Sta.sh
This has been a subject I've been interested in for years, and one which I personally struggle with on a near constant basis: Artist's intent versus fan criticisms. Before we begin I just want to make this clear that this journal is NOT about "ignoring criticisms" or any sort of endorsement of such an action. I'm gonna be accused of it, of course, but I just wanted to get that out of the way right now.
...
As I've been observing fan interactions over the years I've noticed a severe increase in a sense of entitlement: IE: that if you love something enough you have a "right" to force the creators to change their content to suit your personal preferences. We saw this play out to the extremes this past summer with the Mass Effect 3 ending debacle, and we see it play out to a much lesser extent here on DA quite a bit.
Artists need feedback and criticisms to grow and improve their work, but at what point does it move beyond offering suggestions to help an artist improve to outright demanding things be changed?
As a creator I've always felt that the voice of the artist should always be considered. If someone looks at your work and wants to know why you chose to do something a certain way, you should be allowed to explain yourself without fear of being attacked or seen as being defensive. Yet I've noticed that artists who do speak about their work are often criticized for trying to censor the fans, or can't handle criticism, or that they're being too defensive. It's happened to me, but It's also happened to many of my artistic colleagues, usually with predictable and similar results.
Using Mass Effect 3's ending as an example, the fan's outrage and intensity was like nothing I've ever seen before. No matter how shitty the ending was (and believe me, it was shitty), there was no need to file a complaint with the FTC over it. Being a fan of something doesn't mean you're always gonna get what you want. Part of being a fan means you need to accept the risk that you might get a downer ending, or a bad plot twist, or a character you don't like, etc. You have every right to be disappointed or annoyed at such changes/plots/characters... but going from being disappointed to demanding companies/artists "fix" and "change" things crosses the line in my opinion.
This does not mean that fan input is not important. Fan input is very important, and fan input is one of the reasons why there have been a number of really successful comics/shows/movies recently. But there's a fine line between offering suggestions because you're a fan and want to help, and expecting the creators to follow everything you dictate because you "know better" than them.
Being a fan of something doesn't mean you own it. You can love a series, a character, a property, a movie, etc. But if the creators chose to go in a direction you don't personally enjoy, you are not "entitled" to demand change. You can suggest it, and the creators are free to listen and even accept it... but offering criticism and advice is not a contract you are signing with the creators. They are not bound to please you, however right or justified you might be.
Again, artists need feedback both positive and negative to grow and improve. However, artists also need to feel that they're allowed to take creative risks, and fans need to learn that there is a time and a place for demanding change. You can offer your criticisms and advice, but after that it's up to the artist to use advice. If they chose not to, that doesn't necessarily mean that what you had to say was invalidated or wrong, and you shouldn't become angry or upset over it. Right?
...
That's my take on the situation, but I'm curious to know what you all think: At what point does it cross the line from being a fan giving criticism and feedback, to a fan expecting changes because of their criticisms and feedback? Do artists have any say in the matter? How much of their original intent should be considered? Do fans have more power over a creator's work? What's your opinion on this subject, I am very eager to hear your responses.
| Deviant Login | Shop | Join deviantART for FREE  |
Take the Tour  |
Content 
As I suspect the ending of ME 3 was strongly influenced by the company in order to keep the ME franchise running.
Very strong evidence is the fact, that you have to play the multiplayer in order to get the "perfect good" ending. As I see it, ME has such a great story, it deserves a great ending and not something to keep the fans at bay.
I agree with you, that both sides have to be considered and I wouldn't disagree with you if it is about another topic than ME. Some movies and TV-shows didn't end like I would've liked or imagined how they would've, but it didn't bother me too much and I moved on.
ME on the other hand... Too great for such an ending. Too great.
I'm not so much into games, but the example you mentioned with Mass Effect 3's ending....it was changed after so many people complained about the ending right? And the company did have the choice to leave it as it is or change it, which was demanded by their consumers, who they want to please with the game, since they want to make profit with it, and the result was the change.
Now, I think there is a small but certain difference between companies creating games, movies etc. and artists. An artist does not do his or her work to only please people but to express his-/herself in various ways. And since, at least most of the time, art is not solely created for the viewer (in comparison to a game, which is made to be used and played with) but for it being art itself, may it be a piece of writing, a comic or a photograph, there should be a limit on how a viewer has the right to influence this piece of art. And here I am talking about power again: As an artist one can choose to follow their audiences will, or he/she can choose to ignore it, which is their right, as well as it is the viewer's right to voice his/her opinion on someone's work.
Additionally, I find it interesting how many people I have heard criticizing ME3 and haven't even played the game. It makes me wonder how many outraged complaints were from people who created opinions out of second or even third hand information. Humans are weird.
On the other hand, there's been some stories that had had very disappointing outcomes, that had me wishing that there was a way to get the artist to change it.. And hesitated to recommend it to friends, in case they weren't big fans of disappointing endings..
So i guess it's about moderation, the artist should keep their audiance's reaction in mind.. Remembering that when posting or publishing or whatever, the it's not only about them.. They're inviting the masses in to enjoy the story -or not- and give their opinions..
And the fans should always remember that these are pieces of art that belong to the artist, and so they have the right to the whatever the heck they want with their story\characters.. Even if they -the fans- have invested time\emotion and probably money supporting the story.. the last word should always be up to the artist.. And if they -the fans- wanted to, they could write their own stories with their own happy endings.. or support another fandom that gives them all the fluff and/or happy ending they want..
So I suppose it's mainly a matter of situation.