kyburg: (Default)
Only Way Out Is Through - A Captain America FST (119 words) by kyburg
Chapters: 1/1
Fandom: Captain America (Movies), The Avengers (2012)
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: Author Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings, No Archive Warnings Apply
Characters: Steve Rogers
Additional Tags: FST, Fanmix, Get Your Dancing Shoes On, Deep Breath Before Winter Soldier, SING SING SING, Too much Yoko Kanno is Just Right, Schmoop
Summary:

I've been working on a story involving Steve Rogers very heavily (will start posting chapters soon) and finding the wonderful Chicago/Gipsy Kings cover of "Sing, Sing, Sing" - it just came together.

 (Now with working download link! WOOHOO)

The more time passes, and the more things change...one thing remains. Love and hope never die.

kyburg: (Default)
Guys, I have two jobs now and work ten hours. That's between being a Mommy at both ends. And then sleeping. So.

[livejournal.com profile] yuletide_admin? I don't want to miss you, so please? YELL LOUD WHEN YOU'RE READY.

I so want to nominate Kung Fu Panda 2 this year. You have no idea.

And Symbiotic Titan.

Nerd. Word. Repeat.
kyburg: (Default)
Guys, I have two jobs now and work ten hours. That's between being a Mommy at both ends. And then sleeping. So.

[livejournal.com profile] yuletide_admin? I don't want to miss you, so please? YELL LOUD WHEN YOU'RE READY.

I so want to nominate Kung Fu Panda 2 this year. You have no idea.

And Symbiotic Titan.

Nerd. Word. Repeat.
kyburg: (Default)
Guys, I have two jobs now and work ten hours. That's between being a Mommy at both ends. And then sleeping. So.

[livejournal.com profile] yuletide_admin? I don't want to miss you, so please? YELL LOUD WHEN YOU'RE READY.

I so want to nominate Kung Fu Panda 2 this year. You have no idea.

And Symbiotic Titan.

Nerd. Word. Repeat.

Link Soup

Oct. 21st, 2010 11:40 am
kyburg: (Default)
Have you seen these? Tell me and I'll shut up.

Wiscon has said 'nope, not this year you don't', and withdrawn their invitation to be Guest of Honor.

About the only thing I've said about Pookie Moon's post was that it was new asphalt and striping on the road to hell - all good intentions, really AWFUL way to go about it. I could go into detail, but others have to better effect - really.

Truly? Taking it up at Wiscon? Not the right place, approach or even WHAT about it. What, are you guys going to sit around the table insisting the victims justify their experience as victims again? Thanks, Wiscon. Maybe next year for Pookie. Maybe. But this year?

When you sound more like Angela Merkel than is comfortable, perhaps something else needs to be discussed, more often and in different venue.

I don't know what you go to a convention for, but this wouldn't be it for me. Just saying.

Jeez, like this IS something you could take up and put down at leisure anyway. WHAT.

Also, looking at the comments on the Wiscon post, the 'what are you TALKING about' is strong with this bunch. Which dovetails nicely into this one - A newspaper in Maine has shut down its reader comments while it reconsiders its policies. The Portland Press-Herald did so, the publisher writes, to "protect the public, our readers, and the subjects of our stories" from "hurtful and vulgar" comments.

Coming on the heels of 'Spirit Day' - intended to be an opportunity to awaken public opinion to the concept of bullying - this is pertinent. Really, in the current CW, you get what you deserve if you read the comments. Which is the urge to spork your eyes out and desire very directed air strikes towards very specific targets. Repeatedly.

I really have to say I like this policy. You want to comment on a story, write a letter to the editor - and you always, always, ALWAYS have that right. Nobody's taking that away from you, bub.

But doing the virtual version of spraying your name and profanities on a public place really can come to an end anytime, says I. The ability to comment so has been a privilege, not a right and if it been used like a gas station bathroom, time for it to go.

Quit rewarding derp and maybe the derp will end. One can only hope.

Link Soup

Oct. 21st, 2010 11:40 am
kyburg: (Default)
Have you seen these? Tell me and I'll shut up.

Wiscon has said 'nope, not this year you don't', and withdrawn their invitation to be Guest of Honor.

About the only thing I've said about Pookie Moon's post was that it was new asphalt and striping on the road to hell - all good intentions, really AWFUL way to go about it. I could go into detail, but others have to better effect - really.

Truly? Taking it up at Wiscon? Not the right place, approach or even WHAT about it. What, are you guys going to sit around the table insisting the victims justify their experience as victims again? Thanks, Wiscon. Maybe next year for Pookie. Maybe. But this year?

When you sound more like Angela Merkel than is comfortable, perhaps something else needs to be discussed, more often and in different venue.

I don't know what you go to a convention for, but this wouldn't be it for me. Just saying.

Jeez, like this IS something you could take up and put down at leisure anyway. WHAT.

Also, looking at the comments on the Wiscon post, the 'what are you TALKING about' is strong with this bunch. Which dovetails nicely into this one - A newspaper in Maine has shut down its reader comments while it reconsiders its policies. The Portland Press-Herald did so, the publisher writes, to "protect the public, our readers, and the subjects of our stories" from "hurtful and vulgar" comments.

Coming on the heels of 'Spirit Day' - intended to be an opportunity to awaken public opinion to the concept of bullying - this is pertinent. Really, in the current CW, you get what you deserve if you read the comments. Which is the urge to spork your eyes out and desire very directed air strikes towards very specific targets. Repeatedly.

I really have to say I like this policy. You want to comment on a story, write a letter to the editor - and you always, always, ALWAYS have that right. Nobody's taking that away from you, bub.

But doing the virtual version of spraying your name and profanities on a public place really can come to an end anytime, says I. The ability to comment so has been a privilege, not a right and if it been used like a gas station bathroom, time for it to go.

Quit rewarding derp and maybe the derp will end. One can only hope.

Link Soup

Oct. 21st, 2010 11:40 am
kyburg: (Default)
Have you seen these? Tell me and I'll shut up.

Wiscon has said 'nope, not this year you don't', and withdrawn their invitation to be Guest of Honor.

About the only thing I've said about Pookie Moon's post was that it was new asphalt and striping on the road to hell - all good intentions, really AWFUL way to go about it. I could go into detail, but others have to better effect - really.

Truly? Taking it up at Wiscon? Not the right place, approach or even WHAT about it. What, are you guys going to sit around the table insisting the victims justify their experience as victims again? Thanks, Wiscon. Maybe next year for Pookie. Maybe. But this year?

When you sound more like Angela Merkel than is comfortable, perhaps something else needs to be discussed, more often and in different venue.

I don't know what you go to a convention for, but this wouldn't be it for me. Just saying.

Jeez, like this IS something you could take up and put down at leisure anyway. WHAT.

Also, looking at the comments on the Wiscon post, the 'what are you TALKING about' is strong with this bunch. Which dovetails nicely into this one - A newspaper in Maine has shut down its reader comments while it reconsiders its policies. The Portland Press-Herald did so, the publisher writes, to "protect the public, our readers, and the subjects of our stories" from "hurtful and vulgar" comments.

Coming on the heels of 'Spirit Day' - intended to be an opportunity to awaken public opinion to the concept of bullying - this is pertinent. Really, in the current CW, you get what you deserve if you read the comments. Which is the urge to spork your eyes out and desire very directed air strikes towards very specific targets. Repeatedly.

I really have to say I like this policy. You want to comment on a story, write a letter to the editor - and you always, always, ALWAYS have that right. Nobody's taking that away from you, bub.

But doing the virtual version of spraying your name and profanities on a public place really can come to an end anytime, says I. The ability to comment so has been a privilege, not a right and if it been used like a gas station bathroom, time for it to go.

Quit rewarding derp and maybe the derp will end. One can only hope.
kyburg: (loser)
I am VERY done with Star Wars. The whole freaking enterprise/franchise, take your pick.

I don't need it in 3D, I don't need it AT ALL.

Fuckaduck. Now you know.
kyburg: (loser)
I am VERY done with Star Wars. The whole freaking enterprise/franchise, take your pick.

I don't need it in 3D, I don't need it AT ALL.

Fuckaduck. Now you know.
kyburg: (loser)
I am VERY done with Star Wars. The whole freaking enterprise/franchise, take your pick.

I don't need it in 3D, I don't need it AT ALL.

Fuckaduck. Now you know.

CODE BROWN

Jul. 12th, 2010 09:32 am
kyburg: (GET STUFFED)
(Via [livejournal.com profile] rm, thanks):

The user fort_kanji, known in real life as Lohr Miller, is a close-to-sixty year old who lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He constructs an identity for himself on Livejournal that is predicated on pseudo-intellectualism and thinly veiled misogyny, racism, and sizeism.

http://emigree.livejournal.com/52781.html for all the gory details. And they are exactly that.

And damn, he's everywhere.

*flies the L on her forehead*

CODE BROWN

Jul. 12th, 2010 09:32 am
kyburg: (GET STUFFED)
(Via [livejournal.com profile] rm, thanks):

The user fort_kanji, known in real life as Lohr Miller, is a close-to-sixty year old who lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He constructs an identity for himself on Livejournal that is predicated on pseudo-intellectualism and thinly veiled misogyny, racism, and sizeism.

http://emigree.livejournal.com/52781.html for all the gory details. And they are exactly that.

And damn, he's everywhere.

*flies the L on her forehead*

CODE BROWN

Jul. 12th, 2010 09:32 am
kyburg: (GET STUFFED)
(Via [livejournal.com profile] rm, thanks):

The user fort_kanji, known in real life as Lohr Miller, is a close-to-sixty year old who lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He constructs an identity for himself on Livejournal that is predicated on pseudo-intellectualism and thinly veiled misogyny, racism, and sizeism.

http://emigree.livejournal.com/52781.html for all the gory details. And they are exactly that.

And damn, he's everywhere.

*flies the L on her forehead*
kyburg: (Default)
Here's another quirk you probably won't see in the general scheme of things.

I don't like autographs.

I'll let that sink in for a moment. No, I don't want it signed. No, I don't want some stranger to feel obligated to write their name on something, some such or another. It kind of creeps me out.

And if I know you well enough to form an opinion based on other things besides that book, DVD or photograph in your hand?

*shivers* I don't need proof that you are another warm-blood sentient being with hands and know how to spell your name. I don't need proof that you existed.

What else is an autograph for?

I've met many a person who thought an autographing their works was a more-than-larger 'thank you' - I swear, Alton Brown would have signed *anything* I put in front of him - and just about did - I have signed DVDs (inside the box, I never thought of that, but he did and had it done before I could think twice about it) and he asked me if I wanted all of them signed. I hugged him instead, with permission. I am a GOOD hugger. And from that interaction, I take away something more valuable than an autograph - I get to talk to you. And really, that's what I want. I don't need a lifetime -

I want to thank you - and see if you have questions for me. I know I only have five minutes, tops. I can do a lot in five minutes.

This is one of the reasons I really love going to the LAT Festival of Books, because that's the largest draw. They bring out the authors to talk about their Stuff - and plan to host short signing sessions after each and every panel discussion. Buy as many of the books as you wish - Borders has it covered, really. And they are good about the signings - they've done many many festivals, so they have it down to a science. Nobody wears out, nobody gets shorted. You're in, you're done and you move on. Thanks for coming!

So grateful to meet Pico Iyer. I finally got to tell him how grateful I've been for his books - they've saved my good name more than once, and I had information I couldn't have gotten any other way that kept me from being a jerk. Autograph - eh. I'll have to go back and read the inscription (and I don't direct anyone what to write - 'do what you like' is the only direction I'll ever give) - because he just kept writing as I spoke to him. I love his books - after meeting him, I adore him.

Jim and I went to a book signing for Emeril Lagasse once - Jim got recipe tips, but the only thing I really wanted him to hear was 'thank you for putting up with all of us.' That got a look right in the eyes - why yes, I'm aware this is work. And thank you for doing it for me. (It also got a smile. He'd stayed far, far over his scheduled time to sign everyone's books that night. His reward from some idiots was flash photography without asking. Dicks.)

I loved having that five minutes with the three women hosting the parenting panel this last festival - for that five minutes, I had some of the best minds local to me talking to me about parenting, but even more, it was about becoming a parent under less than fair circumstances and having a legitimate vent about it. And all I got were nods, suggestions and yes - validation. They knew I wasn't big on autographs, but there I was - and I explained as much. It got a wry grin from one author with an atta girl.

I like it when people get to be people, after all.

More than once, someone has gone to a con and sent me a signed photograph they'd gotten for me. Aww. And then I didn't have a clue what to do with it. (Yes, yes - I know you can sell such things. Eww. No, really. EWWWWWW.)

People threw their programs onto the stage when Paul McCartney performed here last. Uh, someone *hit* him with one. No, I don't want anything with Paul McCartney's autograph on it. No words large enough for the wrong THAT is. Don't buy third-party gained autographs, guys. Just. Don't.

Swear to God, I'd do anything I could to take the demand out of a market that turns people into monsters like that. (We can talk about people taking pictures without permission another day. There's a post with profanity in it for you.)

It hits my trigger on treating celebrities as inanimate commodities even when we're dealing with the real flesh and blood person - and I really wish someone would take this up as a constitutional issue based on the 13th amendment, because it's just wrong. You may make a bundle being a celebrity, but you are never SOLD, body and soul, to the public, in any fashion - and I'm reminded often that there's a large segment of my culture that thinks an autograph is part and parcel of that concept and that it's very real.

I do not own you - any part of you - if I bought your work. I bought a book, that's it. If I get to talk to you, person to person while you sign it as a gift to me - that's worth the trouble. The autograph is not the reason I'm there. I liked the book, I *might* like you (at least, I respect your ability enough to mention it as such) and that's what I want you to know.

I don't need anything signed and sent to me. I'm also pretty certain you know your books are real, too and that you've been around many copies of them. I don't need proof that you actually saw *this one.*

If I see something signed that I wasn't there for? All I can think of is that you were made to work, without thanks - because I wasn't there to give it.

I don't want it signed. I don't like autographs.

I like your stuff. And that's plenty, for both of us.
kyburg: (Default)
Here's another quirk you probably won't see in the general scheme of things.

I don't like autographs.

I'll let that sink in for a moment. No, I don't want it signed. No, I don't want some stranger to feel obligated to write their name on something, some such or another. It kind of creeps me out.

And if I know you well enough to form an opinion based on other things besides that book, DVD or photograph in your hand?

*shivers* I don't need proof that you are another warm-blood sentient being with hands and know how to spell your name. I don't need proof that you existed.

What else is an autograph for?

I've met many a person who thought an autographing their works was a more-than-larger 'thank you' - I swear, Alton Brown would have signed *anything* I put in front of him - and just about did - I have signed DVDs (inside the box, I never thought of that, but he did and had it done before I could think twice about it) and he asked me if I wanted all of them signed. I hugged him instead, with permission. I am a GOOD hugger. And from that interaction, I take away something more valuable than an autograph - I get to talk to you. And really, that's what I want. I don't need a lifetime -

I want to thank you - and see if you have questions for me. I know I only have five minutes, tops. I can do a lot in five minutes.

This is one of the reasons I really love going to the LAT Festival of Books, because that's the largest draw. They bring out the authors to talk about their Stuff - and plan to host short signing sessions after each and every panel discussion. Buy as many of the books as you wish - Borders has it covered, really. And they are good about the signings - they've done many many festivals, so they have it down to a science. Nobody wears out, nobody gets shorted. You're in, you're done and you move on. Thanks for coming!

So grateful to meet Pico Iyer. I finally got to tell him how grateful I've been for his books - they've saved my good name more than once, and I had information I couldn't have gotten any other way that kept me from being a jerk. Autograph - eh. I'll have to go back and read the inscription (and I don't direct anyone what to write - 'do what you like' is the only direction I'll ever give) - because he just kept writing as I spoke to him. I love his books - after meeting him, I adore him.

Jim and I went to a book signing for Emeril Lagasse once - Jim got recipe tips, but the only thing I really wanted him to hear was 'thank you for putting up with all of us.' That got a look right in the eyes - why yes, I'm aware this is work. And thank you for doing it for me. (It also got a smile. He'd stayed far, far over his scheduled time to sign everyone's books that night. His reward from some idiots was flash photography without asking. Dicks.)

I loved having that five minutes with the three women hosting the parenting panel this last festival - for that five minutes, I had some of the best minds local to me talking to me about parenting, but even more, it was about becoming a parent under less than fair circumstances and having a legitimate vent about it. And all I got were nods, suggestions and yes - validation. They knew I wasn't big on autographs, but there I was - and I explained as much. It got a wry grin from one author with an atta girl.

I like it when people get to be people, after all.

More than once, someone has gone to a con and sent me a signed photograph they'd gotten for me. Aww. And then I didn't have a clue what to do with it. (Yes, yes - I know you can sell such things. Eww. No, really. EWWWWWW.)

People threw their programs onto the stage when Paul McCartney performed here last. Uh, someone *hit* him with one. No, I don't want anything with Paul McCartney's autograph on it. No words large enough for the wrong THAT is. Don't buy third-party gained autographs, guys. Just. Don't.

Swear to God, I'd do anything I could to take the demand out of a market that turns people into monsters like that. (We can talk about people taking pictures without permission another day. There's a post with profanity in it for you.)

It hits my trigger on treating celebrities as inanimate commodities even when we're dealing with the real flesh and blood person - and I really wish someone would take this up as a constitutional issue based on the 13th amendment, because it's just wrong. You may make a bundle being a celebrity, but you are never SOLD, body and soul, to the public, in any fashion - and I'm reminded often that there's a large segment of my culture that thinks an autograph is part and parcel of that concept and that it's very real.

I do not own you - any part of you - if I bought your work. I bought a book, that's it. If I get to talk to you, person to person while you sign it as a gift to me - that's worth the trouble. The autograph is not the reason I'm there. I liked the book, I *might* like you (at least, I respect your ability enough to mention it as such) and that's what I want you to know.

I don't need anything signed and sent to me. I'm also pretty certain you know your books are real, too and that you've been around many copies of them. I don't need proof that you actually saw *this one.*

If I see something signed that I wasn't there for? All I can think of is that you were made to work, without thanks - because I wasn't there to give it.

I don't want it signed. I don't like autographs.

I like your stuff. And that's plenty, for both of us.
kyburg: (Default)
Here's another quirk you probably won't see in the general scheme of things.

I don't like autographs.

I'll let that sink in for a moment. No, I don't want it signed. No, I don't want some stranger to feel obligated to write their name on something, some such or another. It kind of creeps me out.

And if I know you well enough to form an opinion based on other things besides that book, DVD or photograph in your hand?

*shivers* I don't need proof that you are another warm-blood sentient being with hands and know how to spell your name. I don't need proof that you existed.

What else is an autograph for?

I've met many a person who thought an autographing their works was a more-than-larger 'thank you' - I swear, Alton Brown would have signed *anything* I put in front of him - and just about did - I have signed DVDs (inside the box, I never thought of that, but he did and had it done before I could think twice about it) and he asked me if I wanted all of them signed. I hugged him instead, with permission. I am a GOOD hugger. And from that interaction, I take away something more valuable than an autograph - I get to talk to you. And really, that's what I want. I don't need a lifetime -

I want to thank you - and see if you have questions for me. I know I only have five minutes, tops. I can do a lot in five minutes.

This is one of the reasons I really love going to the LAT Festival of Books, because that's the largest draw. They bring out the authors to talk about their Stuff - and plan to host short signing sessions after each and every panel discussion. Buy as many of the books as you wish - Borders has it covered, really. And they are good about the signings - they've done many many festivals, so they have it down to a science. Nobody wears out, nobody gets shorted. You're in, you're done and you move on. Thanks for coming!

So grateful to meet Pico Iyer. I finally got to tell him how grateful I've been for his books - they've saved my good name more than once, and I had information I couldn't have gotten any other way that kept me from being a jerk. Autograph - eh. I'll have to go back and read the inscription (and I don't direct anyone what to write - 'do what you like' is the only direction I'll ever give) - because he just kept writing as I spoke to him. I love his books - after meeting him, I adore him.

Jim and I went to a book signing for Emeril Lagasse once - Jim got recipe tips, but the only thing I really wanted him to hear was 'thank you for putting up with all of us.' That got a look right in the eyes - why yes, I'm aware this is work. And thank you for doing it for me. (It also got a smile. He'd stayed far, far over his scheduled time to sign everyone's books that night. His reward from some idiots was flash photography without asking. Dicks.)

I loved having that five minutes with the three women hosting the parenting panel this last festival - for that five minutes, I had some of the best minds local to me talking to me about parenting, but even more, it was about becoming a parent under less than fair circumstances and having a legitimate vent about it. And all I got were nods, suggestions and yes - validation. They knew I wasn't big on autographs, but there I was - and I explained as much. It got a wry grin from one author with an atta girl.

I like it when people get to be people, after all.

More than once, someone has gone to a con and sent me a signed photograph they'd gotten for me. Aww. And then I didn't have a clue what to do with it. (Yes, yes - I know you can sell such things. Eww. No, really. EWWWWWW.)

People threw their programs onto the stage when Paul McCartney performed here last. Uh, someone *hit* him with one. No, I don't want anything with Paul McCartney's autograph on it. No words large enough for the wrong THAT is. Don't buy third-party gained autographs, guys. Just. Don't.

Swear to God, I'd do anything I could to take the demand out of a market that turns people into monsters like that. (We can talk about people taking pictures without permission another day. There's a post with profanity in it for you.)

It hits my trigger on treating celebrities as inanimate commodities even when we're dealing with the real flesh and blood person - and I really wish someone would take this up as a constitutional issue based on the 13th amendment, because it's just wrong. You may make a bundle being a celebrity, but you are never SOLD, body and soul, to the public, in any fashion - and I'm reminded often that there's a large segment of my culture that thinks an autograph is part and parcel of that concept and that it's very real.

I do not own you - any part of you - if I bought your work. I bought a book, that's it. If I get to talk to you, person to person while you sign it as a gift to me - that's worth the trouble. The autograph is not the reason I'm there. I liked the book, I *might* like you (at least, I respect your ability enough to mention it as such) and that's what I want you to know.

I don't need anything signed and sent to me. I'm also pretty certain you know your books are real, too and that you've been around many copies of them. I don't need proof that you actually saw *this one.*

If I see something signed that I wasn't there for? All I can think of is that you were made to work, without thanks - because I wasn't there to give it.

I don't want it signed. I don't like autographs.

I like your stuff. And that's plenty, for both of us.
kyburg: (chai chai again)
First off, if you want more details on what I'm about to talk about - go get the book I'm going to talk about. Because the point of this exercise? Is a review. Not a critique. You don't know the difference? I'm not surprised. Here, come over here and I'll give it to you the way I got it back in the ollllld days.

See, back when there was no internet for you to find your pr0n fan fiction to read?

It took about 1.5 - 5 years, about five grand of your own money and as many good friends who could write, draw or otherwise flunky for you to have something to read. And then? Maybe there would be 200 copies or so - that you'd have to sell to make back your five grand - and that was it. Oh, and that fanzine of yours? Might have ten stories in it. (BTW, do the math. Add $$ for shipping. OW.)

So, about two years, a buncha money, hope you knew about it (maybe even wrote something for it) and you got ten stories to read. Maybe you'd even like a couple of them.

That's it.

You might imagine what the Yuletide archives look like to me. *cue 2001 overture*

But one of the side effects of that kind of output? You didn't write more stories to outline your opinion of this or that to prove your point - flames? Bah. Carefully banked coals, more like it.

You wrote a critique. Maybe you were stupid enough to call it a review, but then you'd get the likes of Paula Smith, Jan Lindner, Signe Landon, Connie Faddis, Marian Kelly, Teri White and Melanie Rawn down on your ass bitchslapping you into coherence, explaining quite plainly what a review IS and IS NOT.

Now, most of us welcomed critques - but it was expected that you would take such treatment as a means to improve, because as fan fiction writers...that was what we were here for, after all. It's nice to play, but we're doing this to get better and be Real Writers ourselves someday. (Two of those people who lavished much abuse on me back in the day for my own good actually made it. D'ya know who? I still have my zines they wrote. Yes, I do.)

So when somebody asks me to review, even casually - I take it very seriously that there are some things I'm not going to do.

1. A review is not intended to provide feedback for improvement. You don't take something out of the work, turn it over in your hands and go 'yanno, this color blue doesn't match the drapes - it might need some work.'

2. You might discuss the entire plot in a critique. It is verboten in a review. Subject matter, sure. Who, what, when, why and how - as briefly as possible, and don't give anything away.

3. A review is designed to provide the reader with information that will entice them to read the entire work on their own. A critique is for the author's primary use as a means to correct, enhance or go 'hmmm' a lot. So be aware of your focus and your intended audience. (People who write critiques in forums calling them 'reviews' being just plain passive-agressive whiny-weenies get the special hell - and lots of raw egg shampooes. *pulls eyelid in their general direction*)

4. A review is nearly transparent as far as style is concerned. If I write a review, you shouldn't notice me. A review is impersonal space and really? An opinion is not required. It's expected that you would rate a review these days - but in my experience and training? Is not expected and is considered an intrusion of your opinion into a place where it doesn't belong. You want to tell the author what you think? You tell the author, if you've gotten persmission to do a critque - oh, and make sure you can back that opinion up, bucko.

So now that I've said that, I can start saying other things. Be right back.
kyburg: (chai chai again)
First off, if you want more details on what I'm about to talk about - go get the book I'm going to talk about. Because the point of this exercise? Is a review. Not a critique. You don't know the difference? I'm not surprised. Here, come over here and I'll give it to you the way I got it back in the ollllld days.

See, back when there was no internet for you to find your pr0n fan fiction to read?

It took about 1.5 - 5 years, about five grand of your own money and as many good friends who could write, draw or otherwise flunky for you to have something to read. And then? Maybe there would be 200 copies or so - that you'd have to sell to make back your five grand - and that was it. Oh, and that fanzine of yours? Might have ten stories in it. (BTW, do the math. Add $$ for shipping. OW.)

So, about two years, a buncha money, hope you knew about it (maybe even wrote something for it) and you got ten stories to read. Maybe you'd even like a couple of them.

That's it.

You might imagine what the Yuletide archives look like to me. *cue 2001 overture*

But one of the side effects of that kind of output? You didn't write more stories to outline your opinion of this or that to prove your point - flames? Bah. Carefully banked coals, more like it.

You wrote a critique. Maybe you were stupid enough to call it a review, but then you'd get the likes of Paula Smith, Jan Lindner, Signe Landon, Connie Faddis, Marian Kelly, Teri White and Melanie Rawn down on your ass bitchslapping you into coherence, explaining quite plainly what a review IS and IS NOT.

Now, most of us welcomed critques - but it was expected that you would take such treatment as a means to improve, because as fan fiction writers...that was what we were here for, after all. It's nice to play, but we're doing this to get better and be Real Writers ourselves someday. (Two of those people who lavished much abuse on me back in the day for my own good actually made it. D'ya know who? I still have my zines they wrote. Yes, I do.)

So when somebody asks me to review, even casually - I take it very seriously that there are some things I'm not going to do.

1. A review is not intended to provide feedback for improvement. You don't take something out of the work, turn it over in your hands and go 'yanno, this color blue doesn't match the drapes - it might need some work.'

2. You might discuss the entire plot in a critique. It is verboten in a review. Subject matter, sure. Who, what, when, why and how - as briefly as possible, and don't give anything away.

3. A review is designed to provide the reader with information that will entice them to read the entire work on their own. A critique is for the author's primary use as a means to correct, enhance or go 'hmmm' a lot. So be aware of your focus and your intended audience. (People who write critiques in forums calling them 'reviews' being just plain passive-agressive whiny-weenies get the special hell - and lots of raw egg shampooes. *pulls eyelid in their general direction*)

4. A review is nearly transparent as far as style is concerned. If I write a review, you shouldn't notice me. A review is impersonal space and really? An opinion is not required. It's expected that you would rate a review these days - but in my experience and training? Is not expected and is considered an intrusion of your opinion into a place where it doesn't belong. You want to tell the author what you think? You tell the author, if you've gotten persmission to do a critque - oh, and make sure you can back that opinion up, bucko.

So now that I've said that, I can start saying other things. Be right back.
kyburg: (chai chai again)
First off, if you want more details on what I'm about to talk about - go get the book I'm going to talk about. Because the point of this exercise? Is a review. Not a critique. You don't know the difference? I'm not surprised. Here, come over here and I'll give it to you the way I got it back in the ollllld days.

See, back when there was no internet for you to find your pr0n fan fiction to read?

It took about 1.5 - 5 years, about five grand of your own money and as many good friends who could write, draw or otherwise flunky for you to have something to read. And then? Maybe there would be 200 copies or so - that you'd have to sell to make back your five grand - and that was it. Oh, and that fanzine of yours? Might have ten stories in it. (BTW, do the math. Add $$ for shipping. OW.)

So, about two years, a buncha money, hope you knew about it (maybe even wrote something for it) and you got ten stories to read. Maybe you'd even like a couple of them.

That's it.

You might imagine what the Yuletide archives look like to me. *cue 2001 overture*

But one of the side effects of that kind of output? You didn't write more stories to outline your opinion of this or that to prove your point - flames? Bah. Carefully banked coals, more like it.

You wrote a critique. Maybe you were stupid enough to call it a review, but then you'd get the likes of Paula Smith, Jan Lindner, Signe Landon, Connie Faddis, Marian Kelly, Teri White and Melanie Rawn down on your ass bitchslapping you into coherence, explaining quite plainly what a review IS and IS NOT.

Now, most of us welcomed critques - but it was expected that you would take such treatment as a means to improve, because as fan fiction writers...that was what we were here for, after all. It's nice to play, but we're doing this to get better and be Real Writers ourselves someday. (Two of those people who lavished much abuse on me back in the day for my own good actually made it. D'ya know who? I still have my zines they wrote. Yes, I do.)

So when somebody asks me to review, even casually - I take it very seriously that there are some things I'm not going to do.

1. A review is not intended to provide feedback for improvement. You don't take something out of the work, turn it over in your hands and go 'yanno, this color blue doesn't match the drapes - it might need some work.'

2. You might discuss the entire plot in a critique. It is verboten in a review. Subject matter, sure. Who, what, when, why and how - as briefly as possible, and don't give anything away.

3. A review is designed to provide the reader with information that will entice them to read the entire work on their own. A critique is for the author's primary use as a means to correct, enhance or go 'hmmm' a lot. So be aware of your focus and your intended audience. (People who write critiques in forums calling them 'reviews' being just plain passive-agressive whiny-weenies get the special hell - and lots of raw egg shampooes. *pulls eyelid in their general direction*)

4. A review is nearly transparent as far as style is concerned. If I write a review, you shouldn't notice me. A review is impersonal space and really? An opinion is not required. It's expected that you would rate a review these days - but in my experience and training? Is not expected and is considered an intrusion of your opinion into a place where it doesn't belong. You want to tell the author what you think? You tell the author, if you've gotten persmission to do a critque - oh, and make sure you can back that opinion up, bucko.

So now that I've said that, I can start saying other things. Be right back.
kyburg: (Default)
Going to check out a church this next weekend - http://www.seasidecommunitychurch.org/index.html Something tells me it'll be good for kid to have a church home, I could use the time to zone out if nothing else and I like the political climate. Let's see how long it is before they get the pitchforks and torches out. ;)

One of the NEJM studies also showed that many older Americans as well as recipients of the 1976 swine flu vaccine may already be protected against the new virus. In that study, researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report that tests of serum taken from 1976 swine flu vaccine recipients showed a strong protective immune response against today's pandemic virus. Hoookay. It's entirely possible I might have been in that group - Mom was a nurse, remember - so. I'm almost certain we had the flu itself - again, Mom was a nurse and I recall the number of little old people who were hospitalized for it. I wonder how hard the titer is to get done. Worth the trouble, you ask me.

A 3D remake of The Beatles' 1968 film Yellow Submarine has been confirmed, Disney Studios has announced.

I'm old enough to have been one of the target audience for the original film, and YES - we did leave the theater singing. LOUDLY. This is my favorite movie of all time, hands down. I've also made it very clear I really would prefer to have new stories instead of the infernal 'remakes' that I keep getting handed. (And asked to pay money to see. No, thanks.)

I'm telling the powers that be in the only language I have to QUIT IT. By not spending a single cent towards their support. No book adaptations, no merchandising, and definitely NO ticket sales at the box office.

I'll be playing my DVD over here in the corner if you want to find me.

Profile

kyburg: (Default)
kyburg

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
4 56 7 8 9 10
1112 1314 151617
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 2627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 29th, 2017 03:45 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios