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 have to say that the licensed spin-off is so very, very restrictive I think it would be hard to write for if you've had the freedom to go in any direction you want. I don't think it's easier, fwiw, to write fiction based on other people's work. For me there's so much that can't be said or done, and the fact that very little is allowed to change kind of puts a big damper on my creative drive.
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 laughed at this. I'm thinking, of course, as an original fiction writer -- you're thinking as a fanfic writer. But either way, it would be tangled and impossible to follow. Does fanfic follow its own canon, out of curiosity?
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.
From that perspective, I can see your point.
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.
Let's. Not. Go. There.
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.
I think we're using the word critique in different ways. If I wrote a Buffy story -- no, wait, I did -- there was no intent to critique behind the conception of that story; it was purely filling in space between episodes (but two of my favourites, back to back). I wasn't evaluating the show, I wasn't evaluating the form of the show. I was writing a story. I've written critiques and rants about Buffy, otoh. I don't consider them in the same light. If someone asked me about the fiction, it wouldn't occur to me that it was part of a larger discourse. On the other hand, if someone asked me if the fiction was worth less than the opinion pieces, or more, I'm not sure how I would answer.
Oh all right, I know exactly how I would answer. I would say: in the case of the fiction, it depends on the reader. Writing is only half of the process; being read, the other half. In the case of the opinions: they're mine. They are what they are. They don't depend on the interpretation of a reader for their existence or the spark of life that drove them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-10-20 02:52 pm (UTC)I have to say that the licensed spin-off is so very, very restrictive I think it would be hard to write for if you've had the freedom to go in any direction you want. I don't think it's easier, fwiw, to write fiction based on other people's work. For me there's so much that can't be said or done, and the fact that very little is allowed to change kind of puts a big damper on my creative drive.
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 laughed at this. I'm thinking, of course, as an original fiction writer -- you're thinking as a fanfic writer. But either way, it would be tangled and impossible to follow. Does fanfic follow its own canon, out of curiosity?
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.
From that perspective, I can see your point.
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.
Let's. Not. Go. There.
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.
I think we're using the word critique in different ways. If I wrote a Buffy story -- no, wait, I did -- there was no intent to critique behind the conception of that story; it was purely filling in space between episodes (but two of my favourites, back to back). I wasn't evaluating the show, I wasn't evaluating the form of the show. I was writing a story. I've written critiques and rants about Buffy, otoh. I don't consider them in the same light. If someone asked me about the fiction, it wouldn't occur to me that it was part of a larger discourse. On the other hand, if someone asked me if the fiction was worth less than the opinion pieces, or more, I'm not sure how I would answer.
Oh all right, I know exactly how I would answer. I would say: in the case of the fiction, it depends on the reader. Writing is only half of the process; being read, the other half. In the case of the opinions: they're mine. They are what they are. They don't depend on the interpretation of a reader for their existence or the spark of life that drove them.
Next rock