I received this lengthy email the other day. It read, in part:
I can understand intellectual property concerns about currently or recently
active creative concepts, but when a creative concept has been tried and
presented by the producers and craftsmen, has run its course and been
cancelled, has stopped being shown in reruns, has no active tie-ins, and
appears to have been completely mothballed by the original creators and
stakeholders of the concept – AT THAT POINT, would you still consider it
wrong for a fanfiction author to attempt to step in and write creatively in
that sandbox?I ask this because I had been considering a fanfiction based on a series
you produced 10 years ago that has disappeared from the face of the earth.
I admit, as a potential fan-fiction writer, that the lure of
already established character study materials, settings, etc., is enticing –
like the idea of taking down and playing with a set of dolls – er, I mean,
ACTION FIGURES.
As for my own writing career, I’ve never had the courage
to try creating something truly original…
Here is how I replied: My personal feeling is that you are better off, in every possible
way, writing something original. I would never consider writing in "someone
else’s sandbox" unless they invited me to. I never contemplated writing DIAGNOSIS MURDER or MONK novels. I am only writing those books now because
the rights-holders and/or creators asked me to. So my answer to you is this…the
show you’re thinking about, whatever it is, doesn’t belong to you. Or me. Write something that is your
own. The creative and personal benefits far outweigh the convenience of writing
with someone else’s creations. Good luck!
I don’t get these fanfic writers. They always seem to have some sort of grudge against professional writers which seems a bit warped really!
If you are going to go to the effort of writing something, write something original! I’ve read loads of fanfic and some is ok but most is rubbish (bit of a generalisation I know!). If you have writing ability then put it to good use and write something of your own instead of stealing other people’s ideas and charactors and palming them off as your own!
Rant over – sorry fanfic writers annoy me!
My question is which of our many “disappeared from the face of the earth” series does this person want to fanfic? Given the usual genre preferences of fanficcers, I’d guess She-Wolf of London, but I have to admit the thought of someone attempting fanfics based on Cobra or (shudder) The Cosby Mysteries does make me smile…
I’ve read loads of fanfic and some is ok but most is rubbish (bit of a generalisation I know!)
Deep sigh.
Most fanfic is more akin to the slushpile than finished and published works. And that’s what it should be judged against, not the contents of the shelves of Books etc.
Though quite a lot of that is rubbish, too. IMO.
I don’t know whether these people who write fan fiction do so hoping that by working with some one else’s successful characters and circumstances they will enjoy success of their own, or whether they are simply hollow people, devoid of the discipline and imagination that are the only sources of original work. They aren’t really authors. They aren’t really novelists or short story writers. I don’t know what they are, and they don’t either. Can you imagine, say, John Steinbeck or Ernest Hemingway or Willa Cather writing fan fiction? They drew their stories from within themselves, and had much to draw from. They had a life; fan fiction writers probably don’t.
They had a life; fan fiction writers probably don’t.
Way to generalise, and proof that you haven’t been around here very long – read back on some of the ‘fanfic’ threads to find fanfic authors explaining at length that most of us have a very nice life, thank you.
working with some one else’s successful characters and circumstances they will enjoy success of their own
There are famous authors who have written what is arguably fanfic – or do you not regard Neil Gaiman as an author? (He wrote an exceptional piece, a crossover between Sherlock Holmes and the world of H P Lovecraft called “A Study in Emerald”).
We’ve been over (and over, and over) where fanfic starts and ends and where derivative literature which happens to be in a world for which the copyright has ended differs. Is “A Study in Emerald” less fanfic because the copyright on Doyle’s and Lovecraft’s work has ended? What about such examples as “Wide Sargasso Sea”? Is that not “working with some one else’s successful characters and circumstances. The fact that the original writer is long dead does not make a work any less derivative – fanfic on Tolkien’s work will cease to be fanfic in around 2050 (I’m not sure of the exact date, but someone will know). So, for the sake of argument, what’s the qualitative difference between Tolkein fanfic published on the net in 2049 and that published 2051?
They aren’t really authors. They aren’t really novelists or short story writers. I don’t know what they are, and they don’t either.
They had a life; fan fiction writers probably don’t.
I’m sure that’s true of amateur actors as well. I mean they aren’t real actors. They don’t get paid to perform, or to rehearse (and certainly not to build the sets they use because there are no amateur unions for set building and lighting and costuming.) I mean what possible reason could a bunch of amateurs have for trying to put on low budget version of any popular play from Neil Simon to Andrew LLoyd Weber? It’s not like those middle aged wannabe Miss Marples are going to suddenly spring onto Broadway in some Agatha Christie revivial.
And Jeez, community theatre requires a lot of time and effort, and sometimes the only people who ever see you perform are your family and friends, or people who patronize the theatre with their season ticket subscriptions.
I mean who would want to do that? Go through all that effort and work, rehearsal time, fit into evenings and weekends after your job and your kids and the laundry…just to memorize lines and get up in front of people to perform for maybe a couple of weekends a month and not get paid for it.
They must either seriously have no lives or, you know, really, really love acting.
Um, P.M., before you embarrass yourself further…Richard Wheeler has been active on this blog since its inception. More importantly, he is recognized as one of the most honored, prolific, and respected living novelists in western literature (his sf equivalent might be Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov or Ray Bradbury).
Mr. Pete, no disprespect to Mr. Wheeler (who is, no doubt, all that you described and a cup of coffee) but it is a generalization and fairly snarky one at that.
I strongly suspect that, given Mr. Goldberg’s experience and talent, if he were offered an opportunity to write in yet another franchise, possibly even one he’d had no prior experience with, that on accepting that contract, his work would be no less rigorous or successful than his work on Diagnosis Murder and Monk. And I’m absolutely clear that in such a case he would, in fact, be an authorized writer of those novels which, he is very clear, sets him apart from the amateur writers so disparaged here.
However, it’s not the fact that he’d get paid to write, say a CSI tie-in, that would make the novels worth reading, it would be his skill as a novelist, his skill at being able to hear the voices of the actors playing the characters he is writing about and translate them from text to screen and back again.
Mr. Goldberg’s ability to write, indeed the ability of any of the published authors who regularly post here, to provide worthwhile reading matter isn’t based on their ability to get paid. They aren’t good writers because they are published, they are published because they are good writers. Or one would assume.
To A. A. Johnson: I thought at first that fan fiction is the product of laziness. But I now believe it is the product of disengagement. When you borrow characters and circumstances, you are keeping your distance. The only writing that counts rises out of the author and reflects the author’s anguish and joy, his or her confrontation with life. Even the most modest of genuine literature is written with a passion and pain and joy that is not present in an author maneuvering other people’s characters through a story. People who are disengaged are usually those who want to avoid pain. Only when you have torn a story out of yourself, and then torn it apart to make it better, and then thrown half of it away because it didn’t work, will know what it is to be a novelist.
It’s like a video game to them.
Mr. Wheeler; I don’t disagree with you at all, in your assessment of what it requires of you to be a novelist. Scary thought though it is, I have written a novel, two in fact. Original, wholly my own. They are unpublished at present (you knew I was going to say that [*g*]) but regardless, I put a great deal of myself into them, have rewritten sections over and over. Sent it out to be read by total strangers, been rejected by some of the largest publishers of science fiction and fantasy in the country. I’m not unfamiliar with the process. I write poetry as well, also unpublished.
I merely disagree that there is no intrinsic value to fan writing, if only to the writer, be it a) unauthorized which is the type addressed in Mr. Goldberg’s initial post or b) unpublished be it derivative work of some topic or situation that has been handled by other writers (say, some new version of Authurian Legend) or entirely original.
I also disagree that fan writers are disengaged. I think the real problem may well be that they are overly engaged in their fandom du jour, overly invested in the characters, in the universes, to the point of occupying a good deal of their time and attention not required by the rest of their lives. I could similarly say the same think about sports fanatics. Fantasy football and arena football pretty were pretty much invented to provide football fans more of what they want.
My own original work may be pretentious crap badly in need of an editor, but I’m not ignorant of the passion or time it takes to complete a novel.
And as for avoiding pain, I fear you have nailed me but good. I try and avoid pain at all times — however, wanting to avoid pain and succeeding at it are two separate things.
But then again, I am unpublished. A wannabe. A maybe coulda. My opinion on writing would, no doubt, on this board at least, carry far more weight if I were published.
Then again, maybe not.
Perhaps you are right. I grew up before television was significant, and have never understood its grip on viewers. But my instinct is that no committed writer could produce fan fiction.
I’d allow that the instances of writers committed to being published who also write fan fiction are a small fraction of the whole, but it does happen.
Derivative fiction isn’t new, and the distinctions being made here encompass, largely, the difference between authorized and unauthorized derivations. I don’t dispute that. And it seems apparent to me, that given a choice, Mr. Goldberg would prefer to work on original fiction rather than tie-ins, all things being equal. But he makes his living (or part of it, since he also produces televsion shows among other things) primarily as a writer and in the case of his tie-ins, he goes where the work is.
I think that’s largely true of any profession. It’s true of mine and while a good portion of what I do for a living is write, I don’t make my living writing fiction, derivative or original.
But write I do, both on the job and off. Six to eight hours a day for my employer and two to three hours worth for myself, every day, barring natural disasters and major illnesses.
So for me the lack of committment isn’t to writing, it’s to getting published. Which to me is somewhat like winning the lottery. Great if you can do it, but not something I spend a great deal of effort on.
But for someone who does make their living writing, be it novels, or news articles, short stories, or poetry, I can see why the bridge seems too far.
I have a good many friends who are professional stage actors (live theatre), directors, lighting and set designers. I worked in community theatre for nearly 20 years and those same friends never quite grasped why I would do for free what they did for pay. Sometimes I wondered as well, since a lot of the time, most of the time, it was very much like having a second full time job.
Even when most of the community theatres started offering a stipend or went half equity, I was more likely to turn the money back to the theatre than keep it. I did it for a lot of reasons; money just didn’t happen to be one of them.
Writing to me, is very much the same thing.
I don’t have a grudge against professional writers as the first responder stated up top. I think it’s great when people can make a living doing what they love, and in the case of writers and publishers, television and movie producers, actors and directors, I’m more than willing to put out money to be entertained or enlightened.
It’s not the fact that people make money writing the books I love to read that I find objectionable, it’s the assumption that getting published is the only reason why people should write at all.
Good writers get published. It’s really that simple. What we have here is the Aesop Fable Jim Macdonald cited for the PA authors over at AW.
“It’s easy to hate what you can’t get.”
So they play with others’ material since it was successful. It’s projection really.
I’m up for a job with the Livingston Enterprise, Mr. Wheeler. You don’t want to know what they pay.
I don’t know whether these people who write fan fiction do so hoping that by working with some one else’s successful characters and circumstances they will enjoy success of their own, or whether they are simply hollow people, devoid of the discipline and imagination that are the only sources of original work.
Nope. Fanfiction (at least the good stuff) is usually the product of a “Hey, wouldn’t it be cool/funny/exciting/dramatic if character A had X thing happen to them?” Which would then be followed up with a “Gee, I should write that out, to see how it would work.” Ta-da! Fanfiction.
Good fanfiction writers also do research and are quite creative. I’ve discussed and seen discussed road routes in various cities, driving times, locations, dialectical speech, translations, introducing new settings, good websites to find information on canon settings, descriptions, dialogue, character how-tos, avoiding cliches… I could go on for a very long time in this vein, but I think you see my point. Writing good fanfic requires time, energy, focus, intelligence, creativity, and lots, and LOTS of research. My last project had me researching the eating habits of cockroaches (funny story, that…).
They aren’t really authors. They aren’t really novelists or short story writers. I don’t know what they are, and they don’t either.
Most people in the fanfiction community call them “fanfic authors.” You can quibble about semantics all you want, but fanfic authors write stories.
Can you imagine, say, John Steinbeck or Ernest Hemingway or Willa Cather writing fan fiction? They drew their stories from within themselves, and had much to draw from.
Shakespeare did it. Midsummer Night’s Dream was a mythology fanfiction. The historical plays were all Real Person Fanfic (*cringe*). John Gardner did it. Grendel was a Beowulf fanfiction. I am well aware that those characters and situations were not under copyright at the time the pieces were written, but the fact is, both men took characters and situations that had been created by someone else and they made their own work with them. The Grendel type of work is actually looked down upon by a lot of fanfiction writers as the mark of a new or not very talented author. Gardner couldn’t even be bothered to think up his own plot and just stole the old one and wrote it from a new point of view.
They had a life; fan fiction writers probably don’t.
*eye roll*
But my instinct is that no committed writer could produce fan fiction.
There are plenty of professional writers who also write fanfic. Granted, they tend to be better than Jane Average Fanficcer, but that’s neither here nor there.
The only writing that counts rises out of the author and reflects the author’s anguish and joy, his or her confrontation with life.
To be honest, I tend to find books that use characters or situations as a mouthpiece to what the author wants to say a bit on the tacky side. An author who distances themself from the characters enough tends to write better, more rounded characters. An author that identifies too much or is too closely tied to their work usually writes characters or situations that would either never happen in real life because they are too perfect, or never happen in real life because they are too miserable, or never happen in real life because the characters over-emote about the slightest little thing. And, yes, I can think of a few published and well-known authors who are guilty of this.
People who are disengaged are usually those who want to avoid pain.
Or they know that angsting through the writing of a story tends to make the characters wangst through the plot, which is never a good thing. Emotion is nice. Too much makes one want to gag.
Only when you have torn a story out of yourself, and then torn it apart to make it better, and then thrown half of it away because it didn’t work, will know what it is to be a novelist.
Good fanfic authors edit, too. And yes, there are sob stories out there about having to cut a favorite part because it was wrong for the story.
…And I know someone else wrote this, but it was begging to be answered
“It’s easy to hate what you can’t get.”
So they play with others’ material since it was successful. It’s projection really.
Any good fanfic writer will tell you that good fanfic is never the product of thinking that you created the source material. Most fic writers can come up with a list of things that would be different if they had. Since they didn’t, they work with the stories as they are, not “as they would have been if I…” Projection doesn’t come close.
I’m really impressed with how much y’all seem to not understand about the mind of a fanfic writer. I know that you don’t write it yourself, but there’s a lot of very strong opinions flying around here about attitudes and thoughts that are way off the mark.
An author who distances themself from the characters enough tends to write better, more rounded characters.
That’s the most idiotic thing I’ve read in at least 37 hours.
Mr Pete: More importantly, he is recognized as one of the most honored, prolific, and respected living novelists in western literature (his sf equivalent might be Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov or Ray Bradbury).
Is he? I’ve never heard of him. But then, as discussed in a previous entry of Lee’s, I hadn’t heard of Ray (Roy?) Orbison. The published authors, actors, and musicians that I haven’t heard of are probably as numberless as grains of sand.
I notice, though, that whatever his credentials, he didn’t answer my point. Nor did you, and I ask again: other than the copyright issue (which Richard specifically did not raise) why is a derivative work with the name ‘Shakespeare’ on the byline acceptable, but ‘Suzy Fanwriter’ not?
Richard Wheeler: The only writing that counts rises out of the author and reflects the author’s anguish and joy, his or her confrontation with life.
Really? Are you seriously trying to claim that “Wide Sargasso Sea” is somehow not a real book? That Neil Gaiman (using my previous example of “A Study in Emerald”) is not a real writer?
You may not like what they write, but the number of published works I don’t like are again numberless, and include some of the classics of literature. Example: I fully accept that William Golding is a master of his craft, though I’ve loathed every book of his I’ve ever read. I fully accept that James Joyce is believed to be a good writer, though I’ve always considered “Ulysses” to be a joke played on the reading public.
There is good fanfiction, though it bears about the same relationship to good literature as the contents of the editor’s slushpile does to the number of books finally published and you will not (generally) find it by accident.
Richard Wheeler: I grew up before television was significant, and have never understood its grip on viewers. But my instinct is that no committed writer could produce fan fiction.
I do not see how these two sentences are connected. Not all fanfiction is around TV series – a great deal (more these days than formerly) is around books. Harry Potter fanfiction is a huge phenomenon, and mostly not based around the films.
And I think you’ll discover that your instinct is wrong. The ‘commitment’ of the writer cannot surely be judged by their output – even the quality of their output – let alone the subject. I therefore think you’re going to need to defined ‘commitment’ a bit more closely. You appear to be making assumptions based on no data whatsoever, and you know what they say about the word ‘assume’.
Perhaps curious to note in regard to your views on TV, I grew up in a family which did not own a TV until I was twelve and even then watching was strictly limited. My own TV broke down in around 2000, and I have not replaced it – there seemed no point, since at that stage I watched about an hour a week. If your intention is to categorise fan fiction writers as people obsessed by TV, I’m a contra-example, but not the only one.
Alice: An author who distances themself from the characters enough tends to write better, more rounded characters.
Keith: That’s the most idiotic thing I’ve read in at least 37 hours.
Curious, because I’ve read exactly that advice more than once in more than one ‘how to write fiction’ book. I believe I first encountered it in one of Michael Legat’s – either ‘Plotting the Novel’ or ‘How to Write Historical Novels’ and I think “Stein on Writing” says the same. Both caution the budding writer most carefully to restrain themselves from identifying too closely with any character, especially the hero/heroine/point of view character (it’s been a while since I read them so I’m paraphrasing).
The reason given for this is that for the budding writer, if they get too close to the point of view character they run a risk they may turn him or her into what fanfiction writers call a ‘Mary-Sue’ or ‘Gary-Stu’ – they are given all the abilities that the writer has or, worse, would like to have, starting with unusual coloured eyes and ending in extreme cases with godlike powers. At the least, the writer may find it difficult to hurt them, or may go too far and turn their work into an angst-fest of pointless suffering. I have encountered modern published novels where I’ve wondered if the lead character was a bit of a Mary-Sue/Gary-Stu, and the most immediate example which leaps to mind is Harry Potter. (The green eyes, the oh! so sad background, the wizarding powers…the ability at a sport he’s never tried before…need I go on?) Harry manages not to be insufferable by being genuinely engaging, but it’s a close-run thing at times.
“There are plenty of professional writers who also write fanfic.”
And low and behold you didn’t name one. Shakespeare was a real leap of logic akin to Mark Twain self-published. These people really are pathetic.
And low and behold you didn’t name one.
I did, though. Neil Gaiman. And I told you the name of the story, “A Study in Emerald.”
BTW: It’s “lo and behold”, not low. Lo and behold means, ‘look and see’.
Not all derivative fiction is fanfiction. Although it hardly seems to be used as such in these discussions, the term does have a meaning. Fanfic is stories inspired by TV shows, movies or books. (In its original parlance, it was nearly always the first.) Furthermore, it’s stories written by (guess who?) fans!
A story that uses historical figures or myths or legends or actual events or real people isn’t fanfic.
Shakespeare might have written derivative fiction (and to at least some extent nearly all fiction is derivative, in tone and theme if nothing else), but he didn’t write fanfic.
Fanfic is stories inspired by TV shows, movies or books.
You mean like, “Wide Sargasso Sea” – inspired (AFAIR) by Jane Eyre. Or “A Study in Emerald” inspired by H P Lovecraft’s world and Arthur Conan Doyle’s characters.
Not all derivative fiction – even derivative fiction for which real authors have been paid real money – isn’t also fanfiction.
“Not all derivative fiction…isn’t also fanfiction.”
Now that’s a sentence only a fanficcer could love! 🙂
Anyway, I think you’re arguing against a point I didn’t make.
Both caution the budding writer most carefully to restrain themselves from identifying too closely with any character, especially the hero/heroine/point of view character
PM, do you have an opinion that’s not just a paraphrase of something you read someplace?
If you do, is it based on anything but hearsay?
You’re a smart person. You know what “appeal to authority” means. The problem is, you’re forced to cite an authority, while I speak from a lifetime of experience writing, teaching, and collaborating. If your next response is that those qualifications don’t make me an expert, I agree to a large extent–but that would also mean your beloved How To books weren’t written by experts either.
Identifying with a character is not a problem. Identifying closely with a character is not a problem. What is a problem is bad writing, and bad writing springs from different causes in different writers.
So does good writing. I have to identify very closely with my characters, or I can’t write them in a way that I want to put my name on.
“How To Write Good” books are held in low esteem–to the point of outright ridicule–by many excellent, published, well-read writers. It may benefit the aspiring writer to consider, every once in a while, how much money is being made off her aspiration, and not her writing.
I’m sure someone will slap me down if I overstep boundaries here, but the definitional detante is really interesting..
In terms of broad defintions I would say that “derivative” fiction (as Mr. Mongomery pointed out) covers an array of fiction categories: tie-in novels; sequels/extension of works in the public domain, and fanfiction. (There are more, I’m sure.)
Fan fiction is, in its narrowest definition, derivative fiction that is both amateur and non-commercial.
That would set it apart from professionally published, commercial works of the other two types.
A less rigid definiton of fan fiction would be one that encompasses not the end product but the inspiration and motivation. That one, I think would come down to the individual author’s self-definition. If Mr. Gaiman considers “A Study in Emerald” to be a fan fiction, I’m not going to argue with him. Likewise I’m not going to argue with Mr. Goldberg that his tie-ins are not fan works, even though one would suppose him to be a fan of his own show.
I am utterly fascinated by the parsing going on in this discussion.
I think you’re on to something AA. Work for hire would seem to be, by definition, not fanfiction, regardless of its milieu.
Perhaps, Mr. Montgomery. I have to admit I think the actual defintion is far more fluid. I think it’s entirely possible that a work can begin as one thing and become another by virtue of its commercial aspect.
I’m not sure that, if in the instances of authorized fan contributed works (say the article Mr. Goldberg posted a couple of weeks ago on Warren Murphy’s Remo Williams fan compilation) they would fall into work for hire or fan fiction. I couldn’t tell from the blurb whether the contributors were actually paid, or whether they merely accepted a trib copy and that ability to claim they were “commercially” published, or whether they recieved nothing at all..
I don’t think a straight-line defintion can actually be applied to all of this; it’s more like the overlapping section of a Venn diagram, wherein some works are “a” and “b” and “c”, but other works maybe only “a” and “d” (where “a” could theoretically be all derivative works, and the other sections would be pro, commercial, amateur, authorized, unauthorized, public domain, and so on).
I think you’re making it out to be much more than it is.
Fan work is written by fans for love or obsession or whatever else. Work for hire is done for pay. The latter is authorized, the former is (generally speaking) not.
It’s all just trying to gussy up a pig.
Which just wastes you time and annoys Gussy.
Keith PM, do you have an opinion that’s not just a paraphrase of something you read someplace?
I’ve explained, at length, my views on fanfiction and various other matters on this blog in the past. I’ve even done so here: perhaps you’re having problems with phrases like, I fully accept that William Golding is a master of his craft, though I’ve loathed every book of his I’ve ever read. I fully accept that James Joyce is believed to be a good writer, though I’ve always considered “Ulysses” to be a joke played on the reading public.
and
There is good fanfiction,
and
I think you’ll discover that your instinct is wrong.
Or perhaps there’s something wrong with your monitor and it’s only showing you a very small proportion of what I’ve written.
David M: I think you’re on to something AA. Work for hire would seem to be, by definition, not fanfiction, regardless of its milieu.
I still do not see the qualitative difference between the two: while one expects tie-in novels to be at least competently writtten (unfortunately, this is not always the case) the best fanfiction is parsecs better than most tie-in novels, at least partly because it’s not contstrained by limitations set by the copyright holders.
Keith PM, do you have an opinion that’s not just a paraphrase of something you read someplace?
I’ve explained, at length, my views on fanfiction and various other matters on this blog in the past. I’ve even done so here: perhaps you’re having problems with phrases like, I fully accept that William Golding is a master of his craft, though I’ve loathed every book of his I’ve ever read. I fully accept that James Joyce is believed to be a good writer, though I’ve always considered “Ulysses” to be a joke played on the reading public.
and
There is good fanfiction,
and
I think you’ll discover that your instinct is wrong.
Or perhaps there’s something wrong with your monitor and it’s only showing you a very small proportion of what I’ve written.
David M: I think you’re on to something AA. Work for hire would seem to be, by definition, not fanfiction, regardless of its milieu.
I still do not see the qualitative difference between the two: while one expects tie-in novels to be at least competently writtten (unfortunately, this is not always the case) the best fanfiction is parsecs better than most tie-in novels, at least partly because it’s not contstrained by limitations set by the copyright holders.
You might not see the qualitative difference between an orange and a tangerine either, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t different things.
PM, what’ve you said about fanfiction here, elsewhere, now, or elsewhen has no relevance to your recent quoting of somebody you once read who had an opinion about writers identifying with their characters.
Given the absence of evidence to the contrary, it seems reasonable to conclude that you just didn’t want me to get away with being right. Which I am.
Next time, I suggest you type “Heebity beebity meebity schmeebity” as an alternative to crafting grammatical constructs. After all, leading writing experts agree: Form should follow function.
PM is just so biased no factual evidence will matter. I doubt Gaiman considers whatever the work is to be fanfiction. If so of whom? I think we’ve got a pretzel logic thing going on here. No matter where you toch it it breaks. Looks like it’s been a long day at the “go ask Alice” cafe.
“I still do not see the qualitative difference between the two”
One had the quality neccessary to be bought by a publisher.
Shakespeare might have written derivative fiction (and to at least some extent nearly all fiction is derivative, in tone and theme if nothing else), but he didn’t write fanfic.
Okay, I’ll back up a step. Shakespeare wrote several works using characters and situations that he didn’t create. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen people on this blog say something to the tune of, “Fanficcers are uncreative and stupid because they can’t be bothered to come up with their own characters or settings.” But if Shakespeare and Gardner write works using characters and situations they didn’t create, does that make them uncreative and stupid? What about Mark Twain when he wrote A Conneticut Yankee In King Arthur’s Court? He didn’t come up with those characters or settings. Is he uncreative now? Or “devoid of the discipline and imagination that are the only sources of original work?”
And, lo and behold, you didn’t name one.
I didn’t name them because I doubt you’d care what their names were in the fanfic world. Look up “Echo” sometime if you want to check out the one that comes to my mind first.
“When she’s ten feet tall.”
Grace Slick