Persuasiveness is Not an Inherent Trait

 I think one of the things that makes life less stressful for me is that I don't necessarily feel like lack of persuading people of something is a failure on my part.  I don't exclude the possibility that I could have done a better job making my case, but I also realize that persuasion is a dynamic between two people and not a trait the persuader actively has nor is the person being persuaded just a passive participant in the process.  Like, on the simplest level, a person can simply choose not to listen to anything that makes them feel uncomfortable or contradicts their current beliefs.  For someone to be capable of being persuaded of something, they have to be willing to actively listen to arguments regarding it and consider their implications.  There's a lot of reasons why this might not happen that have nothing to do with how well I might make my argument.

Reflections on Fanfic Comments and Writing

I have to admit, I don't really understand the sentiment of 'oh, someone's given me a nasty comment on my fanfic, so now I'll stop writing to punish them'.  Like, I always assume they do that either a.) because I've legitimately said something they view as unsavory in my story and they've actually done the emotional work to reach out and explain that to me or b.) they're being nasty because they want me to stop writing, or c.) both. 

So my reaction to possibility a is to first just try to reflect on the criticisms I've been given to see if they contain anything that may reveal genuine insights into my own flaws (either as a person or a writer) or if they're just superficial preference criticisms which I can ignore or the response to a fundamental value difference between me and the reader. Now, I don't expect all writers have to be willing to reflect on their work in that way, but as a matter of politeness, if one doesn't want that kind of criticism, they should probably mention that in their profile and/or author's notes.  And if one *does* want that kind of criticism, one should mention that in one or more of those places as well.  People aren't mindreaders, and not every writer wants the same kinds of criticisms.   And so I view writers who say 'no concrit' as taking the correct approach as much as those who say 'I only want you to tell me everything you hate' (and everything in between--personally I'm not set on either of those types of critique, but I explain in my profile what I do want as clearly as I can manage).  And so if one is receiving criticism they don't like, they might first consider whether they are telling the reader what they want in the first place.

As for b, if they want me to stop writing, and I stop writing, then I'm...giving them what they want.  And I just really don't see how that's going to hurt them.  If anything, I'd expect such a person to celebrate.  So my actions would essentially be rewarding people who hate me while punishing people who actually like me or my work.  And that just makes no sense to me.

Lastly, if it's both, well, I'm not going to stop writing, but I will take some time to see if the comment has anything of substance to say.  Even if I don't agree with the criticism, a criticism that gives a reason behind it can be worthwhile to consider.  And just because I may not ever want to interact with the person doesn't mean they have nothing valuable to say (although of course that may be the case as well).

So, anyway, that's some of my thoughts on comments and criticism.