on transformative works and respect

[xparrot]

Stumbled across this post by meinterrupted (originally on Tumblr) on OTW, AO3, and creator rights and after hesitating about reading it (there has been a lot of OTW hate around lately, I've been having to limit my reading because sometimes it feels like being kicked repeatedly in the gut, even though I don't think most of it is meant that way; I think most of the folks who wank on the OTW don't ever bother considering that the Org is made up of actual human beings with feelings, who are working hard to make the Org work, and try to make it better.) - anyway, I went ahead and read the post and found, not wank, but a nicely succinct summary of my own feelings on transformative works. So I made a comment that I'm putting up here and expanding on a bit.

(I admit, I feel somewhat awkward making grand proclamations as to the worth of fanfic. Fic has been one of my major hobbies for years, it's given me great pleasure and I've made a lot of friends through it. But the vast majority of fanfic (mine most definitely included!) is extremely lightweight entertainment. It's not culturally insignificant; but it's neither humanity's greatest achievement. So while I can and will defend its artistic merit, for the most part that's not what I look to it for. That being said...)

As a writer, I personally feel that censorship, that the attempt to prohibit or control the sharing of ideas, is dangerous to the production of art, to the creators of art, and to society as a whole. Regardless of whether it's government censorship banning books, or an original creator's censorship of an interpretation of their work that makes them "uncomfortable".

If you respect a creator and want to honor their wishes by not writing fic of their work, that's awesome, good for you. But there is absolutely no rule that says that because you have read something by an author means you have to respect that author. There are quite a lot of authors I've read the works of who I do not respect, either because of the work itself, or because of what I know about the author otherwise (yes, Orson Scott Card, you homophobic asshole, I'm talking about you.) So to say that I should be required to respect a creator's wishes, that a creator has the right to stop me from expressing my opinions of their work - whether they're expressed by writing a critical essay or smutty fanfic - makes me wonder what's the point of art, of experiencing other's ideas, if I'm only allowed to engage with them in "approved" ways and aren't permitted to have thoughts of my own?

I will admit this is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy; any author who opposes fanfic etc. based on their work I automatically lose respect for (and therefore don't feel obliged to listen to their wishes about making fanworks). To me, any attempt by an artist to try to limit others' creative expression feels like they're trying to keep the "art" to themselves, that they feel that they should be allowed to create what work they like, but "other people" aren't worthy of that right. Because there is no artist who has never been influenced by, inspired by, other art, others' creations - whether or not the original creators of those works meant to inspire anybody.

If you don't want to inspire anybody else, if you want to keep your characters and your worlds all to yourself and not let anyone play with them, there is a very simple solution - don't publish. If you make art of them, don't share it with anyone else; or else only share with trusted friends who respect you personally enough to not do anything with your creations that you don't want them to do. As soon as you give a stranger access to your art, then you are giving them the right to have any and all thoughts about that work, and to express those thoughts publicly, and they should be legally protected to do so, in any fair, just, and healthy society.

Comments

[qualapec.livejournal.com]

I think the thing that bothers me MOST about the idea that an author entirely owns any possible idea that could come from their work is that copyright, as we know it, is only about 20-30 years old. The idea that you can own stories is an extremely new concept. For thousands of years stories have been owned by the community. There is no such thing as an original story because those writers that are taking out copyrights on their books all draw from concepts centuries in the making. It tells me that that author doesn't really understand that stories are shared and are by definition interactive, and that shortsightedness makes me lose a bit of respect for them.

While I think that, in a capitalist society, creators should certainly be able to protect their investment and protect the possibility of receiving financial compensation for that investment - from that standpoint, copyright is a great thing, because it means artists/writers/etc but the idea that they completely own a work that is put out into the world is ludicrous. It's a two-way mirror.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Yes, absolutely! Copyright as initially conceived is beneficial to creators, and to society overall because it allows us to have professional artists, people who can dedicate themselves entirely to their art. But there is a distinct difference between ownership of a particular work of art, and ownership of the ideas expressed in that art. (This is true even if that art is abstract rather than physical, like a text work composed of words rather than a physical painting.)

Part of the problem I think is that copyright, intellectual property, and transformative works get confused as being all on the same spectrum, when I think they're discrete categories. I am strongly opposed to plagiarism (claiming someone else's work as your own creation), somewhat on the fence when it comes to piracy (copying/distributing someone else's work without claiming ownership), and strongly in favor of transformative works (creating new work based on someone else's); but I don't think these views are contradictory.

[naye]

Actually, copyright as initially conceived was set up to protect the interest of the Printers guild, backed by the crown wanting to control everything printed for reasons of censorship. This is back in 1710, mind you, but looking at the evolution of copyright, authors' interests have usually come far behind those of the publishers. People like Mark Twain argued passionately for copyright (a legacy to take care of his family after his passing), while Victor Hugo was all about the creative commons, essentially.

... Don't mind me, I just wanted an excuse to revisit my thesis. XD And the most important thing about copyright is that you cannot own an idea. (Well, that, and that the estates of long-dead authors wield far too much power over who gets to access their legacies and how.)

Bottom line is - your post is brilliant and I love your brain!

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Ah-hah, yes, the correction is appreciated! Though copyright does serve the author too, even if not intended for that purpose.

The evolution of copyright over time is fascinating. Back in Dickens' day folks put out a number of unauthorized plays based on his stuff, but it didn't affect his reputation or hurt his sales anyway, that I know of! (and wouldn't it be intriguing these days if movie rights were available to anyone - perhaps for a fee? - and we'd get multiple adaptions of Harry Potter or LotR...)

[sholio]

*nods*

As a personal decision, I prefer to respect creators' wishes about fanfic, assuming they're not douches about it. I think that, just as it's important for us to remember that the fan on the other end of the computer screen is a person, it's also important to remember that creators (and actors!) are people too -- that the characters we love didn't spring into existence fully-formed, but have an actual person or people behind them somewhere. Along similar lines, I always ask before using someone else's fan-created OCs or writing a sequel to their fanfic, and when people have asked me not to, I've respected that.

But that's a personal decision on my part, and not something I expect other people to share. I don't, for example, feel all judgy about someone for writing Anne Rice fanfic. I just don't really feel comfortable doing it myself. (And I've make occasional exceptions, too, for some things that I just really want to write -- so, there you go. *g* Glass houses, and all.)

And, as a creator myself, I fully, 100% support other fans' right to do whatever they want with my creations, whether we're talking about professionally published works, or doing transformative things to my fanfics, etc. I love being part of that free and open exchange of ideas, and I can't imagine standing in the way of someone who wanted to participate. (Actually, if people write fanfic based off my stuff? I will be SO THRILLED. I might be marginally less thrilled if it's obvious that they completely missed the point or utterly hate my favorite character or pairing, but that's what the back button is for ...)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Making the personal choice of not writing fic when a creator asks you not to - that is fine! That's your own decision to respect the creator's wishes, and if you think them worthy of that respect, then you should so respect them. It's not censorship but a matter of how you personally want to present yourself - certainly there's plenty of ideas I have that I won't publish for a variety of reasons; just because there should be a free exchange of ideas doesn't mean you are required to share your ideas; you are equally free to keep them to yourself.

And I also think it is totally fine for a creator to say that they don't want to see other peoples' fic/art/whatever based on their stuff, that they don't want to participate in the fandom. If a writer asked that no one ever link them fanfic or send them fanart, I am entirely fine with that. Or if they'd only like to see a certain type of fic, like a creator who says, sure post fic on my BBS, but nothing explicit - that is totally cool, and I would respect that, and argue for other fans to respect it. Creators have the right to control what they themselves are exposed to, within reason, same as we all do.

But a creator who asks fans not to write or post fic at all, and tries to take action against them (either legal action, or by calling them out or saying things like it's like being raped or somesuch) - yeah, I think that's wrong.

As far as transforming other folks' fanworks without permission - ahh, that's a tricky situation! For one thing, since the fic and the fic of the fic will almost invariably be posted in the same communities, there's no way for the original author to easily avoid it, which is encroaching on their rights to limit their exposure to it.

And then, it mostly comes down to respect. Not respecting a fellow fan is different from not respecting a published author - a fellow fan, even if not personally acquainted, is still part of your personal social group; your relationship with a fellow fan is different from your relationship with a published author. Whether that relationship is more deserving of respect is your own opinion. Personally, even though I feel that fan creators should be welcoming of others transforming their fanworks, I still would not go against the wishes of a fan who asks for people not to transform their own fanworks, and I will always get permission before doing any such thing (unless the fan has explicitly stated that they allow it.)

But I admit that's less out of respect for the original fan, and more because breaching that request would be poor social etiquette in many other fans' eyes; it would make them have less respect for me. (Writing fic for authors/creators who don't want fic written also makes some fans lose respect for one; but not as many. And either way I think it should be entirely a social choice, not anything legally enforceable.)

And yeah, I yearn for the day people write fic for my stuff! Really I think that if a few people at least don't have an OTP that is absurd and totally uncanonical and completely against whatever 'ships I've set up, I'm doing something wrong :P

[nenya85.livejournal.com]

I admit I’m pretty much a “death of the author” kind of person – or to be more accurate – what’s meant colloquially by the phrase, since I admit I’ve never done more than skim the original Barthes essay. But I really believe that it’s what a reader brings to the table that gives a story life; and each reader creates their own, unique version. While the author is the first person, and the most important, person to touch the story, they aren’t the last. Without the author the story wouldn’t exist, but without a reader a story becomes an “if a tree falls alone in a forest does anyone hear it? kind of affair.

I would probably personally acquiesce to any writer’s demand but that’s mainly because it would leave a bad taste in my mouth that’s really not conducive to writing. But I would also think that the author was missing the point. Fiction is meant to live inside of the readers’ heads. And once it crosses that border the author has to accept that to a large extent they have lost control. Ironically when I’m writing, that’s my goal.

Like you I make no great claims for the value of fanfiction, except to the extent that I think self-expression, even when its value is sometimes hard to define is important. Then again if I ever wrote an original work I suspect I’d while I’d be touched and humbled at good fanfiction that explored my characters, I’d also get a kick out of seeing people turn my characters upside-down and inside-out and pair them with everyone I think they’d never be attracted to under any circumstances preferably in bad smut that specializes in using the most ridiculous genital synonyms ever.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I can think of few things that would delight me as much as people writing sincerely improbable & terrible smut with characters of my invention. Talk about giving them a life of their own...!

But yes, more seriously, I agree that part of being a writer is letting go of your creativity, knowing that once you put them out there, though the work will still be your own, the ideas it contains for good or for ill will belong to its readers, and you can't ever take them back. Which I love personally, it's the best kind of immortality to me; but I can understand why it frightens people. But you have to accept it, or else never let your work get published at all...

[beckerbell.livejournal.com]

I keep thinking that I feel sympathy for the author's position, that it would be difficult to see a large fandom springing up that widely misinterpreted your characters or did things you weren't comfortable with or wrote your darling terribly or whatever else obnoxious things fandom does. But I also keep thinking: Yeah, so? What's the harm there? It's not as though fic has any bearing or influence on the canon (unless the author lets it) and most people know that fic and canon are separate things. The canon exists separate from the fic, nothing is changed about it, so why is fic such a terrible thing?

Also, as a reader, I'm far more attracted to fandoms that have a large fic base and tend to stay in them longer and, most importantly, I spend more money on them. The author may not like that I'm reading smutty fanfic about their characters, but without that, I wouldn't have kept buying their manga or watching their show or buying their toys. Without fic to keep all those feelings and emotional attachment stirred up, without fic to help spur on my imagination on what I'd love to see with the characters, I don't see myself lingering much on any given fandom.

Which is, of course, setting aside the more philosophical discussions, I'm just going on an entirely selfish/self-centered perspective here. *g*

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's the thing, I can't see a good argument against allowing transformative works. Copyright law exists for a good reason - without it, someone else can steal your work and make a profit off of it without you seeing any of that. But transformative works don't break copyright; your work is still your work. So the only real complaint here is that some creators don't like people mucking around with what they think of as 'their' ideas, that it makes them uncomfortable to know that people are thinking things about their characters that they didn't put there. And I don't believe in censorship in the name of "uncomfortable". If someone can prove to me that allowing transformative works has a measurable negative impact on original creators, then I'll reconsider; but otherwise, yeah, I'm in favor of legally protecting all forms of expression. If you don't like it, and don't want to share your art if others would be allowed to play with it after, then fine - don't share it!

One of the things that gets me is that no one questions the right of people to write negative reviews, analytical essays, theses, whatever, on creative works. That's clearly protected under "fair use" and no matter how much it might hurt an author's feelings, no matter how uncomfortable it might be for them to read a scathing review of their baby, that's one of the risks of publishing, and not anything that any author can reasonably try to outlaw. So I don't see how a fanfic - which might not use any actual writing from the original work beyond the names of characters/places - is somehow more invasive/threatening to copyright then a review that quotes paragraphs from the original. Both a review and a fic are dependent on the original work to make sense, and both are expressing specific opinions on the original work, so fundamentally what is the difference between them?

[tipper-green.livejournal.com]

I don't disagree with anything you've written at the top -- I actually agree with much of it -- but something in one of the comments bothered me.

I believe in the importance and necessity of copyright to protect and encourage art. It doesn't just protect against plagiarism. It does, to a point, also protect the use of a work, and even the original ideas behind a story, and that's a fine-line to walk, I know. Still, they way I've always viewed it is, I have no issue at all with transformative or derivative works (obviously not, since I write fanfic and I think that's part of the constant rebirth of art and ideas), but what I do have a problem with is anyone profiting from someone else's work, by mildly changing it and then claiming it as their own. It's one of the massive, huge, terrible aspects of patent law in the U.S. at how easy it is for people to circumvent, and my fear is that the same can happen to copyright if we're not careful. It's my one real concerns with the 50 Shades of Gray phenom (well, that and my personal opinion about the quality of the writing compared to some of the truly amazing fic I've read over the years, but that's another beef.) Once profiting from a transformative work comes into play, I think the fine-line gets fuzzy, and I really worry about how far it can go. (Plus, personally, I think it's ugly to do that).

Copyright is what allowed many artists who were previously afraid to show their work to do so, to feel confident that they would be the one to be receive accolades and profit and not someone else. Before then, stealing was rampant -- and not by "communities," but by seriously nasty people who wanted to make a profit. Artists and writers, unless they had a buttload of protection, were slaves to their agents, and a bigger purse could steal their story as easily as candy from a baby. Copyright (the underlying theory of which is about 300 years old in the UK, and about 100 years old in the US) stopped that, or, at least, lessened it to a great degree, and its no coincidence that the "birth" and rise of the novel occurred at about the same time. At the end of the day, copyright isn't there to protect you from me or your church or your town, it's there to protect you from Warner Brothers and Disney.

Long story short (too late, I know), for me, diluting copyright too much by permitting opportunities for profit from merely transformative works could, I think, have disastrous consequences, and I do worry about that. Derivative works, I'm not as concerned about (If I have the definitions right), but transformative...that really bothers me. I want to keep the ideas flowing, but to do so, you have to admit a certain degree of ownership be allowed to rest with an author, and not just of the words themselves. Anyway, that's just my two cents on the matter. (I haven't read any of the links, so I'm probably repeating much that's already been said, so apologies if this is just a rehash of what you've already read somewhere else. I should probably go read those now...)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

See, that's the thing; while I think copyright is very important for creators, I feel that derivative or transformative works (I personally don't see a particular difference between derivative and transformative, am curious what definition you have for each?) do not infringe upon copyright. (I also feel that copyright law has gotten way, way out of hand - copyrights extending for decades past the original creator's death is simply absurd. For that matter I feel that US patent law is seriously broken, but towards being too restrictive rather than too loose - allowing people to patent DNA of existing organisms or existing plants is absurd.)

I don't really believe in the concept of "idea dilution", that someone else making a work that transforms your own work (with full acknowledgment!) could actually negatively impact the original work. For instance, even if 50 Shades of Gray had been published as actual Twilight fanfic, rather than changing the names, and with a byline "unauthorized further adventures of Edward & Bella" - how would that have had anything but a positive impact on the sales of Twilight, from people buying the original book to see what the big deal was?

Copyright protects the Twilight books themselves - the author still gets royalties and has a say who can and can't publish the books, and I entirely agree with that. As you say, that kind of protection is what led to the rise of the modern novel, and as I have ambitions of becoming a professional author myself, I definitely believe in it! But I don't think allowing transformative works - works that do not reproduce an existing work but are inspired by it, and clearly credit the original source - breaks copyright.

[velkynkarma.livejournal.com]

Man, this is such a controversial topic, but I'm pretty much in agreement with you on it.

I don't think fanfiction is bad. For most people it's just a pastime or a hobby, and that's fine. There's lots of people that play baseball or paint pictures without doing it professionally, either, but that doesn't make the way they enjoy it any less worthwhile.

And for people who are legitimately interested in going further with a writing career, it is a good teaching tool. I had to laugh at that one article Robin Hobb wrote there, about how fanfic doesn't teach a writer anything. I'd like to point her towards my own fanfic page and show her just how much I've improved in the past few years! Writing fiction is a huge undertaking, and it can be hard to learn all at once, especially when worldbuilding can get so complex. Fanfic lets you focus more on learning plot, pacing and wiping out plot-holes with pre-existing characters so you can figure out how to tell a story, instead of jumping in the deep end of the writing pool by trying to tackle plot, pacing, characterization, world building, plot-hole eradication, etc etc, all at once. Once you get a little more experienced at handling different aspects of writing it's much easier to tackle them all at once.

Generally speaking I try to respect an author's wishes, because I try to put myself in their shoes too, with my own original characters and world-building. Would I be a little upset if somebody wrote blatant porn about OC X and OC Y, or had OC Z randomly kill off his wife so he could do something completely out of character, or whatever? Yeah. Yeah I might be, a little bit. So, if an author asks to please not write/draw their 'verse, then okay, I'll respect that. And I know a lot of authors use another passive tactic, which is not reading fanfics at all. I know Jim Butcher (Dresden Files) is not allowed to read any fanfic based off his stuff for contract reasons (mostly so fans can't accuse him of 'stealing' a fanfic idea if it coincidentally happens to show up in his actual official work, which is a fair concern. There have been horror stories about fanfic writers trying to sue the original authors for idea theft).

But honestly, I don't see the harm in fanfic, unless people are really blowing it out of proportion with the more childish parts of the fandoms (like character bashing or blatantly offensive fics).

And finally:
If you don't want to inspire anybody else, if you want to keep your characters and your worlds all to yourself and not let anyone play with them, there is a very simple solution - don't publish.
This. So much this. I intend to publish a novel one day, but until then I'm not posting any relevant information, sketches, etc online. I don't want people bending that information out of proportion or taking it and running off with it until I get a chance to put it together. This is just common sense, but it seems like authors don't seem to get it. I understand, they are protective of their ideas that they worked so hard to make (as I said before, some of the stuff that pops up in fanfics I'd be a little uncomfortable with if it happened to my own chars!) But ultimately, an idea is only yours so long as it is in your head, and as soon as you share it, you can't stop people from thinking and interpreting, and trying to is just stupid.

~VelkynKarma

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Fic writing is a great way to learn writing because, as with any art, the best way to get better at it is to keep making it! It doesn't matter what genre of fiction you're writing; writing a lot of stories will teach you a lot about writing stories. If I have any skill as a writer, I owe nearly all of it to writing fic, because that's what I've written the most of. Anyone who says differently...just hasn't written or read a lot of fanfic themselves, so doesn't realize that it is indeed real writing.

ETA: Thinking more about Robin Hobb's statement that fic writing teaches a writer nothing - what makes that so funny is that, at least to me, the easiest part of writing is inventing characters and a world to put them in! I've always made up people and places in my head. The hard part is weaving these things into a coherent story plot, and learning how to construct prose and dialogue well enough to tell that story. Which you have to do as much work for in fanfic as in orig fic...

As for writers disliking fic of their orig stories - part of the problem I have with this, I admit, is that I have a really hard time imagining the circumstances where fic about my own creations would do anything but thrill me. Badfic would just make me giggle with glee, crazy dirty porn I probably wouldn't read but it would tickle me that it exists. About the only situation I can think of that would make me truly uncomfortable was if someone was using my chars to promote a racist/sexist/homophobic/etc agenda. But even then, I'd be just as unhappy if someone write a critical essay using my work to further the same such agenda. Which I wouldn't want to disallow because that's why we have free speech! So yeah, I might argue against a particular example of such a thing, but I wouldn't ever take legal action to take it down.

As far as authors 'stealing' ideas from fanfic writers, and those horror stories you've heard - pretty much all of them are as real as ghost stories. It's never actually happened, that an author lost rights to an idea because a fic writer did it first. The closest incident that I know of involves Marion Zimmer Bradley about 20 years ago, and it's more complicated than is often presented. You can read more about it on Fanlore. (Among other things, the "fanfic" in question was published in an authorized zine edited by the original author herself, and the problem arose when said original author first tried to buy the story concept from the "fic" author to use in an upcoming novel.) Which isn't to say that authors ought to read fic, but the legal risks to them if they do are minimal (though most authors and agents don't know this, not actually being lawyers themselves, and copyright law is confusing as hell...)

[velkynkarma.livejournal.com]

Anyone who says differently...just hasn't written or read a lot of fanfic themselves, so doesn't realize that it is indeed real writing.
Totally agree. Admittedly, fanfiction tends to fall to Sturgeon's Law a lot, and a good deal of fic out there really IS pretty terrible. If you're unfortunate enough to stumble on a fandom and find mostly the badfic, I guess fanfic would look pretty bad. But there are also hundreds of gems out there, where people apply good writing technique and improve as well, so not all fic is worthless.

Thinking more about Robin Hobb's statement that fic writing teaches a writer nothing - what makes that so funny is that, at least to me, the easiest part of writing is inventing characters and a world to put them in!
Same here. Creating characters? Easy! Worldbuilding, shaping cultures and rules and ways things work? Wicked fun, not hard at all. Stringing it all together coherently? A very tough challenge. And since that's what fanfic is primarily about...yeah. It's good for study.

As for writers disliking fic of their orig stories - part of the problem I have with this, I admit, is that I have a really hard time imagining the circumstances where fic about my own creations would do anything but thrill me.
This is a good point, different writers will take it different ways. Me, I wouldn't be totally comfortable with my chars getting twisted OOC for somebody else's purposes. Though, to be totally fair, I get this way even with fanon, too. I'm open to interpretations on chars as long as it can be explained (ex. ZoroXSanji as a couple, instead of Zoro and Sanji as frenemies/rivals/friends/whatever. Former's not my cup of tea, but hey, that's a writer's interpretation...I just won't read it). What I'm NOT open to is completely abusing/destroying a character's core traits to serve the fanwriter's own interests (ex. Sanji threatens/abuses/murders/etc Zoro's girlfriend because he's IN WUV and that girl needs to GTFO of the way 'cause fanwriter loves ZoSan! Not acceptable, man. Chivalry is a core Sanji trait, you don't break it to get your two hot guys together. etc etc).

So I guess the issue with me would be drawing the line between interpretation and blatantly disrespecting character. The former I accept. The latter would infuriate me, if it happened to my own chars.

As far as authors 'stealing' ideas from fanfic writers, and those horror stories you've heard - pretty much all of them are as real as ghost stories.
Is that so? Personally I'm disgusted as a fanwriter that any fans would even consider pulling this crap (if the original creator of anything I wrote fic for enjoyed my idea, all I'd be is flattered). But if it's mostly false, that puts me at ease a little. Though I still can't blame writers for avoiding fanfics of their stuf; personally I'd find it as a challenge to AVOID doing that stuff just to keep things new, which would cause me problems in the end, I'm sure.

~VelkynKarma

[tasabian.livejournal.com]

I think if I was a published author and fanfic based on my work started to be posted, I'd be dead chuffed - it's a sign that you've made it! Also true for films, TV etc. To me, it seems like fan arts are the healthy ecosystem that help support and promote the original work.

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

"Ecosystem" - that's a great way to put it! I do think of art/creative expression as a living thing, or network of life, feeding off one another. And if one part becomes too strong or another gets killed off, everything dies...