Post by orangeflavor in Viatica comments

Viewing post in Viatica comments

Considering that you started your comment off with an acknowledgement to respect the author's choices, your following words don't really honor that. When asked about the lack of trans options in the game (which is a valid question) the author didn't say that they didn't want to include them They didn't say that they believed they shouldn't be included. They said that they didn't feel they could write those options faithfully or realistically, which, to me, feels a lot more inclusive and respectful than a clumsy or misinformed attempt at simply having token representation.

The author focuses on the diversity they can write, because readers deserve to see a truthful and sincere exploration of these ideas. In their first response to you, they even mentioned feeling more confident in writing trans perspectives and that they were including that in their next work. This shows a commitment to genuine inclusion. This shows growth. But you ignore that to continue harping on what you found lacking in the story.

The author also doesn't address ageism, or ableism, or neurodivergence, or religion, or a plethora of other identity issues. But that may not be what the author is attempting to explore, or is even capable of exploring in a way that feels sincere and well-informed. This is also not a salad bar of a story. We don't get to order off a menu for what we think the author should be writing about.

Isn't it more important to celebrate the inclusion we do see, and to acknowledge the author's intent to include even more, to continue growing, to offer more and more genuine, respectful representation, than to sit here and wag a finger at them for not writing the exact story we want to read?

Just a reminder that this IF is clearly a labor of love. Keyword: labor. A lot of time and effort out of someone's life. And it's on here for free for us to enjoy and engage with. Or to not engage with. Your choice. But if your motive for your comments was to argue for the inclusion of something in another person's creation, I have to tell you that this is not the way to go about it. It doesn't read as helpful. It reads as entitled and demanding, even if it started with good intentions.

As a writer myself, I can also tell you that the best way to see the representation you want in stories is to write your own. It feels trite, but it's true. Just a thought.

shadow-fire1012 days ago (2 edits) (-2)

I think you may have misunderstood what my reply was trying to say. Yes at the end I did talk some about where it would make sense to bring it up if the author did ever want to go back and add trans options, but that wasn't my main point.

In their response to me, the author stated not just why they didn't want to add explicitly trans options because they didn't think they could do it justice. Which as stated is perfectly understand, I 100% get that. So I suggested a potential work around, i.e. keeping it ambiguous. That way, they wouldn't have to worry about doing trans character's justice, but wouldn't be fully excluding them. They said they didn't want to do that kind of work around, and stated their reasons why. Which is what I was responding to, since I disagreed with their reasoning.

"The author also doesn't address ageism, or ableism, or neurodivergence, or religion, or a plethora of other identity issues." This was actually kind of my point. From my understanding of what the author said, in their second reply, they did not want to keep it ambiguous if the MC was trans due to, at least in part, wanting to be concise in their messaging. My point was that, the game doesn't really address gender that much and so that, in my opinion at least, making it ambiguous doesn't really affect that messaging. Similar to how it being ambiguous as to whether the MC is say, autistic, doesn't really change the messaging.

I know that making changes would take time and effort, this is why I tried to keep my suggestions to things that would require relatively small changes. I apologize if it came off as me being pushy, that was never my intent. My intent was simply to state something I did not enjoy about a game I otherwise really liked, as well as give my thoughts on it as well as the author's response to me, and to give some suggestions for how the author could go back and address it, if they wanted to.

This is what I meant by my preface, here's my thoughts, here's how the could address it, if they wanted to, but at the end of the day, it's their game, so it's entirely their call whether they do or not. If they decide to take my suggestions and either make it ambiguous or add explicitly trans options, that's fine, if they decide they still don't think they can do it justice, and that they don't want that ambiguity, that's also fine, I'd be a bit bummed, but that's not the end of the world.

realpowermind2 days ago(+2)

I just wanted to let you know this is not proper viewership etiquette. It's one thing to question a part of the story and make a suggestion, it's another thing to ask the author to rework multiple parts of their story, even if it's just small changes, to fit your needs.

I can understand wanting there to be more inclusion for viewership and having a trans option for the MC is a valid concern. But the author has clearly stated that they didn't feel like they could write it in a realistic way, especially considering this is their first IF.

This work focuses on self-discovery, the importance of words, and growing outside of what the society tells you is acceptable. I believe that's puts even more importance that if the author decided to place in a trans option for the MC, it should be clear and explicit and properly shed light on the struggles a trans person has when first questioning their identity. It shouldn't be vague remarks here and there that have nothing to do with the story.

As Orangeflavor has pointed out, there are many other aspects of identity that isn't addressed in the story. Are you saying that the author should make vague remarks about them too? They should edit their story to include ambiguous suggestions to those identities that would only work to confuse the reader of who they're actually playing? As you've said, these identities and the role of gender have absolutely nothing to do with the main story line, so why the hell would the author put in any notes of them if they're not going to mentioned again later on? It's a very ignorant ask of any viewer to want the author to make changes to several parts of their story. Especially with an IF, where the author has to write and code it out properly.

This story was one made out of love and something the author was very clearly excited to show the world. I'd much rather the author write the story as they have and be happy with it, rather than the author makes several small ambiguous changes to the writing and be unhappy and uncomfortable with giving an important journey a flawed execution.

Instead of dragging this whole thing out with your multi-paragraphed "advice," the proper response to this entire thing would've been to address your critique to author, possibly make a short suggestion of what could've been done, and if the author said they couldn't do that for whatever reason, then you thank them for responding and move on. If you cannot enjoy a story without a certain detail being included, then just don't read the story. Read another that's already fitted to your preference, don't make the author feel bad about not including a detail they felt they couldn't realistically write and then tell them how they should write their story.

shadow-fire1012 days ago (2 edits)

Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I genuinely don't understand how I've crossed a line here. Not to use it as an excuse, but I am autistic, so it is entirely possible there is some line I've overstepped without seeing it, but if so I assure you it was completely on accident. From my perspective, here is what happened:

1) I asked a question about whether the game had trans options.
2) I got a response saying no, and giving the author's reasoning for that.
3) I responded, giving some suggestions for how, if the author wanted to change that, they could address it.
4) The author again responded, stating why my suggestions wouldn't work.
5) I gave a response, giving my thoughts on their reasoning, and providing a few more suggestions, again for if the author wanted to add those options in the future.

I only "ask[ed] the author to rework multiple parts of their story" in the sense that I stated something I would have liked to see in the game and offered a way to add them if they ever wanted to.

And yes, there are other things the game does not address as well. However what I got from the authors initial response to mean there was some interest in doing so, so I was trying to respond with how I think they could if they wanted. If I had thought they were completely uninterested, I would not have given them suggestions.

Again it was never my intention to try to push the author into doing anything, tell them how they should write their story or make them feel bad for not including these options. And as I already said, I deeply apologize if what I said came off as such.

orangeflavor2 days ago(+3)

I want to explain a little something because I think it might help. What I'm understanding of the disconnect here is about whether the author wanted the further suggestions. I think that's where it derailed. You said you left suggestions if the author wanted them, but it's better to reserve those kinds of in-depth suggestions and critiques for when the author specifically asks for it.

Believe me, this is also really going to improve your reader experience, because any act of creation is inherently vulnerable, and some authors can be pretty sensitive to critique (in any form), and rightfully so. From reading their bio, Fir has a full time job and teenage kids, so I'm fairly certain she's developed a rather thick skin at this point, haha. But you may come across an author who has not, and they may lash out at your uninvited suggestions.

Commenting is always encouraged! One of the best things about interactive fiction is the interactive part. Not just as a reader, but as a community. Engaging with the author and other readers. This is always good! I would just recommend that you wait for an invitation for the kind of critique that would necessitate any reworking or editing, before you give one. It's just a good practice for all parties involved.

I would definitely recommend you keep an eye out for Fir's new IF "Cantata", though. She's creating many more perspective options, including a touch-averse one (when choosing the element that naturally utilizes touch). I can't speak for the author, but from her writing alone, I can tell that she tries to explore the human condition with all the depth and grace it deserves. And it seems that's what she strives to give each perspective, rather than a vague or easily-dismissed mention. I think that's what drew us all here in the first place. :)

Oh! And I'd keep an eye on her tumblr. If she does want reader opinion on anything specific, she often posts about it, so that's definitely the time to give such suggestions. I hope this gave more clarity about the situation.

shadow-fire1012 days ago

Okay, that makes a lot of sense, thank you. I'll definitely try to keep that in mind for the future.

itch.io

Viewing post in Viatica comments