What do you think of Fanfiction?

[Evie]

I'm not boycotting her, I'm saying that it would be fair to boycott someone over a situation like this. Anyway, since none of that has a bearing to the question of fanfiction (like I said: whatever we chose to believe MZB did or did not, it changes nothing to the value and quality of her writing) shall we drop that line of thought (we know we're not going to convince each others anyway, we always try and always fail) or shall we continue Luckymoose's derailment for him?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

He's more than capable of doing that for himself.

However, I will say that a long time ago I started a silly crossover fanfic with Star Trek and Darkover, in which I chose to drown Expendable Security Goon Ensign Jensen in the Lake of Hali...

 

[Luckymoose]

Bradley actually has a daughter, Moira Greyland, who came forward and claimed Bradley herself molested her, along with others, from the ages of 3 to 12. There was a big deal about it recently in the SF/F community. I also boycott Orson Scott Card for his views on homosexuality. There are some folks you can't tolerate. Their artwork, as with any artist, is influenced by their own views on the world. Once you find out about people, you see it in their work. I can't read it.

"I put Walter in jail for molesting one boy ... Walter was a serial rapist with many, many, many victims (I named 22 to the cops) but Marion was far, far worse."

And no, Valka, I'm not trying to belittle you in any way. I know some fanfiction authors make it out and produce original fiction, but the point is they did make it out. They dropped the crutch and moved on. Maybe they would have published sooner had they started with original fiction? Who knows. It isn't my place to judge it. My views are based on new writers and telling them to avoid the fanfiction game completely. If you want to write original work and be recognized for it, you won't do it with fanfiction unless you're writing Twilight smut. (I really hate people like E L James, making all that money off plagiarized characters in smutty situations). But maybe you don't want to be recognized at all? That's okay too. I'm just offering my own advice and views, which are valid. My own truths, as tim tried to compare me to a prophet. I couldn't care less what his opinion is, as unlike Valka or Oda he has yet to provide anything but snappy, insulting, insubstantial comments.

I won't change your views. You're a lot older than I am, and have been doing fanfiction longer than I've been alive, even. I merely seek recognition of my position and an end to this. And no, this discussion has nothing to do with Iron Pen. I simply don't want you to bring up Bradley in a positive light in a discussion with me ever again, if you'd be so kind.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Bradley actually has a daughter, Moira Greyland, who came forward and claimed Bradley herself molested her, along with others, from the ages of 3 to 12. There was a big deal about it recently in the SF/F community. I also boycott Orson Scott Card for his views on homosexuality. There are some folks you can't tolerate. Their artwork, as with any artist, is influenced by their own views on the world. Once you find out about people, you see it in their work. I can't read it.
...

I won't change your views. You're a lot older than I am, and have been doing fanfiction longer than I've been alive, even. I merely seek recognition of my position and an end to this. And no, this discussion has nothing to do with Iron Pen. I simply don't want you to bring up Bradley in a positive light in a discussion with me ever again, if you'd be so kind.

I saw Moira referred to as a foster daughter or goddaughter, not a biological daughter. Not that biology is any excuse either way, but just to set that straight... EDIT: I did not know MZB and Walter Breen had 2 biological children.

I assume you have a link to Moira Greyland's statements?

As for my mentioning MZB in any positive way ever again... while I understand that you feel strongly, I can't comply. There is NOTHING in her Darkovan writing that even hints that she finds parent-child sex (consensual or not) acceptable, nor indeed any sort of non-consensual sex. With the exception of the latest two anthologies, I've read every word about Darkover that's been professionally published as Darkovan fiction, and if I feel like praising that literary universe, I will. If I feel like praising MZB for mentoring younger authors, I will. And if I feel like criticizing her for ordering people like me to physically destroy every scrap of Darkovan fanfic I have written (in the wake of the legal clash with the fan who sued her for co-authorship of the lost novel that will never be published), I will. If I feel like mentioning her involvement in the SCA, I will. If I feel like praising the extraordinarily talented filk writers who were inspired to compose, perform, and record Darkovan music (ie. "The Horse-Tamer's Daughter"), I will.

Luckymoose, I put up with a lot of things from people on this forum that I find distasteful, and I'm afraid this is one time when you'll have to put up with something you find distasteful, unless you want to put me on ignore (in which case your doing Iron Pen would obviously be impossible). I won't go out of my way to mention MZB as a writer/editor, but I won't tippytoe around it, either.

 

[Tarquelne]

I merely seek recognition of my position and an end to this.

Okay.

There is indeed quite a bit of truth to what you said. Some fanfic is everything you described. And the writing of it, for some people, carries every disadvantage you mentioned.

But you kept clouding the waters by voicing strong disapproval of other's reasonable choices. They may have recognized good within your position, but they were far, far, far, too occupied with the upsetting stuff to spend time on it. I certainly found myself disinclined to voice support despite overall agreement with much of what you wrote.

Yes, people responded to in a less than ideal manner. OTOH, I think they were provoked quite thoroughly.

Maybe they would have published sooner had they started with original fiction? Who knows. It isn't my place to judge it.

Good, 'cuz earlier you called fanfic writers "lazy," which sounds pretty judgemental. Especially given ...

But maybe you don't want to be recognized at all? That's okay too.

That. (And look! You even said that's okay!) Beyond "don't want to be recognized" there are other possible factors that make writing fanfiction a reasonable choice. I mentioned one several pages ago.

You need to limit the scope of your criticisms when you first introduce them rather than only after being hounded. I think your points are perfectly reasonable ... given the sum of the qualifications you've added, here and there ... but, as presented were so absolute, and so broad, and were so judgemental and accusatory that:

First, they were wrong. Too absolute and broad. In your hurry to express disapproval of fanfiction and its writers you overlooked the possible positives. And they're there. Only mosquitoes are wholly evil.

Second, you'd pissed people off so much they weren't inclined to see the seed of truth within your blanket condemnations. I can't blame them one bit.

Post #18, btw, is the one where I think the discussion dropped off a cliff.

Fanfiction as the beginning to a professional writing carer may be less than ideal, especially if you overlook the practice it can give you with the basic act of writing, confidence as a writer, the connections to a fan community, the chance to build up the habits of a writer, and even a possible connection with an established author supportive of fan fiction.

OTOH, it has a lot to recommend it as a hobby. It's creative, it's communicative, it's open-ended, and it's cheap. Yes, it's not wholly good. But, put that way, it's a fantastic hobby.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

And no, Valka, I'm not trying to belittle you in any way. I know some fanfiction authors make it out and produce original fiction, but the point is they did make it out. They dropped the crutch and moved on. Maybe they would have published sooner had they started with original fiction? Who knows. It isn't my place to judge it. My views are based on new writers and telling them to avoid the fanfiction game completely. If you want to write original work and be recognized for it, you won't do it with fanfiction unless you're writing Twilight smut. (I really hate people like E L James, making all that money off plagiarized characters in smutty situations). But maybe you don't want to be recognized at all? That's okay too. I'm just offering my own advice and views, which are valid. My own truths, as tim tried to compare me to a prophet. I couldn't care less what his opinion is, as unlike Valka or Oda he has yet to provide anything but snappy, insulting, insubstantial comments.

Well, we can't all be Vera Nazarian (her first professional publication was in one of MZB's anthologies, at the age of 14). Ms. Nazarian went on to have a career as a writer and publisher.

You're assuming I want to be a professional writer. That's one of those "in a different universe, maybe I am" things. For me, fanfiction is a hobby, whether I collect print zines, read stories online, write stories and poems, or chat regularly with the nice people who write, illustrate, and publish the Valjiir Continuum stories (Star Trek stuff that's been around for over 25 years; I used to correspond with these people via snailmail, back in the '80s until they ceased print publication and it was a lucky chance to make contact again a few years ago on TrekBBS).

I've heard of the "50 Shades"/Twilight thing; haven't read them, so I can't comment on the writing, and I'm not remotely into vampire fiction.

 

[Luckymoose]

You're assuming I want to be a professional writer.

I said:

But maybe you don't want to be recognized at all? That's okay too.

As for the 14 year old and MZB, well, I don't think we should talk about that. But for E L James and the Twilight fanfiction, yeah it happened. She wrote Twilight fanfiction in a smutty scenario online, took it down, changed the names and published it for well over 80 million dollars in royalties/advances. How wrong is that? Super wrong.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

As for the 14 year old and MZB, well, I don't think we should talk about that. But for E L James and the Twilight fanfiction, yeah it happened. She wrote Twilight fanfiction in a smutty scenario online, took it down, changed the names and published it for well over 80 million dollars in royalties/advances. How wrong is that? Super wrong.

JFC, are you going to seriously tell me that a girl who had NO personal contact with MZB at the time (her story submissions and all the legal contract issues were handled via snailmail, and her mother had to sign as well, given Vera Nazarian's minor status) is someone You've Decided I'm Not Allowed To Talk About?

As for the Twilight issue, is it the ethics or the subject matter that bothers you most? Smut has been around for millennia, and if the Twilight lawyers couldn't stop the publication, that's their problem.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

My own truths, as tim tried to compare me to a prophet. I couldn't care less what his opinion is, as unlike Valka or Oda he has yet to provide anything but snappy, insulting, insubstantial comments.

Which apparently has finally worked, since now you are at least talking about 'your own truths'.

Your idea that 'the audience has no right to interpret what is written' has shown clearly here. When you write the short statement "I told you the truth" I can tell you that almost anyone who reads it is going to interpret that in a particular way. 'Hey here's a guy sharing his opinion who also respects mine' is not how they are going to interpret it. You are operating from the idea that anyone who reads what you write will just get it the way you intend it, and if they don't it's somehow their fault. That isn't how writing actually works; here, in fan fiction, or anywhere.

You are twenty posts into 'seeking recognition of your position' and everyone here recognized your position a long time ago. No one here has denied your right to have such an opinion on fan fiction. What led to the dispute is that you did not state your opinion as opinion, you delivered it in a fashion that almost anyone who reads it would interpret as 'dispensation of the truth to the unenlightened'. Then when people interpreted it in what I would consider to be the most obvious way it could be interpreted you blamed them for their failure to understand.

You are fortunate to have the opportunity an interactive forum provides, because here you can get direct feedback on how what you write is interpreted by readers...who by the way will always interpret what you write, as is not only their right but just an unavoidable reality. In other mediums such a difference between interpretation and intent just gets the writer's work discarded without providing any opportunity for the writer to learn from it.

Your initial 'expression of opinion' started a firestorm, not about your opinion but about the interpretation that you believed your opinion somehow carried the weight of truth. That interpretation appears to be common enough among the readers. You are young, apparently, and most youngsters actually do believe their opinion is something they arrived at through learning of truth...an opinion that reality disabuses us of eventually.

My 'snappy' (thanks for that) comments were carefully crafted to get across exactly the point I was trying to make to the vast majority of readers, and I'm thinking that they worked. Your stating of your opinion was not interpreted in the way you now say it was intended. Where does the fault for that actually lie?

You want to be a better writer? Here's a chance to look to your craft.

 

[Tarquelne]

I've heard of the "50 Shades"/Twilight thing; haven't read them, so I can't comment on
the writing

It's mainstream-popular. Yes, it's that bad.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Sounds like something my grandmother would flip out over ("What will the NEIGHBORS think?!" ) if she ever caught me reading it.

 

[Luckymoose]

Your initial 'expression of opinion' started a firestorm, not about your opinion but about the interpretation that you believed your opinion somehow carried the weight of truth. That interpretation appears to be common enough among the readers. You are young, apparently, and most youngsters actually do believe their opinion is something they arrived at through learning of truth...an opinion that reality disabuses us of eventually.

My 'snappy' (thanks for that) comments were carefully crafted to get across exactly the point I was trying to make to the vast majority of readers, and I'm thinking that they worked. Your stating of your opinion was not interpreted in the way you now say it was intended. Where does the fault for that actually lie?

You want to be a better writer? Here's a chance to look to your craft.

So this is ageist now? So me, a person who has spent years in academia writing, researching, and developing the methods required to put in the work, and who has for the past few years dedicated himself to learning and improving at the craft of creative writing is now lesser to you, the older person, because I'm young? How absolutely convenient.

On interpretation: any person with a basic understanding of academic work knows an opinion is not an interpretation. Obviously you do not hold yourself to that higher standard, so I neither will I hold you to it. Let's walk you through the basics of what I meant when I said interpretation of works. You cannot tell me, the author, my work is in support of communism if I disagree with you. Why? Because the work is not in support of communism and is defined as such by the creator. Your opinion is the work makes me you think about communism, or the color red, for whatever reason. Your critique can be the work wasn't adequately expressing itself to give you a clear understanding of its intention. Those are not interpretations.

Ah, maybe I'm not clearly expressing myself here, again. As it seems to me you've misunderstood all of my posts, I'll dial it down again. Let's play pretend, in our own original creative scenario. You are a student in a kindergarten class. Now, assuming you're a healthy child with a basic understanding of language, social interaction, and a passing knowledge of alphabet rhymes and rainbows, the following should be an easy example for you to follow. I, a fellow student, ask you to finger paint with me. You say, "Sure, Luckymoose. We're fwiends." I smile, with no adverbs. I ask if you'll gather my favorite color paint, blue. You bring me red. Now, we're in a bit of a pickle, tim. I asked for blue, you've brought red. Your eyes work perfectly. You understand color. Red may in fact be your favorite color paint. You interpreted my call for blue as red. Blue, as you may know, is not up for interpretation. Blue, no matter the shade, is defined as a spectrum of colors by the English language that are most certainly not red. You then complain, say I asked for red. I, being the gentleman kindergarten student in a sweater vest smoking a bubble pipe, do not look down on you, but simply offer you my position of your interpretation of what I said. You, being reasonable, fetch the blue paint and accept that I said blue the entire time.

 

[Evie]

Their artwork, as with any artist, is influenced by their own views on the world. Once you find out about people, you see it in their work. I can't read it.

Even if that were true, and I don't agree with this, that wouldn't be an argument against letting other people try their hand at writing the characters and setting, since they bring in a different world view free of the distasteful element the original author might have put in. In fact, it could even be seen as an argument for doing that.

On interpretation: any person with a basic understanding of academic work knows an opinion is not an interpretation. Obviously you do not hold yourself to that higher standard, so I neither will I hold you to it. Let's walk you through the basics of what I meant when I said interpretation of works. You cannot tell me, the author, my work is in support of communism if I disagree with you. Why? Because the work is not in support of communism and is defined as such by the creator. Your opinion is the work makes me you think about communism, or the color red, for whatever reason. Your critique can be the work wasn't adequately expressing itself to give you a clear understanding of its intention. Those are not interpretations.

Apparently, you don' tknow the least thing about academic theories of literary criticism here. Because I'm given to understand that prevailing thinking in academic literary criticism is the exact opposite of what you just stated above; that it's the reader's perception of the work, not the author's intention for it, that determine what the work is. (Which, yes, means a single work can be many things...although that doesn,t mean some people arent mistaken about what it is. But in that case their mistake springs from unreasonable interpretation, not from disagreement with the author)

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It's mainstream-popular. Yes, it's that bad.

There's a widespread belief that 'popular is bad'. This is often used to support the idea that something can be 'so good that no one reads it'. Which is a problem because most things that no one reads are actually not read because they just don't deserve to be.

The purpose of the written word is to communicate, so without a doubt the more it is read the more effectively it was done.

 

[Wrymouth3]

I once read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion for a class. It was smut just like most fan fiction. I guess I'm invalidated though because despite the fact of what it says about Jews, I must respect the opinions of the authors.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Ah, maybe I'm not clearly expressing myself here, again.

See...once again my point gets across.

By the way, you introduced age to the conversation and I did interpret that as acknowledgement on your part that it may be relevant. Was that another failure to get your intentions across? A failure you of course blame me for.

You are so busy trying to be cleverly condescending that you have to wrap yourself in sheets of nastiness, but you are getting the point. The only difference between me and most readers is that I have the patience to ignore the sheets of nastiness and not just ignore you. I suspect the vast majority of people understand why I bother, and I may have enough patience to even get it across to you.

Look to your craft.

 

[Luckymoose]

See...once again my point gets across.

By the way, you introduced age to the conversation and I did interpret that as acknowledgement on your part that it may be relevant. Was that another failure to get your intentions across? A failure you of course blame me for.

You are so busy trying to be cleverly condescending that you have to wrap yourself in sheets of nastiness, but you are getting the point. The only difference between me and most readers is that I have the patience to ignore the sheets of nastiness and not just ignore you. I suspect the vast majority of people understand why I bother, and I may have enough patience to even get it across to you.

Look to your craft.

You say I ignore your points, when I answer them in my posts. You ignore my position to strengthen your side. You are figuratively putting fingers in your ears and shouting LA LA LA. You are in obvious need of an education, one I would love to give you save for the infractions I would gain in doing so. If you ever wish to be a normal participant in a conversation like this, and discuss things as an adult, I'll be ready to continue.

Thanks.

 

[Azale]

Apparently, you don' tknow the least thing about academic theories of literary criticism here. Because I'm given to understand that prevailing thinking in academic literary criticism is the exact opposite of what you just stated above; that it's the reader's perception of the work, not the author's intention for it, that determine what the work is. (Which, yes, means a single work can be many things...although that doesn,t mean some people arent mistaken about what it is. But in that case their mistake springs from unreasonable interpretation, not from disagreement with the author)

He's got you there Lucky. The uncited mass of lit critics disagrees with you, ergo The Road to Serfdom is a legit communist text due to the manifesto some anarcho-capitalist trust fund baby wrote on his blog.

 

[Tarquelne]

that it's the reader's perception of the work, not the author's intention for it, that determine what the work is.

Quite.

In addition to everything else, an author may simply fail to achieve what he intended.

There's a widespread belief that 'popular is bad'. This is often used to support the idea that something can be 'so good that no one reads it'. Which is a problem because most things that no one reads are actually not read because they just don't deserve to be.

True. What I said was a joke. Mostly.

The purpose of the written word is to communicate, so without a doubt the more it is read the more effectively it was done.

No. It may be poorly written, but graced with an effective promotional campaign. It may be poorly written, but tell people what they want to be told. It may be poorly written, but read by people intent on the subject matter rather than the writing.

The more it's read the more communication is potentially taking place, but I was addressing quality, not quantity. And a widely read but poorly written book may actually communicate less, all summed, then a well written but less-widely read book. The readers of the well-written book are more likely to get the author's message.

So far as subject-interest goes, smut is infamous for this. People don't read those books or watch those movies for the quality of the writing or acting.

EDIT: Come to think of it #2, a really well written or acted piece of smut might be read/watched by a far greater number of consumers of porn than others. But the point would remain that even the poorly written/acted stuff seems to get spreadwide exposure.

I mean "widespread exposure."

Heck, I'm a big sci-fi fan. There's a fair amount I've enjoyed despite what I'd consider poor writing. The ideas or plot were good enough.

Communication is a purpose, and it's the basic interaction. But getting eyeballs focused on the page it's far from the only purpose, or the only criteria for judging writing.

The better a book's writing, the more likely it is to be widely read. But quality is far from the only factor.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Quite.
No. It may be poorly written, but graced with an effective promotional campaign. It may be poorly written, but tell people what they want to be told. It may be poorly written, but read by people intent on the subject matter rather than the writing.

The more it's read the more communication is potentially taking place, but I was addressing quality, not quantity. And a widely read but poorly written book may actually communicate less, all summed, then a well written but less-widely read book. The readers of the well-written book are more likely to get the author's message.

So if the well read book is more likely to convey the message, wouldn't the effective promotional campaign in fact be included in the 'task' of the writing? So that something left with a poorly performed promotion (or none at all) could be therefore considered 'poorly done', or at best incomplete?

As was noted earlier some of my fan fiction is pretty widely read, for fan fiction. I don't consider it 'the best'. In fact I don't even consider it my best. I did, however, actively promote it at the time. The rest of my stuff I mostly rely on that established reader base to provide sufficient promotion to get it read. Because no matter how 'well written' an author might think their work is, it can make no difference at all if no one reads it.