 101 might be handy for them because they won't go u suk.

As for concrit, I just take the author's notes seriously. If the person says, "Concrit welcome," then I believe them. That's how I hope people take my author notes, anyway. Of course, if it turns out the person is a delicate flower, then I'll rarely offer them feedback in the future.

I just go by the quality of the story. I think you can tell if someone's taken the time to think about plot, characters, spelling. That's what I do, too. I don't think it's so much a case of whether or not you can judge if a person is a new writer in fandom or a writer with a lot of past experience, and based upon that decide whether or not to leave concrit. I think it's more that you watch for if they use a beta, use the proper headings (listing title, rating, disclaimer, etc.), construct a reasonably sound story -- or at least try to -- to know whether or not it's safe to give concrit. Because you never know. A writer may have been writing in fandom(s) for ages, but just doesn't care to improve the quality of their writing or try for good characterisation; controversely, it may be someone's first fic ever but they could be a professional writer who has just recently stumbled into fandom. And neither of them may want concrit. Or both of them may. I don't think there's a way around it, really. I leave concrit if I read something that warrents a reply. I make sure I try to leave both praise and criticism with everything -- always. If someone takes offense at it, I'm all right with that. I know better in the future.

View Full Version: Water's October, Right?: House Fanfiction Discussion