on fanfic

[xparrot]

So as you might have heard, various pro fantasy authors (Diana Gabaldon, GRR Martin, and Katherine Kerr among them) have been speaking out about how fanfic is disrespectful to actual money-making authors (because you're not a real artist unless you're making a buck with your art), is illegal (because apparently copyright law is what they say it is, as opposed to what's actually on the books), immoral (and akin to rape and/or white slavery, because one's original characters are like one's children, and for someone else to dare write their names feels just like having your kids abducted and sexually abused), gross, and inherently inferior to original fiction.

Obviously I have a few mild opinions on the matter. But it's the last point that I keep getting stuck on. Putting aside bookshop's straightforward rebuttal that there is an enormous amount of derivative/transformative literature out there by distinguished professional authors (Bill Shakespeare was such an immoral hack, you know), the fact is, fanfic is not the same as original fiction. A lot - the majority, perhaps - of fanfiction would not work as original fiction.

And it's not because fanfic is inherently bad fiction, or that fanfic writers are talentless wannabe authors who lack the creativity to write their own original characters/worlds. There are a lot of stories that, by their very nature, require that the reader already be familiar with the characters or the world.

Take the entire genre of Alternate Universe fics, which will put a cast of chars in a completely new setting - Kirk & Spock as high school students, Draco Malfoy as a private eye. Some of the pleasure of reading an AU is simply reading a story in which you can clearly picture the characters. But a lot of the enjoyment comes from seeing how these familiar characters fit into these new surroundings, seeing how their skills or traits translate to the different situation. For an AU to make sense, the readers need to know the chars well in their own setting. Therefore the only way you can write an actual original AU is to write a novel to establish the chars in their native universe, and then write AUs based on that (which some authors do - some of my favorite mangaka are very partial to it!). But you can't just write an AU cold. And if you're not a full-time author, if story-writing is your hobby and you don't have the time/energy to write an entire novel, then if you want to write an AU, it has to be based on someone else's characters. Or else a key component of the story will be lost to your readers.

It's not just AUs; there are many kinds of stories that depend on readers being familiar with the characters. Any story with a plot point that hinges on challenging the reader's expectations, needs to be certain that a reader has those expectations. If you're writing a novel, you can set up characters and situations such that readers will start making assumptions. That's a lot harder to do in a short story, and often isn't possible at all when it comes to complex emotional situations. It's show vs tell - "telling" doesn't really inspire feelings in a reader, "showing" is crucial for emotional engagement. But it takes a lot of words to, say, convincingly show a friendship developing. If you want to write a story featuring a change in an already existing friendship (say, the pathos of two friends parting ways), then you need a friendship that the readers are going to care about. Sure, you can write a short story beginning with "X & Y were best friends," and then tell about how they separate - but it's unlikely to move readers much, when they don't know or care about the chars or their friendship. Or, if you have the time and energy, you can write a novel about two people becoming friends, and then write your story. Or you can write a story about two people who you already know your readers will accept as friends.

This is just as true on the reader's side. If I want to read a story about two friends, yes, sometimes I want to read a whole novel on the development of a friendship. But sometimes I'm in the mood for something shorter. Derivative works allow a reader to have their cake and eat it, too.

(And yes, I suspect this is why so much of fanfic is erotic, because a lot of people will get in the mood for something short and satisfying - and women especially tend to enjoy reading about sex more when it has an emotional component. The vast majority of erotic fanfic simply would not be as successful fiction as original stories, because part of the pleasure the reader takes is in seeing the consummation of an already-existing relationship, but at the same time when someone wants to read good porn they don't necessarily want to have to read hundred of pages of non-porn in order to be satisfied. If you want to argue that erotic fiction is fundamentally inferior to other kinds of fiction, that's a whole other argument I can't speak to, but to dismiss erotic fanfic as inferior to original erotic fiction is to dismiss an aspect of sexuality for many.)

A lot of these scenarios hinge on accepting that reading and writing primarily for entertainment is a valid activity. I'd think that most fantasy writers wouldn't argue this case, considering that none of the writers I've seen speaking out are known for writing meaningful, life-changing literature. But even if you believe that the only Good literature is that which is thematically important and significant, then derivative works can be as Good fiction as any other type. There are still some themes which are easier to explore in a derivative work, or even impossible to explore otherwise - a transformative novel like Wide Sargasso Sea critiques Jane Eyre and its themes and cannot function apart from its original; so, too, does some fanfic critique and illuminate problematic themes in its inspiration.

Not all fanfic is so meaningful - but then, neither are all published novels. But professional authors who write transformative works do so for the same reasons fanfic writers do: because there are stories which work better, or only work, as derivatives of other fiction. That certain types of stories can only be told as derivative works - as fanfic - means that you must accept fanfic as a legitimate form of fiction (whether or not you like it personally, or have any interest in writing or reading it), and fanfic writers as legitimate authors - or else you must deny an entire aspect of literary tradition.

Comments

[georgiesmith.livejournal.com]

Wait, you mean the same Diana Gabaldon who has admitted in the past that Jamie Fraser from her Outlander series is based in part on the Doctor Who companion Jamie McCrimmon played by Frazer Hines?

That's rich.

Loved this piece. You've said what a majority of us feel in such an eloquent way. I've always thought of fan fiction as a training ground of sorts. It's a wonderful place to start writing creatively, being able to play in other people's sandboxes and get feedback.

[trystings.livejournal.com]

Word. Word to the entire post and I want to crochet that last paragraph on a pillow.

[wneleh.livejournal.com]

Word!!

Share this piece?

[beautifuljoe.livejournal.com]

Do you mind if I share this nicely laid out argument beyond the Live Journal world with two friends who are 1) being interviewed about this issue and 2) doing some copyright work in another field -- well, let's face it religion ... preaching is the ultimate fanfic, mais oui????? If that's a "yes" do you want it shared with Live Journal name or real name.

[flemmings.livejournal.com]

fanfic is not the same as original fiction. A lot - the majority, perhaps - of fanfiction *would not work as original fiction.*

Thank you. This, to me, glaringly obvious point has gone right past most commentaters I've read, starting with DG herself. Fanfic is referential: it depends on a pre-existing context to be comprehensible in the first place. This is why DG's 'just change the names of your fanfic and presto! original work!' was so head-bangy. Does she truly think that if you changed the names in a Dr Who tie-in novel the book would still make perfect sense?

[michelel72.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this.

I'm just so frustrated, not only by the alleged "pros" getting their panties into twists, but by some of the fanfic defenders, too. In addition to everything you've said, fanfic isn't "just practice" or only a training ground for eventual original fic; it isn't any less an art form than original fic. It is a different type of writing — not inherently better, but neither inherently lesser.

[mjrf.livejournal.com]

Here is the thing that immediately caught my attention -- GRR Martin has licensed Green Ronin to publish a RPG based on his series ( http://www.greenronin.com/sifrp/ ). This allows people to play in his world and interact with his characters. How does writing a campaign for this game differ from writing fanfic in his eyes?

Because I am completely out of this loop . . . what has GRR Martin been saying specifically? His personal problems with fanfic may not actually be in play here but it really seems to me to be odd that he is willing to let people play in his sandbox but only if they call it one name and not another.

If he is really against other people using his characters in their own stories what does he think is going to happen with that? It not like any of us that play RPGs ever write stories based on the games we play. :/

[dogwoodblossom.livejournal.com]

I will never understand why having a fanbase that wants to continue playing in a world you've created isn't immensley flattering to these people. It's not like anyone is going to be less likely to read the originals because there's fanfic out there.

I'm reading some novels right now that I would never have purchased if I hadn't read an SGA crossover AU that I thought was really cool.

[topaz-kat.livejournal.com]

I thought of something while reading this. Consider the development of a fandom as whole and how it can depart even from itself even within it's own world and by it's own author. For instance, Maki Murakami has written her own yaoi porn to go alongside Gravitation in the form of the Megamix books. Additionally, can you name exactly HOW many times characters like Wolverine have had their backgrounds re-written (what Jim called "suffering from the disease of 'toomanywritersitis'").

This is also neglecting the simple fact that a story changes when it shifts media. Superman started in comic books, then branched into the television and the movies. The format and some of the story changed to deal with those accommodations and now there is the tv show "Smallville" which goes completely off the map of the fandom and has re-written some major parts. A similar thing happened with Batman where depending on which 'mini-verse' one follows, Bruce Wayne's parents were either killed by a young Joker, a random street-thug, or a hit man for the mob or some other secret organization. And how many times has a movie based on a comic book ended with killing a major villain that is still alive and kicking in the base origins of the fandom? These are basic demonstration I think of how a story can change details but the premise and promise remains the same (a lot like what you find in fanfiction).

When a fandom shifts around in media, especially from comic to cartoon to TV live action to movie and everything in between, there are some strange changes that take place. The original writers of Batman and Superman are dead, and Stan Lee never wrote X-men, but the PTBs at D/C and Marvel have to sign off on new changes in the story before they can be manipulated. So to me, to argue that fanfiction "rapes" the characters of a writer is really very ridiculous when the owners do it themselves all the time.

I'd also argue, with regards to the element of porn in fanfiction, that it serves a very unique need. I have read many stories where they are short and satisfy the need of simply having the characters get together to make lovely groans and get sticky. But I have also read some seriously, seriously long story arcs that delve into and explore aspects of sexuality as a whole but uses the characters as a back drop more than anything else (at least this seems to be the case with the various long BDSM or slave-fic story lines I've read in many fandoms).

In regards to those stories, I think they also fill a component of women's fanservice. I used to argue that anime had two kinds of fanservice, men's and women's. Men's fanservice had large-breasted, scantily clad women (gee, doesn't that sound like most fantasty/sci-fi/comic-related/movie-related fandoms?) and that women's fanservice revolved around "pretty" boys/men getting the crap knocked out of them and abused in general. Why this particular distinction? I really don't know, but a lot of fanfiction goes the same way, especially longer stories that have a component of sex to drive the plot.

[epicycles.livejournal.com]

Yes, yes, a million times yes. :D This is one of my big pet peeves when people say "why don't you write original stuff" -- because a lot of stories *can't* be told except as derivative/transformative works.

[sholio]

I've noticed that I'm not really feeling the outrage or even reading most of the meta on this particular round of "fanfic is creatively bankrupt and you people are thieves" because, well ... I guess I've come to the conclusion that people like that are so blindingly, blatantly wrong that there's no point in even arguing with them; it's like walking past someone standing on the streetcorner who's ranting about ALIENS CONTROLLING OUR BRAINS BY PUTTING FLUORIDE IN THE WATER! I can't even get worked up enough to engage anymore.

It was really an epiphany for me, a few years ago, to realize that most of what I wanted to get from my original work (the joy of writing, the pleasure of knowing that someone else liked it, even the occasional accolade and good review) was something I was *already* getting from fanfic -- and not only that, but probably more and better than I'd get from original fiction! I haven't given up on origfic by any means (in fact, this summer I'm planning on getting serious about it) but it made me realize that fanfic fulfills a lot of the same functions, and there's really NO reason for me to write original fic instead (unless I just want to) except to make money ... which is a pretty shaky proposition with original writing these days anyhow.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

*nods*

yeah. i generally think of my own fanfic strictly in terms of a hobbyist's writing, but the sentiment here rings true for me, too. two of my favorite fan-genres to write are AUs and cross-overs. you're totally right that at least some of those stories just *wouldn't* work as stand-alone pieces, no matter how much i tried for a style of fiction that was as accessible to non-fan readers as well as fellow fans. i don't usually think about it, but yeah, you're right.

here via wneleh.

-bs

[crysothemis.livejournal.com]

You have hit many nails right on the head, here. I used to write original fic. I don't anymore, because, having seen several friends get published and deal with the reality of writing as a business, I don't want any part of it.

Also? Fanfic is about acknowledging (reveling in!) the sources of ideas and the myriad manifestations they can be twisted into. What's not cool about that?

[hanarobi.livejournal.com]

*deep happy sigh* Yes. And thank you for writing this.

[lest-we-ship.livejournal.com]

Loved this!

Just a comment about what fanfiction really is and also how the argument over fanfiction is irrelavent.

It's in the concept that there is no such thing as an orginal idea. So much of what we read and watch today is sipmly mined form previous ideas and altered slightly.

I'm doing Gendered Cinema this semester and on our reading list was Virgina Woolf's Mrs Dalloway which 'inspired' the novel The Hours which was adapted into a film. The Hours also included an interpretation of V. Woolf her self. Tell me that's nor RPF! Is fanfiction OK when the novel is out of copywrite? Someone else made a profit (a huge profit) of the work of another author. But thats ok because she is Dead!

i wonder if the author's complaining about not-profiting fanfiction will be forgotten when they're DEAD and out of copywrite.

[hoshi-ryo.livejournal.com]

At least a few pro fantasy writers -- not going to name names here, aside from saying that the names listed here doesn't include the ones I know of -- are said to be anti-fanfic for a reason that will never be honestly admitted: it's altogether too likely that some amateur writers, doing fanfic for this author's works, will produce work of higher quality than the originals.

This is...more common than you might think. Let's, for the sake of example and because I know of few works in English which have such a rich body of professionally and amateur-produced transformative works, look at what there is for Sherlock Holmes.

Well, to start with, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote a few fanfics. Yes, the author of the original works himself is responsible for some of its earliest transformative works. It probably says something that they'd mostly be classed as crackfics and parodies, too, but I'm not going to try to figure that out myself. Suffice to say, they're not canon and finding them can be a matter of sheer luck.

Of the transformative works produced by professionals, the quality varies dramatically. Unfortunately, the majority of those written in the last 50 have generally raised the question of if the person who wrote them has actually read the work he (or she) is supposedly basing it upon, something you'd rather hope a person being paid to write a derivative/transformative work would take the time to do. Some of the better ones merely leave one wondering if the author has thought to invest time in researching the setting.

Looking at...well, pretty much whatever is in the FF.net archive for Sherlock Holmes, it is...well... I should admit here that, unfortunately, I have had the pleasure of finding some rather good historical research on homosexuality during that period & I've spent perhaps too much of my life reading late Victorian lit for somebody who isn't getting a degree in it, too. I skip the slash stories because, aside from finding them utterly boring when slashed, I also have serious doubts about it being anything more than than accident.

(Incidentally, if you want something Victorian where there is definitely slash involved, try the Raffles books; the title character is based off of somebody whom the author didn't know was gay. It also needs much, much more love than it gets!)

However, there are some very fine works to be found there, some of which are sadly unfinished so their quality cannot be quite properly determined. It doesn't hurt that many show signs that the writer, despite being an amateur, has done sufficient work to have a good sense of what the setting was really like (proving that it is, in fact, quite easy to avoid such things as sticking female characters in outfits that would inspire questions about their rates!) and an equally good sense of the characters themselves.