Fanfic Pet Peeves

[Skydiver]

Usually, I don't do that. BUt I did have a couple of 3 page fic with twists at the end...and if I summarized it I'd give away that ending. (I had a couple where you think it's one pairing but it's really another that I wrote as jokes)

But they were at least short ones. Long fic gotta have summaries.

[Falcon Horus]

Long fic gotta have summaries.

That is true... You at least have to have some idea what the fic is about. Even if you're all cryptic about it (I don't do summaries, just read it - doesn't qualify as cryptic though).

[jdjunkie]

"I don't want to give away too much, just read it!" or "I knowz me summarie suckz but story is much better!!!" are awful too.

Or how about the immortal "This story is very funny!!"

How about I, your reader, decide whether it's funny or not.

[Raelis]

My biggest pet peeves are character bashing and shallow characterization. I have come across fics the only purpose of which was to degrade a character the author disliked. It was either focusing exclusively on the character's negative traits while completely ignoring the positive ones, or humiliating a character, "punishing" him or her for some perceived slights against the author's favorites. It was horrible. The comments on such stories usually were not about the story itself, but about the many ways the disliked character sucked in canon (oh, and the fans of the disliked character sucked too, of course). I understand what it is like to dislike a character immensely, but honestly, a good writer would at least understand and admit that he or she has their biases. One of my favorite authors loathes a certain female character in canon (not "Stargate"). But instead of dergrading her, she took the time to understand her, to try and see things from this character's point of view. This resulted in a very unbiased, complex and sympathetic portrayal of said character in this author's fic. Or there is also the option of leaving the disliked character out of your fic completely. It's still better than bashing.

Shallow characterization is a milder form of basing, as far as I'm concerned. It's when the author writes, say, Rodney McKay as doing nothing but whining and complaining, or Ronon as being nothing but a trigger-happy brute, or Teyla as being serene and 100% calm and understanding all the time... These characters all possess these particular qualities in canon - Rodney does indeed whine and complain,and Ronon is often trigger-happy, and Teyla really is serene compared to the two of them... But the thing is, all these characters are so much more. Teyla has a wicked sense of humor which is rarely seen in fic. She is perfectly capable of losing her temper and being coldly sarcastic,too. Ronon is smart, observant and when he is in the mood, he also can be funny and mischievous. Despite his whining, Rodney is both courageous and loyal, and while he loves to talk everyone's ear off about his genius, it's pretty clear that he is indeed extremely intelligent and in possession of plenty of common sense. His fierce intelligence is also rarely felt in fic.

The problem with shallow characterization is that the characters feel very one-note, but at the same time you cannot even call the author on on character-bashing because shallow characterization usually focuses on the traits that the characters really do have in canon... it just excludes everything else.

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

I think most shallow characterization is more the writer's lack of skill than deliberate bashing. Yes, there are authors who only write to bash (just as there are authors who only write to whump), but they're in the minority.

Seaboe

[Falcon Horus]

I think most shallow characterization is more the writer's lack of skill than deliberate bashing.

Much like TPTW then...

[SF_and_Coffee]

Usually, I don't do that. BUt I did have a couple of 3 page fic with twists at the end...and if I summarized it I'd give away that ending. (I had a couple where you think it's one pairing but it's really another that I wrote as jokes)

But they were at least short ones. Long fic gotta have summaries.

You can give a "hook" or "blurb" even for a story with a twist, without giving away the ending. It's done all the time for published books, and for films. You just make your summary, hook or blurb be about something other than the surprise ending. If the story is a romance with a surprise pairing, you don't mention both names... just pick one of the characters and talk about them.

For example, say a story starts out looking like Sam/Jack, but it's really Sam/Daniel, and there's something else involved too (because even a romance needs some obstacle to overcome or it won't be an interesting read). Instead of talking about Sam and someone, just talk about Sam and about the obstacle or other plot point: "Sam finally has some time alone with the object of her desires. The problem is that she keeps expecting to be interrupted, so can she really enjoy it?" That tells the reader that it's a romance involving Sam, and that part of the plot revolves around the difficulty inherent in trying to enjoy time together when she keeps expecting duty, other friends, or even just everyday life to intrude. That's enough to draw a reader in, without giving away any of the surprise.

[Whytewytch]

Summaries: You must put a summary if you expect me to read. Period. You must use proper grammar and spelling. Period. The only exception is abbreviations, used because the summary won't fit (ff.net used to have a VERY small summary window). Things like "iz", "wuz", etc, just tick me off. "My 1st fic" doesn't make me shy away, so long as that's not the ONLY words in the summary.

Bashing/shallow: Shallow is likely just a writer's inexperience. We all have to learn and there's a bit of a curve sometimes; so long as the writers are willing to take constructive criticism...

Bashing, there's just no excuse for. It's childish and immature and I simply WON'T read it. In the Robin Hood fandom, I was not a fan of Robin and when I wrote him in my story, I kept him in canon and was not easy on a choice he made that I felt was wrong. I did, however, NOT bash him--I had an OC put him in his place and make him think about what he'd done. Eventually, it worked out that he realized he'd been as wrong as the person that he'd turned his back on. The two regained their friendship, albeit it was uneasy.

[Raelis]

Much like TPTW then...

I think the PTB are partly responsible for the shallowness in fic, given the fact that they wrote the characters as shallow themselvesin some episodes. However, there are some things the PTB did right. There are episodes, quite a few of them, that dig under the surface and give us compelling portrayals. Personally, I just ignore the 'shallow' episodes and focus on the good ones. And I think the badness of some episodes is no excuse for fic writers to ignore the depth of the characters.

Well, "no excuse" sounds a bit too forceful, maybe. I think fic writers are entitled to write what they want. Those who don't give enough thought to the characters just won't get any glowing reviews from me, that's all.

Bashing/shallow: Shallow is likely just a writer's inexperience. We all have to learn and there's a bit of a curve sometimes; so long as the writers are willing to take constructive criticism...

I think most shallow characterization is more the writer's lack of skill than deliberate bashing. Yes, there are authors who only write to bash (just as there are authors who only write to whump), but they're in the minority.

Sometimes it's the lack of the writer's skill, but not always so. I know quite a few writers who have been in the fandom for years. They have a lot of experience in the writing field. But they are still interested in only writing the characters they love as complex while writing the others as shallow. It's not that I think it'saterrible sin, or anything. But it's really annoying when there's a fic that I like, that has a very interesting premise, but it also contains those one'note characters, which usually makes me stop reading out of annoyance. Actually, this criticism also applies to some Stargate tie-in novels.

Also, I would like to think that the writers who bash are in the minority, but experience tells me it's not so. I've lost count of fic that is focused on making a character "pay" for something he or she did in canon and having him/her utterly humiliated. I think there's a term for it, 'grovel fic'. I loathe it so much.

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

I think the PTB are partly responsible for the shallowness in fic, given the fact that they wrote the characters as shallow themselves in some episodes.

I sometimes think people (and fic writers in particular) get so wrapped up in wanting to see into the characters that they loose track of some things. Such as the number of different writers who worked on the series (Brad and then Robert could only do so much to even out the characterizations), the difficulty of satisfying all aspects of the fandom and the constraints of writing a complex story that will only last 42 minutes.

The most consistent series I've ever watched was Remington Steele. Maybe if it had gone on longer, it would've fallen into the same traps.

Seaboe

[Raelis]

I sometimes think people (and fic writers in particular) get so wrapped up in wanting to see into the characters that they loose track of some things. Such as the number of different writers who worked on the series (Brad and then Robert could only do so much to even out the characterizations), the difficulty of satisfying all aspects of the fandom and the constraints of writing a complex story that will only last 42 minutes.

The most consistent series I've ever watched was Remington Steele. Maybe if it had gone on longer, it would've fallen into the same traps.

Seaboe

I agree,but it's hard to forgive the PTB when they completely negate character development from the previous episodes, forget crucial pieces of backstory, do not let the characters have realistic reactions to extreme trauma, have them get over fallen comrades too easily, etc. Although, truth be told, Stargate is much better when it comes to consistence and continuity than some other shows I've seen, like Smallville,for example.

[Skydiver]

Let's not get too lost in the tangent of the show's writers please. I know it's branched off but this isn't the thread for in depth discussion about the show.

[SF_and_Coffee]

If nothing else, should people want to discuss that and how it relates to both the show itself and to fanfic, I've just put a fresh bottle on the water cooler...

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

This is an extremely specific peeve that drives me Up. The. Wall.

A character breaks his or her jaw and is rendered mute.

As if.

Close your mouth so that your teeth touch. Can you talk like that? I'll take that as a yes. If you can do it, why do you suppose someone whose jaw is wired shut can't?

This may be something that only someone who has broken their jaw would notice. It's still infuriating, especially when the entire story depends on the person with the broken jaw being mute.

Seaboe

[Falcon Horus]

This may be something that only someone who has broken their jaw would notice.

You don't have to have your jaw broken to notice this. Waking up, realizing your jaw is locked through dislocation also renders it unable to move. And I can still call for help...

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

... dislocation also renders it unable to move. And I can still call for help...

Did that, too (but not from waking up that way).

Seriously, the lips and tongue are much more important for speech than the jaw.

Seaboe

[mathpiglet]

This is why it is important for characters to know sign language.

[Skydiver]

yes, because we also know that they broke both arms and can't type or write to communicate

[Whytewytch]

Why not just wrap them up like a mummy?

[Princess Awinita]

yes, because we also know that they broke both arms and can't type or write to communicate

They can grunt though, hope they know Gruntese....