Is Fanfiction really that bad?

[Lord of Rhinos]

I've never read Shannara, is it that bad?

Yes, yes it is.

[felice]

Someone on the previous page had a perfect line - I hate violations of canon. As such, I can't bring myself to read fanfiction

How do you feel about fanfic that's set after the conclusion of completed source material, so is written with full knowledge of and no contradictions to the canon?

[Gneisenau]

I don't really mind, but the kind of fan fiction I read are those really short stories that put the characters in some plausible scenario in their world. I have never read those long novel length fanfictions.

[mormont]

There's a tendency to defend fanfic by suggesting that any derivative work is fanfic. It's not. Shakespeare never wrote fanfic: nor did Dante. Fanfic is fiction that is explicitly written in another author's setting, employing their characters (amongst others) and exploring that canon (sometimes by breaking it). It does not include works that reference other works or are retellings of those works: that's a really poor argument to deploy in defense of fanfic. Defend it on its own terms, or you're doing it a disservice.

[Werthead]

The early Shannara books are supremely excellent -- only a handful of fantasy works can rival them.

No. The Shannara books are pretty much awful. Elfstones was okay when I was about 12, but beyond that the early books in the series are poorly-written, derivative and close enough to Tolkien to risk legal action. There are quite literally hundreds of fantasy authors who are better than Brooks.

[The Marquis de Leech]

There's a tendency to defend fanfic by suggesting that any derivative work is fanfic. It's not. Shakespeare never wrote fanfic: nor did Dante. Fanfic is fiction that is explicitly written in another author's setting, employing their characters (amongst others) and exploring that canon (sometimes by breaking it). It does not include works that reference other works or are retellings of those works: that's a really poor argument to deploy in defense of fanfic. Defend it on its own terms, or you're doing it a disservice.

Dante's Divine Comedy is self-insert Bible/Greek Mythology cross-over. It's taking characters from other works and stories, and re-using them in contexts outside the Biblical and Mythological stories. Virgil's Aeneid is state-sponsored Homer fanfic: what happens to Aeneas after the Sack of Troy? Just because it's classical literature doesn't make it less fanficcy.

[The Crow]

I write TES fanfiction myself, and I view it as a good way as like sort of a (as already said) training wheels. I think it is a great way to start out.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

RBPL,

Aeneas appears in one scene in The Illiad. Is writing a completely new story after the fact with a character who is a blank slate really "fan-fiction"? Under your definition all historical novels or alternate histories are fan-fiction.

I agree with Mormont Shakespear is not fan-fiction.

[The Marquis de Leech]

If I take a random one-off Harry Potter character, and write about that character's future life, that's still fanfic. Same with the Aeneid.

[mormont]

Dante's Divine Comedy is self-insert Bible/Greek Mythology cross-over.

No, it isn't. And saying it is, doesn't make it true.

Trying to make 'fanfic' include The Divine Comedy is just not a good argument; any fiction that references God or the Bible (or for that matter, any other mythology) would, according to this claim, be fanfic. That's a definition so wide as to be untenable. It's a disservice to fan fiction and a terrible tactic if you're trying to argue the validity of fanfic.

Fan fiction is fiction written by fans. It is not any fiction that references something external to the story.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

RBPL,

If I write a political thriller set in South Carolina is it fan-fiction because SC is a pre-existing setting?

[Goodbye World]

RBPL,

If I write a political thriller set in South Carolina is it fan-fiction because SC is a pre-existing setting?

No, but if you write a thriller about a fictional character that has only appeared in one fictional book by another author then yes, it's fanfic.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

HW,

An undefined character who exists only as a name? What if I take the name and put it in a completely different story, is it still fan-fiction if I use the name?

[The Marquis de Leech]

No, it isn't. And saying it is, doesn't make it true.

Trying to make 'fanfic' include The Divine Comedy is just not a good argument; any fiction that references God or the Bible (or for that matter, any other mythology) would, according to this claim, be fanfic. That's a definition so wide as to be untenable. It's a disservice to fan fiction and a terrible tactic if you're trying to argue the validity of fanfic.

Fan fiction is fiction written by fans. It is not any fiction that references something external to the story.

The Divine Comedy does more than reference. Its entire function is a journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven: interacting with Christian theology is the point. Paradise Lost is similar: it takes a pre-existing literary character, namely Satan, and re-explores him. Arguably, it's no different from people who write fanfics reimagining Draco Malfoy.

My view is that it's fanfic if you're writing your own stories using someone else's characters.

[The Marquis de Leech]

HW,

An undefined character who exists only as a name? What if I take the name and put it in a completely different story, is it still fan-fiction if I use the name?

Virgil wasn't just using the name Aeneas. He was using the character. It's rather like someone taking, say, Fatty Bolger from LOTR, and writing his life story - I think we could all agree that would be fanfic.

[The Marquis de Leech]

There's a tendency to defend fanfic by suggesting that any derivative work is fanfic. It's not. Shakespeare never wrote fanfic: nor did Dante. Fanfic is fiction that is explicitly written in another author's setting, employing their characters (amongst others) and exploring that canon (sometimes by breaking it). It does not include works that reference other works or are retellings of those works: that's a really poor argument to deploy in defense of fanfic. Defend it on its own terms, or you're doing it a disservice.

If I were to write a story featuring, say, Tolkien's Maglor as an out-of-work musician in modern-day New York, does it have to explore Tolkien's canon in order to qualify as fanfic (e.g. our out-of-work musician realises someone's found a Silmaril) or is the fact that I'm writing about Maglor at all (as a character, and not merely a name) make it fanfic?

[mormont]

The Divine Comedy does more than reference. Its entire function is a journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven: interacting with Christian theology is the point. Paradise Lost is similar: it takes a pre-existing literary character, namely Satan, and re-explores him. Arguably, it's no different from people who write fanfics reimagining Draco Malfoy.

My view is that it's fanfic if you're writing your own stories using someone else's characters.

And this definition is clearly inaccurate, offers nothing helpful or useful to the discussion about fan fiction, and acts as a distraction to a consideration of fan fiction on its actual merits, which is what this thread should be about.

As I've said already: fan fiction, as in what we are actually talking about, is closely defined and well understood. Your definition, by contrast, is so broad as to include great swathes of existing fiction that no fan fiction writer or fan would actually acknowledge as fan fiction, including homages, works concerning religion and mythological figures, and authorised 'franchise' works from August Derleth to Warhammer 40K - heck, virtually every comic book published by Marvel and DC - and that's just for starters. It doesn't legitimise fan fiction to include all of this material: it just makes the definition you're using so broad as to be useless.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

RBPL,

I was unaware that any of Homer's work took place in Italy.

[The Dragon Queen]

YES YES BAD BADDDDD

[Lady Lea]

I just wanna take this opportunity to promote Rainbow Rowell's Fangirl. I read it this month and it's terrific. Rainbow is really involved in fandom and she wrote a book from a fanfic writer's perspective. It's pretty great because the author is a reader (and probably writer) of fanfiction so she knows how to relate.

Slightly more on topic though, I'm always amused at how a lot of people in this board are against fanfic. Is it because a lot of you are older and don't really get it?