Is Fanfiction really that bad?

[Lyanna Stark]

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.

Well, where is the exact line drawn between "retelling of a work" and using an author's setting, employing his/her characters and exploring that canon? I recently read a book about how fantasy authors draw on medieval works for inspiration, and back then, what people did with each other's works would at least according to me (and it seems, quite often the writer of the book I am reading) fall well within the limits of fanfiction. Of course, these works of Chretien de Troyes fanfiction and the expansions of the Arthur/knight myths are history today and are incorporated in our literary canon, more or less. But the way they treated the original works? The same way as a fanfiction author, up to and including finishing works other authors died before they managed to do, exploring minor characters (Gawain, Parcival etc) or just nicking the setting and most definitely exploring the canon.

In the end, this is subjective stuff. Do we avoid labelling Dante and Wolfram von Eschenbach as fanficers because they are now cultural and accepted, while fanfic authors of today are not?

Is even asking this question doing fanfiction a disservice? I don't think so, personally, since this question is part of what fanfiction is, just as it is also like DatePalm pointed out an active sort of relationship with the text, and a description of what the text made someone think of. One thing does not exclude the other. Unless you mean by "defending it on its own terms" only the quality of the writing and whether the fic is enjoyable by lots of readers, or not? (Under that sort of criteria, yes, most fanfiction fails dismally :p )

As for computer games, it absolutely "breaks" canon, even the ones that are extremely carefully made, like Lord of the Rings online. It may be small details (like Buckleberry ferry being the wrong distance from the Brandywine bridge) or more involved things, like some storyline additions, added characters etc. Then you have stuff like the movies, which are in my view absolutely 100% fanfiction since it's someone's reinterpretation of the material with change in events, characters added and removed and a lot of stuff cut, some added. Classic fanfiction stuff, just that in this case, Peter Jackson had permission to film his version of LOTR. I agree with Wert here (perhaps because I am a canon purist at heart :P ) that any reinterpretation is by its nature fanfiction. It's not the canon, not the original, and made by someone else, hence fanfiction.

[Clueless Northman]

There definitely seems to be a gap in age when it comes to tolerance of fan-fiction.

Definitely a gap in age. Partly because elder readers have read more stuff, including a buckload of crappy books, and are therefore more experienced to sort the BS and the good stuff ;)

Not that people didn't deal with fan-fic in earlier decades, but they just kept it to themselves, or at best shared it with a few friends and brothers/sisters. Nowadays, we suffer the same issue with fanfic than with pretty much everything else: when people take a shit, they feel the urge to share that big breaking news with the world, thanks to blog, Facebook and the like.

I'm reminded of John Howe at some book signing way back when the movies were released, who basically said:

"5 years ago, I found in my attic 2 cardboards full of my first and very early drawings, when I was 18-20 years old. I looked at them, and I burned the whole stuff in my backyard, because the world really didn't need to see this."

Some people know when the world doesn't have to see/read it, others never learn.

[Darth Richard]

I think we'd all have to agree on a definition for fanfiction before this thread can go anywhere.

[Lyanna Stark]

This is pretty much nonsense.

Uses of fanfic other than to practice the art of writing (which is one potential use but far from the only one) include: engaging with the canon, engaging with other fans of the canon, speculation via a convoluted form of roleplay, and having fun, both as a reader and a writer. Plenty of fanfic authors have no desire to write original fiction. They're playing.

Anyone who thinks that writing fanfic alone is going to teach him or her to write a perfect original novel will be sorely disappointed. Fic can improve one's prose, character development technique and plotting technique for short stories/novellas/novels/delete as applicable according to length, but it won't teach the difficult bits of character creation and, for SFF, world creation and worldbuilding.

While I agree that fanfic won't teach you how to write a novel, I think it still can teach you how to write better. Especially second language speakers who rarely get the chance to write a long text in English can benefit a lot from this. (I've read fics by second language speakers I would never, ever in a million years guess were second language speakers. Lots of practice and a good beta helped their English up to native levels, which is extremely useful.) It can also teach you how to be a better reader, if you engage with other people's texts critically.

A lot of people never write. Not letters, not project plans, nothing. For them to try their hand at writing is a huge step forward, even if it turns into another Draco in leather pants. It's a fantastic ability to be able to put pen to paper and write what is in your head, even if it means we get another Cassandra Clare, Eragon or 50 shades. And people who write fanfiction also read, since well, you need to to write fanfic. So in this, both a reader and a writer has been created. :)

I think we'd all have to agree on a definition for fanfiction before this thread can go anywhere.

Good luck with that, I guess?

[Yagathai]

What about Erotic Versions of Star Trek Where All the Characters Are Furries, Like Kirk is an Ocelot or Something, and [the author puts] a Furry Version of Themselves as the Star of the Story?

[thecryptile]

I think we'd all have to agree on a definition for fanfiction before this thread can go anywhere.

Fanfic is like pornography in that respect- very hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

[Sci-2]

I'm reminded of John Howe at some book signing way back when the movies were released, who basically said:

"5 years ago, I found in my attic 2 cardboards full of my first and very early drawings, when I was 18-20 years old. I looked at them, and I burned the whole stuff in my backyard, because the world really didn't need to see this."

Some people know when the world doesn't have to see/read it, others never learn.

Sorry, but I don't get this mentality. You're assuming all the fan-fiction written is bad, which isn't necessarily the case.

While I don't doubt a lot of fan-fiction is bad, I don't believe there's anything inherently shameful about the exercise. As others point out, it does allow you to plug into an extant audience and get critiques on your craft.

[lady narcissa]

I'm fine with fan fiction. I don't think its a generational thing very much. In the 1980s my friends and I sat around and wrote stories about what happened after Star Wars Return of the Jedi with Luke and Leia and Han Solo. I suspect there were people in the generation before ours who did the same thing with Star Trek and other shows. And so on. The difference is now you can share your stories with millions of people online and before you only could share it with those you knew or those who subscribed to certain fan mailings that got mailed out.

My general preference for fan fiction is staying within the borders of cannon and what is known. I prefer stories that come after the author is done or exploration of a minor character where there is lots of room to fill in the gaps. In a book that contains a collection of letters between C.S. Lewis and some children fans there is one letter from one child asking Lewis about a minor character. His response was something along the lines of he didn't have time to write about all the characters in Narnia in great detail so why didn't the child write the story about that character and figure out what their story was. Those are my favorite kinds of fan fics.

[Galactus]

Where the problem occurs is that GRRM is happy for his playground to be used for video games, pen-and-paper roleplaying games and for a TV show. If he was dead-set against fans playing in Westeros and Essos, then it would be more consistent not to licence it out for such use through other channels. It also doesn't help that the TV show is a totally different canon and continuity, and some fanfic writers are now writing fanfic set in the TV universe who argue that GRRM's prohibition on fanfic does not apply because he is not in creative or legal control of the TV show.

Furhtermore George's opposition seems to be less on any real esthethic grounds as much as (possibly overstated) fears of compromising his intellectual property rights. (Whether or not that's a thing well... That's up for other discussions)

[Yagathai]

Furhtermore George's opposition seems to be less on any real esthethic grounds as much as (possibly overstated) fears of compromising his intellectual property rights. (Whether or not that's a thing well... That's up for other discussions)

That was, at least, the accepted wisdom in the SF/F writer community since time immemorial (aka the 60s). It definitely seems to be a generational thing. Many writers of George's (pre-internet) generation have that entrenched view.

[Leofric]

Everyone (if they have any kind of imagination) has created fan fiction at some point in their lives. Everyone who has pretended to be their favorite superhero or fought a light saber duel with their best friend, or just thought about or discussed what would happen next Sansa ran off with Sandor or if all the aliens weren't killed at the end of Independence Day. Just not everyone has written it down.

So I have no issues at all with people writing fan fiction. With the advent of the internet however, this fan fiction, that was once just shared amongst friends or may have been sent to fanzines, has been sent out for the whole world to see, and you read it at your own risk. There may be some gems, but you need to wade through a lot of crap.

Even GRRM has supported fan fiction, though he called it a tribute, with the Songs of the Dying Earth anthology.

[thecryptile]

The difference between the tribute anthology and unlicensed ASOIAF fanfic is that Jack Vance approved of Songs of the Dying Earth.

[Darth Richard]

I have no problem with fan fiction unless you steal someone else's fan fic, slightly change the names, then self publish it and pretend its yours. :O

[The Marquis de Leech]

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.

Yes, my definition of fanfiction is broad, but that's why I take a particularly favourable view of fanfic: it's not simply some pimply anorak wearers writing Legolas stories - fanfic has existed for as long as storytelling itself.

I think you might have a case for arguing that authorised usages count more as peerfic than fanfic - but the difference is the status of the writer, not the nature of what is being written.

Again, with my Maglor example: is it fanfic or not?

[The Marquis de Leech]

RBPL,

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

And Tolkien never wrote a story set in modern New York. However, a Maglor story set in New York is still fanfic, regardless of setting.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Furhtermore George's opposition seems to be less on any real esthethic grounds as much as (possibly overstated) fears of compromising his intellectual property rights. (Whether or not that's a thing well... That's up for other discussions)

I've always liked Terry Pratchett's view: fanfic is fine so long as the fanfic writers do it where he can't see it (he doesn't want to be accused of stealing someone else's idea for a future Discworld novel - he'd win the court case, but mud sticks).

[Werthead]

Furhtermore George's opposition seems to be less on any real esthethic grounds as much as (possibly overstated) fears of compromising his intellectual property rights. (Whether or not that's a thing well... That's up for other discussions)

Well, GRRM's stated reason is that he thinks that fanfiction is bad practice for a writer, and that a truly good writer needs to also create his or her own characters (and, if appropriate, setting). This may be true for people who do want to be 'real writers' [/loaded term] but as Eloisa points out very well above, a lot of them don't want to do that, and use fanfic as a way of engaging with the fandom.

I also thought it amusing to see a great pic of GRRM sitting next to EL James - the poster person whose career got kickstarted by fanfiction - and posing for the cameras at a recent con.

The legal argument, by the way, is also one heavily shared by Raymond E. Feist and Joe Straczynski, though the former only with regards to computer games. The latter articulated well by saying that if a fan is smart, they can pick up on elements from the setting (especially where the writer has done good foreshadowing) and extrapolate a story not far from the author's own intentions, which potentially creates legal problems if the fan sues them for stealing 'their' idea because they got it written down first. And this is actually what happened to a Babylon 5 episode (Passing Through Gethsemane, which dropped from Season 2 to 3 whilst JMS and the fan hammered out a legal agreement). However, in that case the fan posted his idea to the same newsgroup that JMS posted at, which made the situation more complex; if it was in some remote corner of the internet on an obscure LiveJournal or something, the fan wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on as there would be no way of proving the author ever saw it.

This situation remains untested in a court of law. However, I think it would be very, very hard for a fan to prove his or her case. I just thinkl that no author really wants to be the one to first test a precedent (except maybe Harlan Ellison, who'd probably love it, but I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream fanfic seems to be unfortunately lacking).

Even GRRM has supported fan fiction, though he called it a tribute, with the Songs of the Dying Earth anthology.

Not exactly, as that was a licensed and approved product. However, IIRC Jack Vance approved a fanfic Dying Earth story from a writer, and allowed it to be published in the 1970s.

I think we'd all have to agree on a definition for fanfiction before this thread can go anywhere.

'Fiction', if you will, written by 'fans'? ;)

Beyond that, you could argue that fanfiction is a narrative set in a pre-existing setting or involving pre-existing characters that is written by a fan without the specific permission of the creator (though the creator may have given blanket permission for fanfic to be written, or said they don't mind) and with no real expectation of being professionally published. Except that doesn't cover Stephen Brust's Firefly novel, which does seem to be considered fanfic despite being written with permission and with the expectation of publication before the publishers chose to cancel the novel, so he released it online instead.

Even that definition is a bit of a can of worms because it doesn't account for out-of-copyright works and characters which have been professionally published by major companies and written by major authors without the creator's permission on account of the creator being dead for decades or centuries.

[thecryptile]

Not exactly, as that was a licensed and approved product. However, IIRC Jack Vance approved a fanfic Dying Earth story from a writer, and allowed it to be published in the 1970s.

Michael Shea's first novel, A Quest for Simbilis (1974) was an authorized sequel to Vance's Eyes of the Overworld (1966). It's not considered canonical, as Vance ignored the novel and took Cugel in a different direction with his own sequel, Cugel's Saga (1983).

Vance was even offered part of Shea's advance money from DAW books, but generously refused.

[baxus]

However, there's also been frequent discussions about how GRRM's fanfic position seems slightly inconsistent with the 'enfranchisement' of ASoIaF through numerous games and other media encouraging fan participation, even in the creation of stories, but then drawing a line at actual fanfic.

GRRM has explained exactly why he's against fanfic, and i understand his position, though i don't think there would be anything he could do to stop someone from writing fanfic based on his work.

he could and should stop the said someone from publishing that fanfic and making money from it.

If you want to release your creation to the world but you don't want it to become some sort of huge franchise which encourages engagement such as fanfic, don't certainly then release things which give fans the tools to create such things, especially not pen-and-paper roleplaying games.

now there is an interesting scenario.

a group of people play one of GRRM approved pen and paper RPGs and after a while they write down their campaign and post those stories on their website.

would GRRM have a leg to stand on in case he wanted to file a law suit?

[mormont]

That may be your opinion, but it doesn't change the fact that they do confuse the issue because they expose an inconsistency in the author's stance (which is fair, as we're all human and have our inconsistent moments) about how they allow their work to be interacted with by the audience.

If you don't want your creation to be engaged with by fans, do not release it to the world. Ever. That's simple enough.

If you want to release your creation to the world but you don't want it to become some sort of huge franchise which encourages engagement such as fanfic, don't certainly then release things which give fans the tools to create such things, especially not pen-and-paper roleplaying games. Even video games are borderline: how many lengthy reports of CK2 or Total War campaigns reported here are basically just fanfic generated by events in the games?

Even Goodkind, for all his flaws, has shown consistency on this issue by refusing to allow any RPGs or computer games to be made based on his work, and has been heavily dismissive of fanfiction as well.

I suspect on the grounds of publication (HBO's rights do not permit them to publish fictional books set in the TV canon, or so I assume) they'd have a strong case. But then legal claims about fanfic have never been tested, and you can bet the first author who really tries will find a large chunk of his or her fanbase turning on them with impressive speed and vitriol.

And that may be your opinion, but with respect, it's groundless. There's no inconsistency in allowing a TV adaptation and being against fanfic: at least, not without deploying the 'slippery slope' argument, and there is no reason to suppose that this particular slope is at all slippery, I'm afraid. You may have a point in suggesting that adaptations are on the same continuum as fanfic, but the ends of that continuum are separated by a long distance, and there are a range of points along it where the line can be drawn with no hypocrisy or inconsistency implied. The notion that licensed products 'muddy the waters' is baseless unless you can show why they must inevitably do that, and the problem with that is that the real world is full of practical examples to the contrary. Courts have had no problem in drawing a consistent line on the topic, and I have no problem in doing so either.

The one area that is arguable, I think, is RPGs, but an arguable proposition is not the same as a proven one. Yes, RPGs usually allow the players to take on the roles of canonical characters and in one sense do so in a 'story', but RPGs have several characteristics that distinguish them from fanfic writing (they're collaborative, they're not usually written down, they take place within a set of defined mechanics, they take place in an 'authorised' setting, etc). Whether those are important distinctions is certainly open to question: but I think they're absolutely congruent with GRRM's stated reasons for discouraging fanfic.