![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
So, Vid Review
So this is, in part, the entry I didn't write all summer because it was stressing me the hell out. Then Vid Review happened this year and amazingly it was much less stressful than in previous years, so I'm finding my words.
Vid Review was a lot better than in previous years. The moderation was extremely important in that. Astolat and Flo were solid, organized, thoughtful moderators. I liked the set-up this year--they grouped vids into blocks of half a dozen or so, Character Studies (viewable with and without context), Relationship vids, Broader Themes, Comedy, and Lonely Hearts (didn't fit comfortably in other categories). They encouraged the audience to make connections between vids in categories and between categories and to comment on more than one vid at a time. So we stayed on time and finished around 11:55, without skipping over any vids, and--I think this is important, but to be fair, my vid was categorized in Comedy--grouping the comedy vids together prevented the usual savaging of comedy vids.
You see, Premieres is typically drama/angst-filled and beforehand everyone is excited that someone might have made a comedy to break up the tearfest and then afterward at Vid Review--in previous years--comedy vids got fairly uniformly shredded, and then people wondered why hardly anyone submitted comedy vids to Premieres. Gee, it might have been because Vid Review told people that comedy vids were unwelcome and only drama vids were valid Premieres vids.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS YEAR. Like, no one even uttered the phrase "should have made the joke and got out." You do not understand how happy this makes me. That's a phrase that functions as a dismissal, because it closes the topic with supposed general wisdom instead of opening the topic, such as by saying what part of the joke was worth keeping and what part dragged, which is something people could actually talk about and might not agree on even if they did all think it could be shorter. And the fact that that phrase--and other old chestnuts--have been repeated year to year just means that they're soaked in context that new members don't get. That's why I think comments like "should have made the joke and got out" need to be unpacked and formed in specific for the vid in question rather than quoted as a general rule--because when quoted as general rules they function to alienate and dismiss vids that don't meet an invisible standard that is not acknowledged to exist.
And can I get a BOOYAH let me repeat THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS YEAR.
There are a few people--and it seems to me to be a specific lineage of vidding geneaology--that prefer to speak in Vid Review only when they have something negative about a vid. Someone behind me, when told I was the vidder of one of the vids of current category, leaned forward to say that she had nothing to say about my vid, and she meant it as a compliment. This is an attitude I don't understand and that bothers me about Vid Review--and in previous years it was much more pervasive, in part because it seemed to be an attitude held by a moderator. I don't get it. I don't get why just because you CAN say negative things in Vid Review, you want to ONLY say negative things in Vid Review. It makes it sound like you don't like anything, because nobody can hear your silences about things you liked, or even things you didn't like or dislike but found intellectually interesting. I like it when Vid Review has commentary on what worked as well as what didn't, on what made people think and wonder. I don't think it needs to be balanced in the sense of 'be nice to every vid whether it deserves it or not,' I mean, 'why can't we be talking about the good that exists as well as the bad? I mean, we like vids, right?'
There were a couple of comments this year that made me wince a little, but overall, I feel like people did talk about what the liked as well as what they disliked, that the moderating emphasis on connections and comparisons got people thinking and talking in ways that were more fruitful, that opened things up instead of shutting things down.
Vid Review was a lot better than in previous years. The moderation was extremely important in that. Astolat and Flo were solid, organized, thoughtful moderators. I liked the set-up this year--they grouped vids into blocks of half a dozen or so, Character Studies (viewable with and without context), Relationship vids, Broader Themes, Comedy, and Lonely Hearts (didn't fit comfortably in other categories). They encouraged the audience to make connections between vids in categories and between categories and to comment on more than one vid at a time. So we stayed on time and finished around 11:55, without skipping over any vids, and--I think this is important, but to be fair, my vid was categorized in Comedy--grouping the comedy vids together prevented the usual savaging of comedy vids.
You see, Premieres is typically drama/angst-filled and beforehand everyone is excited that someone might have made a comedy to break up the tearfest and then afterward at Vid Review--in previous years--comedy vids got fairly uniformly shredded, and then people wondered why hardly anyone submitted comedy vids to Premieres. Gee, it might have been because Vid Review told people that comedy vids were unwelcome and only drama vids were valid Premieres vids.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS YEAR. Like, no one even uttered the phrase "should have made the joke and got out." You do not understand how happy this makes me. That's a phrase that functions as a dismissal, because it closes the topic with supposed general wisdom instead of opening the topic, such as by saying what part of the joke was worth keeping and what part dragged, which is something people could actually talk about and might not agree on even if they did all think it could be shorter. And the fact that that phrase--and other old chestnuts--have been repeated year to year just means that they're soaked in context that new members don't get. That's why I think comments like "should have made the joke and got out" need to be unpacked and formed in specific for the vid in question rather than quoted as a general rule--because when quoted as general rules they function to alienate and dismiss vids that don't meet an invisible standard that is not acknowledged to exist.
And can I get a BOOYAH let me repeat THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN THIS YEAR.
There are a few people--and it seems to me to be a specific lineage of vidding geneaology--that prefer to speak in Vid Review only when they have something negative about a vid. Someone behind me, when told I was the vidder of one of the vids of current category, leaned forward to say that she had nothing to say about my vid, and she meant it as a compliment. This is an attitude I don't understand and that bothers me about Vid Review--and in previous years it was much more pervasive, in part because it seemed to be an attitude held by a moderator. I don't get it. I don't get why just because you CAN say negative things in Vid Review, you want to ONLY say negative things in Vid Review. It makes it sound like you don't like anything, because nobody can hear your silences about things you liked, or even things you didn't like or dislike but found intellectually interesting. I like it when Vid Review has commentary on what worked as well as what didn't, on what made people think and wonder. I don't think it needs to be balanced in the sense of 'be nice to every vid whether it deserves it or not,' I mean, 'why can't we be talking about the good that exists as well as the bad? I mean, we like vids, right?'
There were a couple of comments this year that made me wince a little, but overall, I feel like people did talk about what the liked as well as what they disliked, that the moderating emphasis on connections and comparisons got people thinking and talking in ways that were more fruitful, that opened things up instead of shutting things down.
no subject
no subject