Priveliging the Creation over the Creator
Jul. 3rd, 2004 10:13 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rowynI've been playing devil's advocate on ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
haikujauar's journal, on the subject of fanfiction. (Poor Micah! If you decide to contribute to the thread, I'd recommend reading the comments so far. She's wound up repeating several clarifications multiple times already.) I've found that I have a surprising amount of passion on the topic, especially for someone who doesn't read or write fanfiction.
As I've been considering the topic, I've been contemplating what it is that I personally dislike about fanfiction. Among the field of problems associated with it (most of it is badly written and/or wish-fulfillment, much of it violates creative intent and/or copyright law, etc.) is one that hasn't been mentioned yet:
It implies that the character is more important than the author.
I've read almost every book that Diana Wynne Jones has ever written. She seldom writes about the same characters twice. I'm very fond of some of those characters. I'd enjoy reading more about Chrestomanci (who does appear in several short stories and a few books), or Rupert Venables of Deep Secret, or finding out what happens next to Thomas Lynn and Polly of Fire and Hemlock.
But I don't go searching for fanfic about those characters (there's probably some out there) or write to Ms. Jones begging her to do another book about Rupert.
And part of that is because I trust Ms. Jones as an author. I trust that what she writes next will be what she's inspired to write, and that it, too, will be good just as her other books have been good. It doesn't have to be about the same characters.
There's something ... suffocating about the human demand for more about this character. Or this universe. Or this team. It leads to a lot of bad writing: writers flogged to make what will sell, rather than what they are driven to make.
This isn't just about fanfiction; it's about professionals writing their own creations, too. Glen Cook has written I-don't-know-how-many Black Company books now. If all his books were equally popular, he'd've stopped writing Black Company by book five (if not sooner). But Black Company is what sells, so he flogs his muse to produce Yet Another Black Company novel, and it makes him ten times what any novel in a new series would. So that's what he does.
But there are novels in his head -- new stories, in new settings, about new characters -- that will die with him, because not enough people are willing to take a chance on them. Because they won't say "Hey, I loved this series by that Cook guy -- maybe this other novel by him will be good, too."
When I was in fifth grade, I read a dozen or more books about Oz. The last one I read was the sixth novel by Frank L. Baum. It ended with the statement that there would be no more visitors to Oz, no more books about Oz. I was shocked. How could this be? I'd read way more than six Oz books. And I finally thought to check the spine: most of those books had been written by other authors. It had simply never occured to me that might be the case.
What is it about us, that we value the creation more than the creator? Why do so many people say, "That was great! Can you do another one just like it?"
Why don't we want to see what else they can do, that might be new, and fresh, and different and maybe -- just maybe -- even better?
haikujauar's journal, on the subject of fanfiction. (Poor Micah! If you decide to contribute to the thread, I'd recommend reading the comments so far. She's wound up repeating several clarifications multiple times already.) I've found that I have a surprising amount of passion on the topic, especially for someone who doesn't read or write fanfiction.As I've been considering the topic, I've been contemplating what it is that I personally dislike about fanfiction. Among the field of problems associated with it (most of it is badly written and/or wish-fulfillment, much of it violates creative intent and/or copyright law, etc.) is one that hasn't been mentioned yet:
It implies that the character is more important than the author.
I've read almost every book that Diana Wynne Jones has ever written. She seldom writes about the same characters twice. I'm very fond of some of those characters. I'd enjoy reading more about Chrestomanci (who does appear in several short stories and a few books), or Rupert Venables of Deep Secret, or finding out what happens next to Thomas Lynn and Polly of Fire and Hemlock.
But I don't go searching for fanfic about those characters (there's probably some out there) or write to Ms. Jones begging her to do another book about Rupert.
And part of that is because I trust Ms. Jones as an author. I trust that what she writes next will be what she's inspired to write, and that it, too, will be good just as her other books have been good. It doesn't have to be about the same characters.
There's something ... suffocating about the human demand for more about this character. Or this universe. Or this team. It leads to a lot of bad writing: writers flogged to make what will sell, rather than what they are driven to make.
This isn't just about fanfiction; it's about professionals writing their own creations, too. Glen Cook has written I-don't-know-how-many Black Company books now. If all his books were equally popular, he'd've stopped writing Black Company by book five (if not sooner). But Black Company is what sells, so he flogs his muse to produce Yet Another Black Company novel, and it makes him ten times what any novel in a new series would. So that's what he does.
But there are novels in his head -- new stories, in new settings, about new characters -- that will die with him, because not enough people are willing to take a chance on them. Because they won't say "Hey, I loved this series by that Cook guy -- maybe this other novel by him will be good, too."
When I was in fifth grade, I read a dozen or more books about Oz. The last one I read was the sixth novel by Frank L. Baum. It ended with the statement that there would be no more visitors to Oz, no more books about Oz. I was shocked. How could this be? I'd read way more than six Oz books. And I finally thought to check the spine: most of those books had been written by other authors. It had simply never occured to me that might be the case.
What is it about us, that we value the creation more than the creator? Why do so many people say, "That was great! Can you do another one just like it?"
Why don't we want to see what else they can do, that might be new, and fresh, and different and maybe -- just maybe -- even better?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-03 09:24 am (UTC)That is, the author has succeeded in maintaining the illusion - on some level, for enough readers - that this is a real person, a real character, in a real setting, in real events. So, the reader doesn't stand back and think, "Man, what a great writer!" No, the reader thinks, "Man, this hero is JUST SO COOL! I want to find out what he does NEXT!"
Of course, the character isn't real. We all know that. And one reason why fan-fic just doesn't "feel right" is that so often it rips out the personality of the character ... because the personality of that character is granted by the work of the author, and that personality is inextricable from his situation many times. So many fan-fics ponder, "What if?" - what if this happened instead, what if so-and-so had a romantic interest with so-and-so, what if so-and-so WENT BAD, what if so-and-so met so-and-so, and so forth. But if it were really in the hands of the author, all those "what ifs" wouldn't happen.
I suppose it's the cost of success. A story that really grips the reader is probably going to have really compelling characters that we care about, that we want to know more about, that we can identify with in some way. (I am tempted to say a great deal about Mariel from Prophecy, but that's best reserved for email, lest I throw spoilers left and right.)
And I've heard plenty of "fans" of various stories talk about these totally fictitious characters and settings is if they were real in some way. I suppose the funniest extent of this would be situations where guys get into arguments about who would win out in a cross-universe showdown - the Empire or the Borg. ;D And, man, can people get worked up about stuff like that! (The irony for me is that so many of the arguments in favor of one side or the other winning are also arguments AGAINST the quality of writing for that given story franchise; i.e., powergaming would win a theoretical fight, but tends to make for bad stories, IMHO.)
Anyway, I agree with you - so often, the fanfic I've seen is about the character, the character, the character, without so much as a mention of the author.
no subject
Date: 2004-08-04 04:54 am (UTC)Do you still recall what it was you wanted to say about Mariel? I don't think I ever got that email on it .... :)
I think you're dead-on about the "who would win?" argument -- usually the "winning" side is the one with the worse writers. ;)
no subject
Date: 2004-08-04 07:00 am (UTC)That reminds me of an episode of Elf Only Inn.
Goku666: "yah i got mad marital arts skills. i can shoot a laser that can blow up a planet!"
Darth Vader: "And all this time we were building Death Stars...."
no subject
Date: 2004-07-03 10:45 am (UTC)I do agree that some stories and universes seem to invite people to wonder what happens next. I tend to think it's the closed vs open story thing. If the story is done, it's done and we bask in the experience. If it seems open to new things happening... We wonder about those things, the continuing adventures of the characters, even if they've already finished out some stories, because things will continue to happen that change them.
Chrestomanci... I don't think I yearn to see more stories about him, but I enjoy the ones I've read. He may very well go on, but he's going to handle whatever happened in excellent fashion, perhaps with the help of others or showing up to help them. That universe isn't likely to change, and so there isn't a continuing story that needs to be revealed.
My thoughts.
Date: 2004-07-03 11:22 am (UTC)It is a great tragedy for an author to allow herself to be trapped by her creation. Some authors fear forging into new territories for financial reasons. Some don't want to put in the work to start over in a new universe. Some authors are just comfortable and happy with no desire to go someplace else. So long as the author is comfortable with her creative choices and is aware that the choices are hers, she is not trapped. Trapped implies a lack of choices. Truly being trapped is rare. Usually when we feel trapped it means that we are unwilling to make the choices necessary to free ourselves. There are always choices, we just may not like the ones that are available.
People clamor for another one "just like it" because we all want to repeat pleasant experiences. How many times do you want to eat your favorite food? But ultimately the author chooses whether to keep making the same dish all the time.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-05 01:20 pm (UTC)What I mean is, imagine if nobody after Clement Moore could write about Santa Claus? I mean sure, we wouldn't have to put up with stuff like "Santa Claus: The Movie" or "Bad Santa", but at the same time we wouldn't get "The Santa Clause", or that stop-motion classic, "Santa Claus Is Comin' To Town".
There's bound to be crap from allowing others to use a character (or in a more fair situation, pay for the right to use a character), but there can be greatness as well. I'm glad Timothy Zahn was able to write about the familiar Star Wars characters, and I almost wish Lucas couldn't keep using them in his retro-sequels. (I call them that instead of prequels because to me they would ONLY make sense when viewed after the originals. Like The Magician's Nephew in C.S. Lewis' Narnia series.)
Having said all that, I don't think people should be able to distribute new work based on someone else's characters without the creator's permission (or the permission of whoever holds the rights to it), unless the characters are so ubiquitous and timeless that they've transcended the medium. (Santa Claus and Dracula being only two such examples. I doubt think Buffy [or the aforementioned Rupert] have reached that level. Yet.)