No, it doesn't make you sound selfish at all. I don't even think I'm disagreeing with you. I'm not itching for the right to publish my fanfic as a novel -- if I were, I'd be trying to network my way into the licensed spin offs business. I totally agree that it's the right of the creator to set canon.
I wouldn't want fanfic to be part of the canon. It would make canon an unknowable mess, branching off from every turning point in all directions, and hence make the future fanfic writer's task impossible.
I guess part of what I'm saying is that, to me, published on the Internet or in a zine could be both public enough to partake of the artistic conversation and still different enough from your novels to make the distinction you're talking about intuitively clear, even without the standard disclaimers.
Actually, I also think two published novels can be that different -- f'rex, the Frank Herbert Dune books versus the Brian Herbert Dune books. But I don't feel strongly enough about that to argue for it.
Fanfic is not a critique,
Sometimes I think it is -- a critique in fictional form, showing what the reader thinks was missing or wrong, not unlike a traditional parody, except by adding or fixing what the writer thinks is missing instead of exaggerating what is there. Like the Wind Done Gone, which was ruled a parody, but is hardly Bored of the Rings.
Not that I think all fanfic, or even most, falls into this category. But I do think it exists.
But if the review has some heat or love at its heart, it's still about the work as a whole.
some understanding of the original is necessary in order for the parody to work at all;
Some understanding of the original is necessary for fanfic to work too. In my experience, more understanding of the original is needed for fanfic than for review (which can focus on small or beside the point aspects) or for classic parody, because it's quite easy to mock the surface without understanding the substance.
Of course, quite a lot of fanfic does not work, and that may very well be because the writer doesn't understand the work, or is letting her wishes distort that understanding -- or just isn't a very good writer. But those things are true of parody and reviews as well. I'm not quite sure I'm getting the distinction that "the work as a whole" is meant to be making.
I agree that fanfic is a more emotional dialogue than review -- that's partly why I value it, because one of the things it says that review has trouble with is what emotional reaction the canon produced. I don't know that it's more emotional than parody, or just a different range of emotions, though I suppose mockery is inherently more distancing than love.
It explores other possibilities and permutations (if I understand what you've said correctly) that the original work did not -- or hasn't yet. Or never will.
Often. Other kinds try to recreate as close to canon as possible. But it has to be somewhat different, or it's just plagiarism.
one being, I have some attachment to my copyright.
*nodsnodsnods* Of course you do. I'm hoping, if/when I'm able to publish a novel, to do so under a Creative Commons license which would allow noncommercial derivative works with attribution and retain the rest of my rights.
Digression: I only know of one first novelist (Cory Doctorow) who published under a Creative Commons license, so I don't know how possible that would be to negotiate. And right now CC either allows derivative works only, but can be for profit, or nonprofit only, but including verbatim copying as well as derivative works. I did ask for a nonprofit sampling only license when they were developing it, but it didn't happen.) End digression.
property is first presented. Joss Whedon approves of fanfic, but he's doing Television, and I bet he'd be a lot less happy if fanfic writers were to get together and produce and air their own version of Buffy.
People do make fan videos, mostly by reediting footage. I don't know how Joss feels about it. Lucas Arts had a contest for Star Wars fanvids, though, so I don't think objection is a universal reaction to work in the same medium.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-10-20 01:24 pm (UTC)I wouldn't want fanfic to be part of the canon. It would make canon an unknowable mess, branching off from every turning point in all directions, and hence make the future fanfic writer's task impossible.
I guess part of what I'm saying is that, to me, published on the Internet or in a zine could be both public enough to partake of the artistic conversation and still different enough from your novels to make the distinction you're talking about intuitively clear, even without the standard disclaimers.
Actually, I also think two published novels can be that different -- f'rex, the Frank Herbert Dune books versus the Brian Herbert Dune books. But I don't feel strongly enough about that to argue for it.
Fanfic is not a critique,
Sometimes I think it is -- a critique in fictional form, showing what the reader thinks was missing or wrong, not unlike a traditional parody, except by adding or fixing what the writer thinks is missing instead of exaggerating what is there. Like the Wind Done Gone, which was ruled a parody, but is hardly Bored of the Rings.
Not that I think all fanfic, or even most, falls into this category. But I do think it exists.
But if the review has some heat or love at its heart, it's still about the work as a whole.
some understanding of the original is necessary in order for the parody to work at all;
Some understanding of the original is necessary for fanfic to work too. In my experience, more understanding of the original is needed for fanfic than for review (which can focus on small or beside the point aspects) or for classic parody, because it's quite easy to mock the surface without understanding the substance.
Of course, quite a lot of fanfic does not work, and that may very well be because the writer doesn't understand the work, or is letting her wishes distort that understanding -- or just isn't a very good writer. But those things are true of parody and reviews as well. I'm not quite sure I'm getting the distinction that "the work as a whole" is meant to be making.
I agree that fanfic is a more emotional dialogue than review -- that's partly why I value it, because one of the things it says that review has trouble with is what emotional reaction the canon produced. I don't know that it's more emotional than parody, or just a different range of emotions, though I suppose mockery is inherently more distancing than love.
It explores other possibilities and permutations (if I understand what you've said correctly) that the original work did not -- or hasn't yet. Or never will.
Often. Other kinds try to recreate as close to canon as possible. But it has to be somewhat different, or it's just plagiarism.
one being, I have some attachment to my copyright.
*nodsnodsnods* Of course you do. I'm hoping, if/when I'm able to publish a novel, to do so under a Creative Commons license which would allow noncommercial derivative works with attribution and retain the rest of my rights.
Digression: I only know of one first novelist (Cory Doctorow) who published under a Creative Commons license, so I don't know how possible that would be to negotiate. And right now CC either allows derivative works only, but can be for profit, or nonprofit only, but including verbatim copying as well as derivative works. I did ask for a nonprofit sampling only license when they were developing it, but it didn't happen.) End digression.
property is first presented. Joss Whedon approves of fanfic, but he's doing Television, and I bet he'd be a lot less happy if fanfic writers were to get together and produce and air their own version of Buffy.
People do make fan videos, mostly by reediting footage. I don't know how Joss feels about it. Lucas Arts had a contest for Star Wars fanvids, though, so I don't think objection is a universal reaction to work in the same medium.
continued in next comment