The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Kathryn Allen:

#204 I was going to remark that the term ficwriter (and I've not come across it in lj half as much as I have fanficcer and variations) appeared to be trying to obscure the nature of the writing involved. But this pretty much says it for me.

And I don't want to try and obscure that I've written fanfiction, or that I will do so again at any time the mood strikes.

Nor have I ever known people to change their opinion of something/someone simply because they're asked to use a different descriptor. Indeed, those wishing to make derogatory remarks can do so using any word which accurately describes the group they wish to despise.

Fanfiction deserves a degree of respect. It's the result of an urge to communicate creatively and it plays a positive role in many people's lives -- giving it merit quite separate from the quality of the writing involved. (Just as a good kickaround has merit even though most of those involved have two left feet and will never play in an organised team, let alone professionally.) Yes, some part of the phenomenon is about writing, and good writers can be found playing in fanfiction sandboxes -- but it isn't *just* about writing, or reading.

[And I find it amazing that people should praise kids who read Harry Potter, for reading, but make negative remarks about the literacy of those who dare to try and do more. Yup, much better that they sit watching tv and playing video games until they no longer have the urge to write... or read.]

BTW one writing lesson I've learnt -- being specific in ones choice of words makes for far more powerful writing than resorting to generics. frex a sword is just a sword, but an estoc or an epee or a cutlass or scimitar... is a detail. And that's where the devils are :)

Even if one considers fanficcers to be the evilest, rudest, nastiest scum on the planet... a writer writes so as to engage readers, whether that's to entertain them or make them think or whatever.

A professional writer sets out to hook and hold them, and maybe it would be nice if the only result of that was their recommending the book to friends and buying the next one, and the next, but some readers will be so engaged that they won't be satisfied by that and they'll do more than wait for the next installment. They'll turn into fans, and some of them will turn into fanficcers. Especially if the popularity of the source material means it can be a shared passion and a community activity.

Professional writers *sell* books. They write books that engage so that the books will sell, which means they'll be published. Books that aren't appealing to readers don't sell and don't get published. Simplistic as that is, writers want readers and, while they may not consider fanficcers part of that equation, if they get enough enthusiastic readers, visible fanfic is pretty much the inevitable consequence of writing an engaging book that sells widely.

A writer who expects their readership to turn off their imaginations and emotions just because they finish reading a book... Is expecting rather a lot from human beings who've invested money and time to read it in the hope they *will* get carried away. Readers have feelings too. And I think writers have to accept some responsibility for those feelings. Maybe more responsibility than the reader has to have for the feelings of the writer.

#14 & #20 Interesting and engaging... Perfect entertainment for a Bittercon night :)

Apologies.

Mr Fiest's account seemed to point up that people who are copyright holders believe they also own original elements, here including a character, written by someone else within their world.

I had no idea I'd be reopening a can of worms -- I will try and remedy the situation by eating some :)

However, contrary to all-too-common belief, the copyright holder has no claim on that new story. The story itself—that specific configuration of words—belongs to the author. So does the plot, if it doesn’t infringe on the copyright. So do any other non-infringing original elements. So if you’re a fanfic writer, please stop saying you don’t own your own work.

Or to take the oft-cited Marion Zimmer Bradley affair. The latest version I've read being here -- http://webnews.sff.net/read?cmd=read&group=sff.sfwa&artnum=4369.

MZB wanted to use original elements -- a character -- from a story which had been accepted for publication in a Darkover(?) anthology (I think that means she was granting a licence for people to write stories for submission...)

The writer of the short story, who generally gets vilified in these accounts, was the copyright holder of those elements -- and so had every right not to accept MZB's offer.

[Whatever the moral of the story actually is (possibly 'you can't have your cake and eat it') -- if this account is a true one, it's kind of unfair for those who're against people using and abusing *their* original creations to keep making unpleasant comments about a writer, who had fairly explicit permission to use MZB's world and characters, choosing not to sell *her* rights.]

"But they do get more than a cursory glance, if they're at all readable."

I really wouldn't expect publishers/publishing house editors to be interested in trawling display sites -- they already have a system which brings post-slushed books to their attention. At least that's what I understood agents were for, and its agent slushpiles I was thinking about.

But I've made the terrible mistake of reading agent blogs :) 'Cursory glance' was a kind of balance between 'rejected unread because I'm five hundred queries behind and there are five MS's for clients I need to read and comment on within the week' and 'I hate anything with an amulet'.

http://www.amheath.com/

UK literary agent, UK small publisher... and actually UK publishing probably does need *something* to make it even vaguely approachable. AMHeath is one of the (few) UK literary agents I've run across with anything like the kind of web presence the majority of US agents have. Of course, they don't take SF.

And yes, one can believe that good fiction will get published... but that doesn't mean all the good fiction in any given slushpile gets published. I can certainly sympathise with any writer who wants a way to win their book more than a cursory glance. Even if I'm fairly sure they're doomed to failure.

Putting aside for a minute episodes of deliberate cruelty, like this one, and how much damage such public idiocy does in terms of 'radicalising' locals and foreign nationals... (radicalising is such a cool buzzword)

At least one kid has been shot by our side while begging for sweets. Many more have been caught up in insurgent attacks on US troops. There are easily found stories (propaganda, perhaps, but often propaganda is just the ideas the other side believe about their enemy) accusing US troops of deliberately enticing children to follow them, promising sweets and gifts. Using them as human shields -- because the presence of children discourages attacks by all but the most hardened insurgents. It is getting difficult to dismiss those stories.

You shouldn't need dead kids to know that encouraging them to come close is bad for them -- and unless you don't give a damn about those kids lives, it's bad for the soldiers too. You certainly shouldn't need as many dead kids as have been killed in incidents involving troops handing out goodies to issue general orders to discontinue the practice. Unless, of course, putting children in harm's way *is* official policy.

And if you know the Pied Piper act is about protecting yourself at the kids' expense... cutting off any empathy for those kids could actually be a way of coping with that.

Comment statistics for Kathryn Allen on the Making Light blog

Total: 8 comments. View all these comments on a single page.