![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Recently, I have been batting around the idea of submitting one of my short stories for archive review at HASA. So why is this a big deal? Just do it, right, Dawn?
The problem is that I have always made such a big loud noise about how I don't agree with processes that claim to judge what is "quality" fiction, something that is made even worse online, where even "blind" submissions are often easily recognized as belonging to a certain author and therefore prone (in my opinion) to greater bias than a review by true strangers.
For example, many of you have stories that I would know as yours the moment I read them or read the titles, even, in certain circumstances. I admit that I would find it hard to separate my feelings for you as a friend or an individual from my judgement of a story. And the opposite is unfortunately also true: I am sure that there are people in the Tolkien fanfic community who would decline one of my stories just because it was written by me. (None of these people, as far as I know, belong to HASA. If they do, they are not active over there.) And it's not hard to know what stories belong to me. Go to my "short story" tag and there's a list right there.
Besides that, I simply don't agree that even a huge pool of reviewers have a right to decide what is or is not quality. Now I've had it brought up to me before: But Dawn, you are an editor for a literary magazine. And you have been a fiction editor before and had the difficulty of actually choosing the "best" stories from a pool of submissions. Yes, but I see this as different. A literary magazine, to me, is nothing but a collection of pieces that the editor(s) find particularly good. It is the editor's opinions, certainly not a declaration of quality at large. Were you to read the same pool of stories as me, you would probably "rate" some differently than I do. And a literary magazine, also, includes a certain kind of fiction. A story from the genre of science fiction might be excellent to readers of science fiction, but I don't think that it would ever appear in The Praire Schooner. Not because it's bad but because they don't publish that kind of fiction.
But archives that require a "review" to get in on the premise of only wanting to accept fiction of "quality" are, in my opinion, assuming that a team of reviewers can make such a judgement. Even the most atrocious blue-haired, purple-irised, unicorn-riding "Mary Sue" would be good fiction to someone. On the other hand, a dense, psychologically-based story dealing with the Elven view of mortality might breeze into most archives...but there would be readers who would hate it. There are doubtlessly readers who hate my stories, who think that I'm long-winded, blathering, and--at times--pompous (they're certainly right on the first two counts...I'm not so sure that I can count as pompous, though), and I know there are people who love my stories. Who's right? Who's to same I write quality fiction...or not?
And so I've always assumed that I would avoid archives that "review" stories for inclusion. But recently, I want to give it a try, for a couple of reasons.
So that's where I stand. I'm interested in people's opinions on this.
But if you'd rather give me your opinion anonymously (and just because they're fun and I'm paying for the ability to use them), here's a poll:
[Poll #669291]
Now that it's 3 o'clock and I've done my blathering for the day, I will stop procrastinating and do some writing.
The problem is that I have always made such a big loud noise about how I don't agree with processes that claim to judge what is "quality" fiction, something that is made even worse online, where even "blind" submissions are often easily recognized as belonging to a certain author and therefore prone (in my opinion) to greater bias than a review by true strangers.
For example, many of you have stories that I would know as yours the moment I read them or read the titles, even, in certain circumstances. I admit that I would find it hard to separate my feelings for you as a friend or an individual from my judgement of a story. And the opposite is unfortunately also true: I am sure that there are people in the Tolkien fanfic community who would decline one of my stories just because it was written by me. (None of these people, as far as I know, belong to HASA. If they do, they are not active over there.) And it's not hard to know what stories belong to me. Go to my "short story" tag and there's a list right there.
Besides that, I simply don't agree that even a huge pool of reviewers have a right to decide what is or is not quality. Now I've had it brought up to me before: But Dawn, you are an editor for a literary magazine. And you have been a fiction editor before and had the difficulty of actually choosing the "best" stories from a pool of submissions. Yes, but I see this as different. A literary magazine, to me, is nothing but a collection of pieces that the editor(s) find particularly good. It is the editor's opinions, certainly not a declaration of quality at large. Were you to read the same pool of stories as me, you would probably "rate" some differently than I do. And a literary magazine, also, includes a certain kind of fiction. A story from the genre of science fiction might be excellent to readers of science fiction, but I don't think that it would ever appear in The Praire Schooner. Not because it's bad but because they don't publish that kind of fiction.
But archives that require a "review" to get in on the premise of only wanting to accept fiction of "quality" are, in my opinion, assuming that a team of reviewers can make such a judgement. Even the most atrocious blue-haired, purple-irised, unicorn-riding "Mary Sue" would be good fiction to someone. On the other hand, a dense, psychologically-based story dealing with the Elven view of mortality might breeze into most archives...but there would be readers who would hate it. There are doubtlessly readers who hate my stories, who think that I'm long-winded, blathering, and--at times--pompous (they're certainly right on the first two counts...I'm not so sure that I can count as pompous, though), and I know there are people who love my stories. Who's right? Who's to same I write quality fiction...or not?
And so I've always assumed that I would avoid archives that "review" stories for inclusion. But recently, I want to give it a try, for a couple of reasons.
- I just want to see if it would be accepted. I'm curious. Curiosity may have killed the cat, but satisfaction brought him back.
- I can't help but feel that I am pompous or prideful to assume that I am making some kind of impact by witholding my work from certain archives. Like the staff of these archives are wringing their hands even as I type this and considering revising their admission guidelines solely because Dawn Felagund doesn't agree with them, and they are somehow incomplete if they don't get stories by Dawn Felagund posted there. Hmph.
- I want an audience for my work. And HASA is one of the most-read Tolkien archives, so to have my work there would be a good thing. (And eventually other "review" archives as well.)
- Am I really compromising my principles to submit my work? I do not do reviews, not because I'm lazy or I do not wish to help other authors get into archives but because a) I do not trust myself to be fair in reviewing the work of a friend or someone well known to me and b) I do not believe that I have any right to determine what is quality fiction. But to submit one's work...is that really in violation of my belief that the system is wrong? I also do not agree with using standardized tests for admission into universities, but I have taken both the SAT and GRE, scored well on both, and am proud of my work. It doesn't mean that I am agreeing that standardized tests are appropriate admissions standards. It is simply something that I had to do to achieve a greater goal: getting into the university I wanted to attend. A necessary evil, to borrow the cliche.
So that's where I stand. I'm interested in people's opinions on this.
But if you'd rather give me your opinion anonymously (and just because they're fun and I'm paying for the ability to use them), here's a poll:
[Poll #669291]
Now that it's 3 o'clock and I've done my blathering for the day, I will stop procrastinating and do some writing.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-08 09:55 pm (UTC)I personally have quite a few objections to HASA, besides the fact that you need to show them your e-mail to get in, and I'm not willing to do that. HASA strikes me as the University of Michigan of fanfiction archives -- it produces roughly equal parts stellar work and tsuris. Just as the University of Michigan, although nationally recognized as an excellent school, finds itself embroiled in very loud public battles over affirmative action and reports from current students that the administration makes it almost impossible to get out of that school, HASA causes lots of people to worry, angst, bite their fingernails, get into long, bitter online arguments with each other. . . over what? Fanfiction?
HASA certainly sets itself up as The Best Of The Best, and they do have some basis for that claim. Probably ninety percent of what they post there is good, if somewhat repetitive in style. On the other hand, there are equally good archives out there. Stories of Arda is my personal favorite (it's now my primary archive), and it's well worth checking out. SoA doesn't set itself up to be the be-all and end-all of Tolkien fandom, the site owner is a very nice lady with endless reams of patience and a real commitment to making sure everyone has a good time. So, is HASA in some way "better" than SoA? I don't know. It doesn't have the reputation, certainly. But it also doesn't have either the hubris or the tsuris* that seems to follow HASA wherever it goes.
I guess I'd tell you this: If the fact of having a short story up at HASA will make you happy, go for it. Submit a story, see what happens. But don't hang your entire self-esteem on it. It's really not worth it, and there are other, perfectly good places out there. When all is said and done, this is just a game that we play. It's not worth getting yourself terribly worked up over a game.
*Look at me! Greek and Yiddish in the same sentence!
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-08 11:34 pm (UTC)Thanks! I've never turned down a long, considered reply. :)
HASA causes lots of people to worry, angst, bite their fingernails, get into long, bitter online arguments with each other. . . over what? Fanfiction?
True. I still maintain (despite evidence to the contrary) that this is a hobby and should be fun. (Not that I am pegging HASA as the sole culprit in the fanfic drama/angst arena. Actually, I've only had one opportunity to become miffed since belonging over there and have had more bad experiences with other archives that shall remain unnamed.) And I'm not worried about rejection any more than I worry over my weekly postings...actually less, because the people who read AMC are generally writers whose work I greatly respect and criticism from them tends to sting worse than from an anonymous source.
It doesn't have the reputation, certainly. But it also doesn't have either the hubris or the tsuris* that seems to follow HASA wherever it goes.
I'm very much an archive gypsy. I have no undying loyalty to any single group/archive except my own SWG (and we don't have an archive...yet.) I have HASA admins on my flist...and people who can't stand the place. So I've heard a good balance from both sides and still can't say that I'm unequivocable on either one but more standing in a big shade of gray.
I do have a problem with their review system, though. I have had anti-HASA friends complain that the people there are stuck up and only take a certain kind of writing. Many of these friends are fine writers, in my opinion, and if they were rejected, that only underscores (to me) the notion that "quality" is not for any group of people to decide.
If the fact of having a short story up at HASA will make you happy, go for it.
No, it's really not, that's the thing. If it was, I'd already be there! But I do want readers for my work and so am batting around my options...and came to the question of whether I thought it would compromise my principles to send my work there. If it was rejected...well, I'd move on elsewhere. End of story, no pun intended.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-09 03:14 am (UTC)Talk to Dawn.
the notion that "quality" is not for any group of people to decide.
That's an interesting thought. What, then, in your opinion, is a good way to determine "quality?" Quality is a human construct, as are standards. If a group of people can't decide quality, then what will? A group of cats, perhaps? There's no such thing as quality if some group of people isn't deciding on it.
If you want to narrow the definition to read that "the absolute literary value for the ages of a piece of fanfiction" isn't for a specific group of people (the members of HASA) to decide, that may or may not be a different thing. I think that many of HASA's problems come from a common perception that That Which Is On HASA Is Good, and That Which Is Not On HASA Is Not Good. It may be that the HASA people don't intend their archive to have this image, but the fact of the matter is that it does. And the HASA people sure haven't made a whole lot of effort to dispel that aura, which suggests to me that they kind of like the idea that they are the arbiters of Quality for ever and ever amen. So their reviews, and especially their rejections, come off as very arbitrary and somewhat high-handed.
For contrast, one of the things that I like about SoA is that, while there are certainly criteria for admission, the site owner (
The thing that HASA doesn't acknowledge is that any moderated archive is by definition going to take only a certain kind of writing. SoA does acknowledge this. I don't know about OSA, since I don't hang out there. But that kind of honesty is a factor in what I think of an archive. I really don't care one way or the other if HASA only takes a certain kind of writing. If they didn't, they'd be the Pit, and there's already one of those. The thing that bothers me about HASA is that they try to pretend that they don't pick and choose. That's dishonest. And that, ultimately, is what bugs me about them. Perhaps you don't mind that. Cool with me, babe.
So. Apropos of nothing at all, you mentioned earlier that there were some writers who you could tell it was their work just as soon as you laid eyes on it. Would you know my work like that, or would it take you a bit? Just curious. And if I were to come up with a story featuring your favorite dysfunctional Noldorin-genius family, would you welcome pimpage here, or would you prefer to find it on your own?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-09 03:42 pm (UTC)Ha! *wins again*
What, then, in your opinion, is a good way to determine "quality?"
I see quality as being a personal opinion. To use an example from the world of fanfic, some writers would find a high-minded story about Aragorn dealing the philosophy and psychology of his reluctance to become king as a "quality" story. Another group of writers would hate that story and find a graphic slash story about Aragorn relentlessly banging Legolas in the Mines of Moria to be quality. A third group may yawn at the first, cringe at the second, and label "quality" as a story where a girl rides a pegasus into Middle-earth and uses her earth-shattering beauty and Speshul Powers (tm) to woo Aragorn away from Arwen to become the Queen of Gondor.
If a group decides that one of those is quality while the rest is not, that is fine. I can be quite vocal in my opinions of "quality" books and movies too. My problem comes when that same single group of people attempts to label their opinion of quality as the be-all-and-end-all determinant of quality in the entire world. Looking at the HASA site, it claims to feature only "well written, interesting" and "high quality" stories while rejecting those that are "frivolous." It also claims to "do it best." At one point, in the FAQ, it is said that it is really only the opinion of nine reviewers, but the rest of the site certainly does not reflect that attitude.
I think some rewording is in order. Call it like it is: an archive where a random pool of members vote on stories. Don't pretend like the judgement of that random pool confers some label of quality.
It may be that the HASA people don't intend their archive to have this image, but the fact of the matter is that it does.
The site certainly does encourage this view by outrightly labeling accepted stories as one thing and rejected stories as another. (Calling itself the "best" archive doesn't help that swaggering image either.)
The thing that bothers me about HASA is that they try to pretend that they don't pick and choose.
They do write that they accept anything...except frivolous works of poor quality. Whatever that means. ;)
Apropos of nothing at all, you mentioned earlier that there were some writers who you could tell it was their work just as soon as you laid eyes on it. Would you know my work like that, or would it take you a bit?
I would certainly know your stories that I've already read. As far as knowing a story of yours that I hadn't read, I don't think that I can go quite that far yet. Most of the writers whose work I could recognize like this are people for whom I have done enough beta/editing to have minutely analyzed their style.
And I would love to hear of anything pertaining to Arda's first dysfunctional family...and I'm sure the other Feanatics on my flist would like to know too.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-09 07:08 pm (UTC)I think I'm about half done with the next story, and I know where the second half is going. Le Thesis does take priority, though, so I can't say when I'll finish the story. But it will be finished.
Actually, on that note, would you do me the great favor of looking over two Quenya names that I made up and making sure they work? The names are "Vénefinwë," which ought to mean "Girl-Finwë," and "Inyafinwë," which is meant to be "Female Finwë." If either one doesn't work, could you touch them up a little? Would be much appreciated.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-10 01:14 am (UTC)Isn't
Sorry I can't be of more help than that.... :^/
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-12 11:29 am (UTC)That was not the impression I got from the "About Us" page and the "Guidelines". It sounds like just any other archive, only with a longer list of what is not permitted.
However, I admire the friendly style of the guidelines. HASA definitely can learn from that.
What I regret is that so many people look at HASA on the basis of past kerfuffles and the attitudes of people who are no longer active there. The atmosphere at HASA has changed a lot even in the one and a half years since I joined the site. It's sad how people cling to prejudices.
I don't think HASA is the "best", but it's also not evil. However, compared to other moderated archives (apart from TFF, which is probably the most relaxed and comfy Tolkien archive atm) it really does take every kind of story. The memberside archive is unmoderated. The only story that was deleted there as long as I have been a member of the archive, was a story that was not a Tolkien fic at all. I like the idea that it's nine random members who get to decide anonymously if a story gets into the public archive, and not always the same clique of volunteers or friends of the site owner (as is often the case with small archives). What I definitely don't like is if the reviewer pool is so small that it's always the same people with the same attitudes deciding...
*sigh*
I've no idea what else to do against those prejudices. I've tried for more than a year, to show that HASA's changing, that there are a lot of new and open minded people there, and I'm beginning to get weary.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-12 06:58 pm (UTC)Another reason why I think that the tone of the information pages need to change.
To relay a quick anecdote (cue *eyerolls* everywhere! :^P), when I first started SWG, I advertised the group to my friends--who were all Henneth-Annun people--and Uli the comod advertised to her friends.
I made the suggestion of doing drabbles/stories for birthdays like is done on HASA and Silmfics, and we started batting around some ideas. HASA was mentioned. The fact that I belong to HASA and think it a generally nice place was unveiled. And I had my first "unsubscribe" message waiting for me a few minutes later.
Uli in all of her wonderfully unlimited patience was the first person to explain to me that some people just don't like HASA. And the thought that SWG would become a little HASA for Sil writers was unbearable to certain SWG members.
I was shocked. How could one not like HASA, of all places? All the people I'd met had been very nice. I found it a very comfortable place to be.
So when I reread the information pages from the PoV--as best as I can approximate it--of one who sees HASA negatively, I found myself cringing at the swaggering tone taken and the prevailing attitude that selection into the archive is less a selection by members than a stamp of quality. Given that, I can see how it would sting to have a piece of writing on which one has worked very hard and believes to be quality rejected. It is not so hurtful to be rejected as "this just isn't what our members like to read" so much as to have the label of "frivolous" or "not well written" applied to one's work. I think that such a label applied with the kind of language used on many of HASA's pages provokes an immediate defensive response. "Okay, so your group doesn't take my writing" is easier to accept then "Your group sees fit to judge my writing as poor quality/frivolous/poorly written/uninteresting."
It seems so silly that a few words could dissuade a person, but I can imagine that even if someone was willing to give HASA another chance, some of the prideful language on the information pages would turn them off before they even had a chance to see what goes on inside.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-12 11:08 am (UTC)Hehehe! I'm one of those admins, and I'm in those shades of grey myself. I have a lot of concrit and I'm voicing it *inside* HASA.
The review system is based on the people who are willing to be reviewers. If only a few canatics and fanonatics are willing to review...
Become a reviewer. Make a difference.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-02-12 06:44 pm (UTC)Until you told me, I did not know that such an animal as a "Suggestions forum" even existed. I am taking my time to get my thoughts together, and then I shall make my suggestions.