![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
helloladies posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
ladybusinessI often come across online discussions about the state of short SFF. In some ways it's a golden age for short SFF right now. Yet people still wonder why there aren't more short SFF reviews, framing the question as if reviews are how most, or at least more, people can find excellent short SFF to read and love. While many readers do find short SFF through reviews, this framing and these conversations ignore what I consider to be a critical part of the short SFF conversation: people who write about short SFF but not in a review format.
Because short SFF does have a major problem: discovery. There’s lots of awesome short fiction being published that isn't being read widely. Even the most dedicated people can't keep up with all of it. For people who aren't so dedicated it can be hard to find what they want to read. Some people are so overwhelmed that they just give up. And many SFF readers don't seem to be aware that this explosion of short SFF is happening at all.
Short SFF rarely gets the same type of buzz that SFF novels can achieve, and lots of people who would enjoy some short SFF aren’t reading any. I’m not sure what the solution is to these problems, but I don’t think it is more reviews—or not more reviews alone. When a book has buzz it's not because a lot of people are reviewing it. It's because a lot of people are talking about it—and there are many ways of talking about a book. A classic is: "Here, I loved this, try it!"
These issues came up recently in the discussion of the problematic review site Rocket Stack Rank, which was publishing some really transphobic reviews. This open letter has good summary of the key issues. My thoughts on Rocket Stack Rank boil down to, "I never liked them much but I had no idea they were that bad." I'd read a few reviews there, decided that their reviewers didn't share my concerns or tastes, and then ignored the site. Maybe I should have paid more attention.
I was glad to see so many people condemning problematic reviewing but I'm also frustrated by the conversation about it. I saw lots of calls for more reviews and criticism of short fiction to help improve the conversion and solve the discoverability problem. This focus on reviews is not new, but I find it frustrating. I'm not against more reviews, but I feel focusing on reviews ignores many other ways to address the problem. I write about short SFF, but I don’t write reviews. There's a lot of conversation about short fiction to be had that's not reviews or criticism, and that type of conversation can help with discoverability.
I see a lot discussion about short fiction happening that is not included in those categories. People recommending stories to each other, people talking about trends they see in short fiction, detailed analysis of who gets published, and even the occasional piece of fanfic. There are probably people talking about short fiction in many other ways that I don’t even see.
Personally I don’t write reviews, I write recommendations. On my personal blog and now here at Lady Business I post links to short fiction I’ve read and enjoyed with a short explanation of why I think others might like it too. This is for a bunch of personal reasons, like that I have trouble with long form writing and being critical of things in public. But also because I think what I do has value to people. People tell me they enjoy my rec lists and that it helps them. Which is what motivates me to write recommendations in the first place.
I rarely read long form reviews, and then only of things I've already read or things I’ve decided not to read. I don’t use reviews to find new works to try. Instead I rely on word of mouth; following favorite authors around the internet; checking out online magazines and interesting sounding anthologies; and good old-fashioned stumbling upon things. When I read long form reviews, it's to try to better understand something I've already read. To get a better sense of how it fits into the big picture, or whether and how marginalized people see themselves in the story, or just to see the story in a new light. And I'm glad that those reviews exist and would be happy for more people to review short SFF. However, I don't think that more reviews will solve short SFF's discovery problem.
I want people like me who don't review to be acknowledged as part of the conversation—not even me personally, but everyone who writes about short fiction in non-review formats. I love hearing that someone read a story I recommended and enjoyed it. I want to shout out to some of the people who are talking about short SFF in non-review format. Some of these people also write or have written reviews, but I’m going to focus on their non-reviewing work. These are just a few of the many people talking online about short fiction in formats other than reviews.
A.C. Wise frequently tweets about the stories she's reading and also maintains a yearly round up of awards eligibility posts and recommended reads. Find this year's here.
Bogi Takács posts frequent rec threads on eir twitter and also has good commentary on what's happening in short fiction and SFF in general.
Cecily Kane wrote the The 2016 #BlackSpecFic Report. She writes a fair amount of meta (mostly on twitter these days) about the short SFF field with a focus on racism.
Maria Haskins does monthly short fiction round ups with lots and lots of recs.
Where do you go to find out about the latest short SFF or talk about the state of the field?
Short SFF is something that I really love and that I think deserves more attention. However, the current meta-conversation about short SFF has very limited view of what kind of discussion is the correct way to pay attention to short SFF. That's bad, because it doesn’t acknowledge the work that many people are doing, and because it discourages new people from joining the conversation in fresh and unexpected ways.
Because short SFF does have a major problem: discovery. There’s lots of awesome short fiction being published that isn't being read widely. Even the most dedicated people can't keep up with all of it. For people who aren't so dedicated it can be hard to find what they want to read. Some people are so overwhelmed that they just give up. And many SFF readers don't seem to be aware that this explosion of short SFF is happening at all.
Short SFF rarely gets the same type of buzz that SFF novels can achieve, and lots of people who would enjoy some short SFF aren’t reading any. I’m not sure what the solution is to these problems, but I don’t think it is more reviews—or not more reviews alone. When a book has buzz it's not because a lot of people are reviewing it. It's because a lot of people are talking about it—and there are many ways of talking about a book. A classic is: "Here, I loved this, try it!"
These issues came up recently in the discussion of the problematic review site Rocket Stack Rank, which was publishing some really transphobic reviews. This open letter has good summary of the key issues. My thoughts on Rocket Stack Rank boil down to, "I never liked them much but I had no idea they were that bad." I'd read a few reviews there, decided that their reviewers didn't share my concerns or tastes, and then ignored the site. Maybe I should have paid more attention.
I was glad to see so many people condemning problematic reviewing but I'm also frustrated by the conversation about it. I saw lots of calls for more reviews and criticism of short fiction to help improve the conversion and solve the discoverability problem. This focus on reviews is not new, but I find it frustrating. I'm not against more reviews, but I feel focusing on reviews ignores many other ways to address the problem. I write about short SFF, but I don’t write reviews. There's a lot of conversation about short fiction to be had that's not reviews or criticism, and that type of conversation can help with discoverability.
I see a lot discussion about short fiction happening that is not included in those categories. People recommending stories to each other, people talking about trends they see in short fiction, detailed analysis of who gets published, and even the occasional piece of fanfic. There are probably people talking about short fiction in many other ways that I don’t even see.
Personally I don’t write reviews, I write recommendations. On my personal blog and now here at Lady Business I post links to short fiction I’ve read and enjoyed with a short explanation of why I think others might like it too. This is for a bunch of personal reasons, like that I have trouble with long form writing and being critical of things in public. But also because I think what I do has value to people. People tell me they enjoy my rec lists and that it helps them. Which is what motivates me to write recommendations in the first place.
I rarely read long form reviews, and then only of things I've already read or things I’ve decided not to read. I don’t use reviews to find new works to try. Instead I rely on word of mouth; following favorite authors around the internet; checking out online magazines and interesting sounding anthologies; and good old-fashioned stumbling upon things. When I read long form reviews, it's to try to better understand something I've already read. To get a better sense of how it fits into the big picture, or whether and how marginalized people see themselves in the story, or just to see the story in a new light. And I'm glad that those reviews exist and would be happy for more people to review short SFF. However, I don't think that more reviews will solve short SFF's discovery problem.
I want people like me who don't review to be acknowledged as part of the conversation—not even me personally, but everyone who writes about short fiction in non-review formats. I love hearing that someone read a story I recommended and enjoyed it. I want to shout out to some of the people who are talking about short SFF in non-review format. Some of these people also write or have written reviews, but I’m going to focus on their non-reviewing work. These are just a few of the many people talking online about short fiction in formats other than reviews.
A.C. Wise frequently tweets about the stories she's reading and also maintains a yearly round up of awards eligibility posts and recommended reads. Find this year's here.
Bogi Takács posts frequent rec threads on eir twitter and also has good commentary on what's happening in short fiction and SFF in general.
Cecily Kane wrote the The 2016 #BlackSpecFic Report. She writes a fair amount of meta (mostly on twitter these days) about the short SFF field with a focus on racism.
Maria Haskins does monthly short fiction round ups with lots and lots of recs.
Where do you go to find out about the latest short SFF or talk about the state of the field?
Short SFF is something that I really love and that I think deserves more attention. However, the current meta-conversation about short SFF has very limited view of what kind of discussion is the correct way to pay attention to short SFF. That's bad, because it doesn’t acknowledge the work that many people are doing, and because it discourages new people from joining the conversation in fresh and unexpected ways.
forestofglory.
no subject
Date: 2017-12-13 10:41 pm (UTC)