Fanfic

[shadowkat]

1. The Margins of Print - Fan Fiction as Book History by Catherine Coker -- which I got from elisi but I'm almost positive was mentioned by yourlibrarian.

Abstract—Contemporary fan fiction is overwhelmingly digital in both publication and dissemination; it has never been easier to access this subculture of writers and writing. However, fan fiction in print has likewise never been so accessible, as a slew of recent popular novels proudly proclaim their fannish origins and make claims such as "More Than 2 Million Reads Online—FIRST TIME IN PRINT!" Further, traditional fannish mores insist that fan work should never be done for profit, and yet numerous print works adapted from fan fiction have become best sellers. I would like to problematize how we consider form and content in both creation and reception, how the popular value of work waxes and wanes in relation to its fan fiction status. In other words, how can we read fan fiction as part of a continuum of historical publication practices by women, and problematize our hierarchies of value between print and digital?

Fanfiction and self-publishing have both been stigmatized. But with the digital age, more and more people are ignoring this and sort of looking at the people pooh-poohing it and saying bugger off, as I run off with my millions.

The internet has in some respects freed people to write and create without worrying about the gate-keepers, who for the most part no longer exist. This upsets a lot of people, mainly people who make money from traditional publishing, television, music and film venues and feel that it is encroaching on their revenue stream. It is and it isn't. It is only to the extent that the public chooses to read fanfiction or non-traditionally distributed cultural works over say traditional ones. Which, hello, means the traditionally distributed works aren't meeting the public's needs or expectations.

If someone prefers to read EL James Fifty Shades of Grey over the latest Danielle Steel or Nora Roberts novel, then perhaps there's a reason for it? (Mainly Danielle Steele and Nora Roberts don't have any new ideas and have become a bit tired in their conventions and style. Having read all three, I'd say they are on par with each other for the most part, with Roberts being the best...but she hasn't had a new idea in twenty years. 50 Shades didn't either, but it did incorporate text messaging and a contract, fanfic writing techniques, which was a new idea stylistically.)

Let's face it the publishing world needs to be shaken up a bit in this regard. It's sat comfortably on its laurels for far too long. Fanfic and self-published novels, such as many of Courtney Milan's recent works, deal with LGBTQ relationships, POC, and love interests that are off the beaten track and defy conventional models. They don't follow the Romance Writers Guidelines, they make up their own.

Same deal with Sci-fi.

Also, I remember a fan telling me that she'd been approached by trade publishers at fan conventions to publish her work. Because they felt she had a built-in readership. She was writing real person fanfic - or celebrity fic, where basically she picks an actor like say James Marsters or in this case a guy from a British Reality Show about casting someone for Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat...and puts him in various stories. It's really not that different from Everybody's All Human fanfic that I've read back in the day. And a heck of a lot easier to publish, because all you have to do is change the names and throw in a bit more description. Everything else can remain.
No worries about copyright infringement, because you aren't using anything from the original creator's world. And no worries about defamation, because you just changed the names.

Cassandra Clare did it with Harry Potter fanfic -- her Shadowhunter series is basically based on her Harry Potter fanfic. There's a lot of published fic out there in the YA and New Adult genre that came from Twilight and Harry Potter. Harry Potter and Twilight took fanfic mainstream. Most people didn't know about fanfic until Twilight and Harry Potter. Those of us who were writing and/or reading it prior to that -- know about the Star Wars, Star Trek, Supernatural, Farscape, Doctor Who, House, Buffy, Angel, etc fanfic. I admittedly didn't discover it until Buffy, when I went hunting for Buffy discussion boards, spoilers, etc.. and stumbled upon the fanfic first. This was in the early days of the internet, circa 2002, before we had LJ, before Twitter, before FB, before all the other social media platforms. We just had websites, listserves and voy forums.

Twilight fic tends to be X-rated New Adult. While Harry Potter tends to be Dystopian YA or Paranormal YA. For some reason Potter fans didn't do All Human fic and get it published, near as I can tell.

There are a few fanfic writers such as Cat Valente and CS Pascal who wrote original fics online and self-published them online, prior to a publisher grabbing them and turning them into best-sellers. Andy Weir is an example of a non-traditionally published writer -- who got a best-seller and a movie - The Martian. Go on Good Reads sometime, quite a few of us non-traditionally published writers are on that site. Also before you pooh-pooh it, keep in mind half your flist may fall in that category, just as half falls under the fanfic category.

It's really all about how you promote and market yourself. If you are good at it -- the sky's the limit. If you aren't...doesn't matter how good your writing is, it won't go far.


2. Fanfic pairings I'd like to read but can't seem to find that much of, so gave up.

* Daredevil and Jessica Jones (gen or platonic) - combine those worlds

* Doc Holliday from Wynonna Earp with anyone

* X-men Scott Summers (Cyclops - original version) with Jean Grey(romantic/het), or anyone (platonic/gen)

* John Crichton and Aeryn Sun fanfic

* Sense8 - Wolfgang and Talia, also Wolfgang and the Cop.

* River Song and pretty much anyone

* Starbuck and Apollo (BSG, either version)

Buffy fanfic was easier to find. I have a tendency to like characters and relationships others aren't into writing about.

Oh, regarding Buffy, one fic I wanted to read...but have yet to see is Spike becoming human and acting more like say Ripper or a human version of Spike, not William. Crack martial artist, into killing demons, and becoming a Watcher who hates vampires. I thought about writing it myself but gave up.

Another that I was reading, a WIP, but disappeared before it was completed was about a human Spike with no memory caught in the cul-de-sac hell that Gunn was stuck in, when Dawn runs into him -- thinking he was dead. We had just gotten to Buffy running into him as well...when the writer stopped. Anyone remember it or know what happened to it?
It was doing interesting things with memory loss.

Comments

[cactuswatcher]

I'm of two minds about fan-fic. On the one hand I think it's a healthy expression of creativity, a fun way to extend the enjoyment of whatever universe it's set in, and a good way to relate to others through sharing. On the other hand reading it is kind of a time waster, it gives people exaggerated ideas about their writing talent and some folks do get so wrapped up in fan-fic they read, they forget that it's not something that everyone is going to accept as a part of the original story framework.

Among all kinds of brick and mortar stores it seems that bookstores are among those less damaged by internet sales. Which tells me that on some level it is important for readers to browse, get a taste of the writing and see if it fits what they are willing to accept. There is nothing wrong with publishing fan-fic if you understand that like professionally written, pot boiler genre, it's throw away. You read it once, pass it on or pitch it, forget it and go on to the next.

I remember the first fan-fic-style published book I tried reading. It was back in the 1970's and a publisher was obviously trying to cash in on a craze of the moment, by printing something that at least hinted at being more than one book worth of profit. In fact despite the fact I was interested in the subject matter, it was a tedious book that started nowhere in particular and led nowhere. I read about half of it, then realized it wasn't going to get any better, because it was just written by a "fan" with no particular talent for story telling (organization, plot movement, characterization, and so on). I felt a bit cheated as I trashed it. I've read far better fan-fic since then. These days I'm very demanding of what I pay for, but I'm more tolerant of free fan-fic that I choose to read for myself.

Several people from ATPo have asked me for help at one time or another with their writing (beyond the frequently asked for quick read through with comments). I admit I get very demanding in that case because I'm trying to help them to write a cut above the average fan-fic, toward writing that maybe people won't throw away as soon as they finish it. I think it's often more than what they bargain for in terms of critique, but I don't think I'd be doing them any favors by giving them less.

[shadowkat]

I think we should try to be careful not to lump all writing into a category or generalize about it. Also, try to be equally careful not to speak for others...I mean just because I find something a waste of time, doesn't necessary make it that way for someone else. For example -- I think the tv show NCIS is a waste of time, but my parents adore it -- it makes them happy. So, it is not a waste of time -- it is something they can watch together and makes them happy.

Although to be fair, I usually don't finish books that I feel are a waste of time and I don't finish watching movies or tv shows that I feel are a waste of "my" time and don't work for me. For example? The best selling, traditionally published novel "Me Before You" which was also made into a movie, I did not finish. I felt it was a waste of my time. I regret writing a negative review on it and have attempted to stop doing that. But it is wrong of me to tell others...that it is a waste of their time and they shouldn't read it. Similarly, I felt American Psycho -- a book that was made into a movie and a Broadway musical was a waste of my time, but obviously people disagreed. They have the right to do that. We view the world differently. ;-)

I also think we should be careful about making pronouncements based on limited information or assumptions?

I call this tendency the illogical syllogism.

Example?

A: The fanfic story I read was horrible and a waste of my time.

A: Debbie has written a fanfic story. Since it is fanfic, it is therefore horrible and a waste of my time. So I won't bother with it because it is fanfic.

There's a huge gap in logic in that assertion. And you state as much yourself above, that you have read and appreciated fanfic that isn't a waste of your time, just as you have read and determined traditionally published and in fact established literary works were a waste of your time in other posts, not necessarily this one. ;-)

Add to this the assumption that just because it was a waste of your time, because you felt it was poorly written, it is a waste of everyone else's time.

The assumption that if something is poorly written, it bears no importance...is also an illogical syllogism based purely on subjective opinion and no fact. Importance is in the eye of the beholder or so I've found. I've read poorly written stories that have resonated with me long after I read them, and well written stories that for the life of me I cannot remember at all. As much as I loved "A Hundred Years of Solitude" which has won awards and was beautifully written, I don't remember anything but that. Yet, I vividly remember every moment of Elizabeth Peter's Night Train to Memphis, which is not a well written book and basically pulp. But it resonated for me. There are books that I despised that I cannot forget and books I loved that I cannot remember. Obviously I learned something from the book I despised -- or it wouldn't stay with me.

I think the problem with setting oneself up as a purveyor of taste is one cuts oneself off from so many things that can resonate and teach one something. I think, being curious is better than being critical...or so I'm finding.

Mileage may vary on this of course. But being cruelly or bluntly critical, or so I've found, is more isolating and less...helpful in some respects. I mean constructive criticism can be and is helpful. But, well, having been on the other end of substantial and hurtful criticism...I think it is detrimental and hurts everyone involved.

I'm not saying your critiques were not constructive, I've no way of knowing. Since my work was not the subject of those critiques. But I have been on the receiving end of non-constructive critiques and constructive ones. The difference lies in the emotion -- and the intent. If the person doing the critiquing is doing it for any reason other then to truly aid the other...then it's not going to be constructive. If the critic has an agenda -- then the critique is just a reflection of the critic. Sometimes it's best to pay the person doing the critiquing...then the self-interest has been taken care of, they've been compensated for their time.

I'll give an example? When I sent my novel to a friend, also a writer, who was in the business with contacts in the business, and asked her to "beta" my work and give me an honest critique. Her response was "you start with an offensive suicide and clearly know nothing about depression, I suffered from post-partum and know about this! And what world is this in anyhow? You made up a television show and a tv actor? Why not just say it's James Marsters! And this should start with a murder instead. Also, less adverbs!" That's the gist, don't remember the exact words. Her critique was the opposite of constructive. She attacked me and my book.

She had an agenda. We are no longer friends. It was done by email. Had me in tears. I called my parents and was considering giving up writing. My father, a non-traditionally published writer, who had an editor who reviewed his work and was a professional, told me that my mistake was sending it to an amateur. (The person I sent it to had professionally edited works for magazines and is now an C-list best-seller, with an espinoage series. I'd met her on a fanboard. And had betaed two of her works and am in the acknowledgments of her best-selling series. So, I'm not sure she's an amateur, so much as had an agenda. She also told me once upon meeting her that there was no way I could be five years older than she was and must be lying about my age. Her insecurities got in the way of her critiquing -- it was not about my book, it was about her ego and self-empowerment. It gained her nothing -- as a result she lost a friend and a reader.) Anyhow, my father paid for me to send it to his editor, who I had also met years ago and was a professional book editor and literary agent in NY and was working freelance now. She was constructively critical of my Dad's works. Anyhow she read my book and said it was good. She had a few story suggestions to make it better, redlined it, and provided me with a laundry list of what worked and what didn't. She also told me that because it was so unique and impossible to put in a marketing nitch, I might want to publish it myself. My father said that she liked my book better than his books. She never said those things to him. He also told me that book critiquing is highly subjective and not to take it personally. And be careful who you send your work to -- to edit it. Much better to send it to a professional. And someone who doesn't know you and is less likely to have an agenda.

Familiarity can breed contempt. And a real clue as to how someone is critiquing something is -- whether they are critiquing the bits in such a way as to entirely change the theme and story, or in a way meant to make the theme and story stronger and clearer to the reader. An editor should never try to change the writer's story or theme, they should aid them in making that story/theme clearer to the reader. Instead of telling me to turn my story into a murder mystery, because she couldn't handle the suicide attempt, she should have said -- why are you starting with a suicide? And is there a way you can make this work better for the reader?
Why did you write it in this manner? She should have been "curious" instead of "condemning".

[rahirah]

I've always thought that if Spike became human that's what would happen. Even as a human, he's still a guy with a hundred-plus years of experience in fighting dirty under his belt. But I suspect that the people who like Spike acting that way are less likely to write stories where he becomes human.

[shadowkat]

That was my take as well...and true, most of the fanfic writers who liked the more ambiguous Spike -- didn't want to write human Spike.

People saw Spike oddly, I thought, in the fandom. (shrugs)