(no subject)
Feb. 7th, 2004 09:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
psocopteraMore Teresa Nielsen Hayden quote that probably won't paste but is a brilliant and fascinating observation:
It's a funny thing. People who can't do advanced math, or play classical piano concertos, or pitch a no-hitter in the major leagues, generally know they can't do it. People who don't have an intimate relationship with language are far less aware of their condition, and for them the written world can be a very frustrating place. Near as we can make out, they literally can't tell that their rejected writing isn't like the writing that does get published.
Those of you who've hung out in Usenet newsgroups for any length of time will have seen the phenomenon of a tone-deaf poster exploding in fury and frustration because all he can tell is that he's somehow being left out of some part of the conversation, and that for no reason that he can see, his posts don't get the same reactions that other people's do.
I wonder if the "literally can't tell" thing has something to do with reading being such a mental experience (okay, yes, that did say "such an interior experience" until I went back and changed it, I still have *some* shame), that people can confuse the stream of consciousness they had while reading a book with what the book actually was, and so a stream of consciousness looks like "a book".
I feel like this must happen all over in fandom, people wondering why their stories get the reactions they get, and don't get the reactions they don't get. I wonder how deliberately some of the "big" stories go about being "big" stories - like whether authors consider the optimum length of time between posting chapters (not too fast, because you want to let anticipation build, but not too slow, or people will fear that you're not still working on it, and you won't acquire as many new readers). How actively they think about fandom presence as a publicity campaign. (Which, disclaim disclaim, I have absolutely no problem with - I'm their fan, after all ::grin::.)
It's a funny thing. People who can't do advanced math, or play classical piano concertos, or pitch a no-hitter in the major leagues, generally know they can't do it. People who don't have an intimate relationship with language are far less aware of their condition, and for them the written world can be a very frustrating place. Near as we can make out, they literally can't tell that their rejected writing isn't like the writing that does get published.
Those of you who've hung out in Usenet newsgroups for any length of time will have seen the phenomenon of a tone-deaf poster exploding in fury and frustration because all he can tell is that he's somehow being left out of some part of the conversation, and that for no reason that he can see, his posts don't get the same reactions that other people's do.
I wonder if the "literally can't tell" thing has something to do with reading being such a mental experience (okay, yes, that did say "such an interior experience" until I went back and changed it, I still have *some* shame), that people can confuse the stream of consciousness they had while reading a book with what the book actually was, and so a stream of consciousness looks like "a book".
I feel like this must happen all over in fandom, people wondering why their stories get the reactions they get, and don't get the reactions they don't get. I wonder how deliberately some of the "big" stories go about being "big" stories - like whether authors consider the optimum length of time between posting chapters (not too fast, because you want to let anticipation build, but not too slow, or people will fear that you're not still working on it, and you won't acquire as many new readers). How actively they think about fandom presence as a publicity campaign. (Which, disclaim disclaim, I have absolutely no problem with - I'm their fan, after all ::grin::.)
