Am I a Fanficcer?

I received this comment from "GMW:"

If we take the published author view then I hate to say it but Mr. Lee Goldberg, according to this you have no talent for writing because you are using a preset universe and characters. You do write fanficiton with legal ability to get it published for money. In my mind that is the only thing separating you from a fanficiton writer. Has writing the ‘DM’ and ‘Monk’ novels helped you in writing your other novels? If yes then why can’t it help others? If no, then why do you write them?

1) I didn't just wake up one morning, burning with the need to write DIAGNOSIS MURDER fanfic and then sent it out a publisher, hoping to sell it. They came to me. I would never consider writing a book about characters I didn't create unless the creator/rights holder asked me to. Why? Because the characters aren't mine.

2) I was an executive producer and principal writer of the DIAGNOSIS MURDER TV series for many years and was approached by the studio and publisher to write the books. In many ways, I shaped, guided, and "controlled" the characters long before I started writing books about them.  This makes me a rarity among tie-in writers. As far as I know, there isn't anyone out there writing fanfic about the shows they wrote and produced.

3) I was writing for the TV series MONK for several seasons when the creator/executive producer of the show approached me to write the books.  I not only continue to write episodes of the show, but I write the books with the executive producer's full consent and creative input. How many fanficcers are also writing for the TV shows they are ripping off?

4) To date, I have only written tie-ins based on TV shows that I also wrote and/or produced. Again, that makes me a rarity among tie-in writers.

5) These are licensed tie-in novels, written under the contract with the rights holders, who have full control over how their characters and "worlds" are used. This is true of all tie-in writers...and no fanficcers.

6) I wrote my own, published novels long before I was approached to write any tie-ins (in fact, they got me the tie-ins) and continue to do so. My recent book THE MAN WITH THE IRON-ON BADGE, which got a starred review from Kirkus and was favorably compared to Hammett and Chandler, is currently nominated for a Shamus Award for Best Novel.

What I do isn't comparable to fanfiction -- which is using someone else's work without their consent or involvement and distributing on the Internet. I don't do it as my personal artistic expression -- it's a job, one that I do to the best of my ability.

Like a fanficcer,  I am writing about characters I didn't create and that are not my own. But, as I said before, unless approached to do so, I would have absolutely no interest or desire to write about someone else's characters. Why? Because...and let me repeat this... the characters aren't mine. I didn't create them. They don't belong to me. I much prefer to write totally original work and if I could make my living only doing that, I would.

Write all the fanfiction you want to for practice -- just don't post it on the Internet or publish it. Or if you do want to post it, ask the creator/right's holder for permission to do so first. How hard is that?

What I have yet to see any fanficcer explain why they won't to ask the creator or rights holder for permission before posting and distributing their work. Or why fanficcers adamantly refuse to follow the expressed wishes of creator/rights holders (for example, Rowling has approved fanfiction based on Harry Potter as long as it's not sexually explicit...but that hasn't stopped thousands of people from writing and posting Potter slash, disrespecting her and her wishes ).

I know the answer, of course. Fanficcers are terrified of officially being told NO... and identifying themselves in case they decide to blithely violate the author's wishes anyway.

Comments

[sxKitten]

I don't know why people have so much trouble telling the difference between fan fiction and licensed tie-ins. It seems pretty bloody obvious to me. Of course, I'm not a fanficcer ...

[Carstairs38]

The problem comes when people say that you can't learn anything about writing by writing fan fic. That fan fic writers are just hacks because they don't create their own characters/settings.

When things like that get written on the blog of someone who makes a living writing about other people's characters and settings, whether on books or TV, it causes confusion. And this happens whether Lee says it or not.

Obviously, the fact that Lee has permission to write about the characters makes a huge difference. But when people degrate the quality of the writing based on the fact that the writer didn't create everything from scratch, that's where the confusion comes from.

Mark

[tod goldberg]

I degrade the quality of the learning, Mark, not the quality of the writing. In the quality issue, it's sort of algebraic from the learning issue.

[Lee Goldberg]

Mark,

The views expressed by the readers of this blog in their comments to my posts often do not reflect my opinions on a particular topic.

Unfortunately, I am often credited elsewhere in the blogosphere with comments that I never made...but were, rather, comments left here by readers of this blog. There's little I can do about such inaccuracy and carelessness...so I ignore it (though I suspect some bloggers are doing it on purpose just to be inflammatory... as if there isn't enough that I *have* said that they can use against me!).

Obviously, I don't think writing about characters you didn't create makes you a hack (I am, after all, co-founder of the International Association of Media Tie-In Writer...www.iamtw.org). There are a lot of terrific tie-in novels out there and I like to think that the ones I write are pretty good, too.

But I do believe that the vast majority of fanfic is hideous, masturbatory crap and that writing it is not the best way to hone your writing skills...even if a very small number of fanficcers have gone on to commercial success with their original work.

Lee

[Richard S. Wheeler]

I'm probably the "published author" to whom GMW objects. I feel that fanficcers betray our literary tradition, betray the authors they steal from, betray copyright law, betray readers, and worst of all, betray themselves.

I don't feel that way about people who write stories under license. Such people are actually entering into a collaboration, and the resulting story is the product of the creator of the character and the licensed author. Collaboration has a long and honorable literary tradition. For instance, Alexandre Dumas, Pere, had a virtual writing factory in which he polished up the work of his staff and published it. There have been many fine works resulting from collaboration throughout literary history.

[Carstairs38]

Lee,

My comments weren't clear. I know you don't feel you are a hack. :) I was trying to say that people commenting on your blog often get mistaken for your opinion. And that's where the confusion lies.

I almost didn't comment. I'm so tired I'm not thinking straight. (And you don't even want to know what my work day has been like.) I should have listened to my initial instinct instead of making a confusing post.

Mark

[lost_erizo from LiveJournal]

Mr. Goldberg wrote:
"What I have yet to see any fanficcer explain why they won't to ask the creator or rights holder for permission before posting and distributing their work. Or why fanficcers adamantly refuse to follow the expressed wishes of creator/rights holders ([example redacted for brevity] )."

I think you're phrasing the question wrong. The question isn't why don't they do this, it's why _should_ they? Since fan authors are not making a profit from their hobby, as long as they aren't otherwise hurting the copyright holder's ability to profit from their work, why should they feel any obligation to abide by what the copyright holder wants? They may be violating the copyright in the sense that copyright is a monopoly, but as long as those two conditions are met they aren't really violating the spirit of the copyright.

If fans want to extend the courtesy of honoring the author's expressed wishes on the subject then that's all well and good. But I don't see any reason they should feel _obligated_ to do anything further once they've made sure that their writing activities don't affect the copyright holder's ability to profit from their copyrighted material.

[kathy kune]

Lost Erizo's last comment, Lee, is perhaps the most revealing glimpse yet into what you called The Fanfic Mind.

"as long as they aren't otherwise hurting the copyright holder's ability to profit from their work, why should they feel any obligation to abide by what the copyright holder wants?"

It's called respect. It's called honor. It's called being a decent, considerate, ethical and caring human being. Apparently those basic values, which civilized society holds in high regard, are beyond the grasp of the fanfiction community.

A writer creates something unique, magical, and wonderful that entertains and enlights you...and instead of honoring and respecting that person for what they have given, you piss all over them instead, showing total disregard for their feelings, their effort, and their imagination.

[G. T. Karber]

I've been sitting here trying to come up with a reasonable rebuttal to those who are pro-fanficcers rights above even the rights of the copyright holders. I cannot think of one. In truth, you are right. Fan fiction does no financial harm to the creator of said work (usually, though I can't imagine sexually explicit Harry Potter work is going to create any new church-going fans).

What about banner ads on the websites that host fan fiction? Or the hosting company that hosts it? Someone makes money on fan fiction, and that someone isn't the author. It should be.

[G. T. Karber]

Oh, I forgot to mention that I thought of a reason after the first paragraph, thus explaining the second one.

I need to go to sleep now. It's late.

[kete]

"It's called respect. It's called honor. It's called being a decent, considerate, ethical and caring human being. Apparently those basic values, which civilized society holds in high regard, are beyond the grasp of the fanfiction community."

Excuse me, what bullshit! The author writes something and gets paid for it. When I buy their book they've been renumerated for their effort. From then on there's nothing they can do to prevent me reacting to the text in whatever form I see fit. I can burn the book, re-sell it or give it away as a present. I can think about the content, talk about it with my friends or write a critical essay about it and publish it on amazon.

But perhaps I love the characters and settings in the book? Perhaps it fires my imagination, so that I write a story about the characters' fates after the book has ended? And perhaps I share that story with likeminded people on the net for free.

If you want to stop me sharing my imagination, what will be next? Will I be forbidden to write something critical about your book?May I not even think about it? Shall I be condemned to just consume without any reaction to anything? - I think not.

Therefore, if you don't want reactions of whatever kind to your creative effort - don't put it out there. Because, if you do you have to accept the fact that you've abandoned control. There will be reactions - from harsh critics to enthusiastic fanfic - and you cannot command their form or direction. So, take your money, be glad of it and leave us the heck of it alone.

kete

Kete, for heaven's sake. You bought the book. That gave you the right to have a copy of the text in your house. It didn't buy you any further rights. You are seriously misinformed if you think that the price of a book is high enough to buy a stake in the characters when it comes to publishing them in a public forum like the internet. All the price of the book buys is the physical object, not the stuff contained therein. That's why, for example, the things you're legally allowed to do to the book such as burning and giving away do NOT include photocopying it and selling your copies, which I hope you'll concede is definitely against the law. You have freehold on the book, but leasehold on its contents.

"Kete, for heaven's sake. You bought the book. That gave you the right to have a copy of the text in your house. It didn't buy you any further rights. You are seriously misinformed if you think that the price of a book is high enough to buy a stake in the characters when it comes to publishing them in a public forum like the internet. All the price of the book buys is the physical object, not the stuff contained therein. That's why, for example, the things you're legally allowed to do to the book such as burning and giving away do NOT include photocopying it and selling your copies, which I hope you'll concede is definitely against the law. You have freehold on the book, but leasehold on its contents."

If you think you've contradicted me, anonymouse, you're sadly mistaken. Please note what I said above: I can destroy, re-sell or give away the book I bought as I see fit. What I cannot and do not do is profit from it in any way, shape or form. Which I do not do by writing fanfic and sharing it for free with those people who like to read the stuff and make a considered decision to do so by clicking the respective links. I DON'T PROFIT.

But you cannot take away the ideas and images you as a writer have put into my head and which I've made mine by devouring and digesting them. (Yeah, yeah, I know: target for some puerile jokes here, but who cares.)

And if I want to expand on the ideas and images I've now in my head, there's nothing anyone can do to hinder me. Of course I could name the character you named Paul, Saul instead, and let the whole story play out not in today's California but in last century's England, and claim I've all made it up myself without giving you any credit (isn't something like that what just happened to Lewis Perdue?). And as LP's law suit shows, there isn't anything you can do to hinder me, even if I sell the stuff. Instead I tell my readers that I've expanded on your characters and universe and give you all the credit - can't say fairer than that.

kete

No one thinks you are profiting financially, that's not the point. And while no one is suggesting you don't have the right to -think- what you like about a book, the right to -circulate- spin-off works based on it in a public forum is completely different, and gets into the world of business, profit or not. After all, I'm free to think that a law-abiding citizen is a degenerate crook if I wish, but if I publicise that view, then the law of free speech stops and the laws of slander and libel take over. Free speech is a right bounded in by other rights; the point people are making here is that the right to control your own creation should be final word on the subject in this case.

I don't think you've really answered my point. Sorry I was snappish before, I've been having a bad morning, but to get back to it: Your earlier post suggested you have a Customer-is-King belief; all I was trying to suggest is that the price of a book only buys certain defined rights as to using it. Fantasising about it is certainly one, but producing derivative work is another, and the right to the former doesn't automatically give you the right to the latter.

"No one thinks you are profiting financially, that's not the point. And while no one is suggesting you don't have the right to -think- what you like about a book, the right to -circulate- spin-off works based on it in a public forum is completely different, and gets into the world of business, profit or not."

Well, this is where we don't agree. Profiting financially is the sole reason behind any copyright law as far as I interprete it and up to now no court has contradicted me. Also, fanficcers certainly see their communities as kind of private, though they're on a public medium, because you only go there if you have business there, namely you either want to post your fic or you want to read fic posted by others.

"I don't think you've really answered my point."

Same is true for you. You didn't answer my point here: As soon as I ingest an idea it becomes mine, because how do you suggest to get it out again?

"Your earlier post suggested you have a Customer-is-King belief; all I was trying to suggest is that the price of a book only buys certain defined rights as to using it. Fantasising about it is certainly one, but producing derivative work is another, and the right to the former doesn't automatically give you the right to the latter."

Nonsense. I'm forbidden to produce derivative work for mercenary purposes - which I agree to and don't do - but as a hobby? to share with friends? as a form of reacting to and interacting with the source text? I'm free to do whatever I like.

kete

I'd like to answer your point, but it's difficult, because all you're doing is issuing flat assertions and flat contradictions. I'll try, but after this I've got things to do, so this is my last post on the subject.

To me, the suggestion that an idea becomes yours as soon as you ingest it is simply false. Analogy: a patented trademark image doesn't become yours because you've seen it; food you've eaten doesn't become yours if you took it without permission - hard to get back is not the same thing as rightfully owned.

The suggestion that you can do something in a public place and call it private just because it feels that way to you isn't logical. Analogy: if you sit in a bar with your friends and make offensive remarks, the barkeep is within his rights to stop you if other customers are disturbed; saying 'this is our private table' doesn't mean it's okay.

I don't think that the fact that something is not for profit should be the determining factor. The fact that a court case hasn't determined this yet is a negative proof, which doesn't work. The issue is ownership, not money. Robin Hood had the best of intentions, but he's still called the prince of thieves, not the prince of wealth redistribution.

That's all I have time for, so I'm off.

I think the idea of an anonymouse is cute.

[Richard S. Wheeler]

There is a clear leitmotif evident in the apologies for fan fiction. It is that moral or ethical standards, or cultural standards, have little validity and can be ignored.

Fan fiction writers choose to operate in a nether world below the lowest rung of legitimate literature, and by doing so betray themselves. Who knows what they might achieve if they were to set their sights higher.

Civilization, which depends on ethical and cultural understandings, will survive them, but their hopes of producing any literature worthy of admiration are almost nil. You can't put fan fiction on a resume and hope it will win you honor.

[kete]

"To me, the suggestion that an idea becomes yours as soon as you ingest it is simply false. Analogy: a patented trademark image doesn't become yours because you've seen it; food you've eaten doesn't become yours if you took it without permission - hard to get back is not the same thing as rightfully owned."

Why are you - again - as so many others have before you - comparing ideas to trademarks when - even under the most illogical law - they aren't?

Your analogy limps. Fanfic sites aren't public bars where everyone sits and consumes their beer. An archive or fanfic site owner can rightfully assume that only people interested in fanfic would go there. I mean, if you stumble into a peep-show because you can't read the signs or something, you'll sound pretty dumb complaining about nude people doing bawdy things.

"I don't think that the fact that something is not for profit should be the determining factor. The fact that a court case hasn't determined this yet is a negative proof, which doesn't work. The issue is ownership, not money. Robin Hood had the best of intentions, but he's still called the prince of thieves, not the prince of wealth redistribution."

When you start an argument by citing copyright law and are shown that fanficcers aren't infringing on this law you cannot suddenly change your argument and say that this isn't the point. I mean, you can and in fact you did, but it does nothing for your line of argument, you know. Chose a line and stick to it.

"That's all I have time for, so I'm off."

Me, too.Off to the movies seeing "Crank".

"I think the idea of an anonymouse is cute."

Not mine, though. It's a common expression on F_W. Credit where credit is due.

kete

[kete]

"There is a clear leitmotif evident in the apologies for fan fiction. It is that moral or ethical standards, or cultural standards, have little validity and can be ignored."

Apologies? What apologies? I don't apologise for writing fanfic, because I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. That your moral, ethical and cultural standards differ from mine doesn't mean yours are necessarily right.

"Fan fiction writers choose to operate in a nether world below the lowest rung of legitimate literature, and by doing so betray themselves. Who knows what they might achieve if they were to set their sights higher."

I have no idea what I could achieve in writing original fiction and I'm not interested in finding out. Financial regards, nasty deadlines.... thank you very much, but I can live without those. All I sometimes want is persuing my hobby, tapping away on my keyboard.

"Civilization, which depends on ethical and cultural understandings, will survive them, but their hopes of producing any literature worthy of admiration are almost nil. You can't put fan fiction on a resume and hope it will win you honor."

First, let me express my extreme relief that I'm not doing everlasting harm to civilisation as we know it. Gasp!

Second, I don't pretend to produce literature (in that I differ radically from many pro-writers of my acquaintance....) and don't hope for anybody's admiration. If someone likes my story, that really is enough for me, thank you very much.

Third, here you're wrong if you think that for instance Cassie Claire's over hundredthousand hits on her webite haven't had the smallest influence on her publisher's decision to offer her a book deal, imo.

Fourth, how about coming over a little less pompous, gramps?

kete

[Richard S. Wheeler]

For Kete:
Apology: 1. A formal justification; defense. 2. expression of regret for a wrong.

[Lee Goldberg]

Kete,

Richard Wheeler is one of the most respected and honored authors of western literature in the world today. The last line of your previous comment, sadly, is indicative of the lack of respect fanficcers show authors... which is the only reason I didn't delete it. I want people to see fanficcers for who they really are.

Lee

[Anonymous]

Fiction Alley - www.fictionalley.org is making money off fanfiction. It's a tax-exempt 503(b) organization. Uncle Sam is footing their bill.

http://forums.fictionalley.org/park/showthread.php?threadid=11746

I believe Heidi Tandy is on the board of the non-profit. Supposedly, it's for educational purposes. They teach young people to write fanfic. Also, they like to get together at expensive conferences like Nimbus and talk about Harry Potter stuff. Somebody is getting paid administrative fees for that non-profit. Fiction Alley has thousands of members. There's money coming in.

Pretty good deal, eh? And Fiction Alley hosts sexually explicit fanfic, of the type JKR isn't happy with. A double slap in the face.

[kete]

"Richard Wheeler is one of the most respected and honored authors of western literature in the world today."

Lee, he writes *Western* for heaven's sake. Hardly what I would call literature. And I've never heard of him before coming to your blog.

"The last line of your previous comment, sadly, is indicative of the lack of respect fanficcers show authors... which is the only reason I didn't delete it. I want people to see fanficcers for who they really are."

Why would I show any respect to a guy I don't know and who, in my book, hasn't done anything deserving of my respect? As far as I'm concerned he isn't more of a blimp on my screen than you or anybody else, sorry.

kete

[Peggy]

Just because a court hasn't YET ruled on the financial infringement issue does not change the law as currently written.

That law, as far as I understand it, states that copyright is the right to "copy and distribute" the work (including derivative work, which fanfic is, as far as I understand it) of a creator. Whether such copying and distribution is for profit or not is not mentioned in the law.

What part of that law does fanfic NOT violate?

Or, perhaps, quote the applicable section of US copyright law and provide a more complete interpretation.

[Twila]

Um. Hi. I've been lurking for these discussions for a while, and I'd like to add my .02, even though it's not exactly on one side of the fence or the other. Y'see, I grew up in the heady days of Star Trek fanfiction (yes, the 60s and 70s) and I thought about many a story about my beloved Spock inside my own head. But I never felt able to get the character right, because he wasn't mine, and I never dared write any of my teenaged imaginings down. I thought that it must take a very good writer to take someone else's characters and remain true to their conception. So I read what little fanfic was available to me (I've never been in fannish circles much, until very recently) and thought it was very cool, but didn't think much about whether or not it was legal, or okay with Mr. Roddenberry or anything like that, because, y'know, I recall Mr. Roddenberry writing a *footnote* in his novelization of the first Star Trek movie about the slash fic, which said (to the best of my recollection) "It's kind of funny that people think Jim and I are like that, 'cause we're not, we're best friends, but that's humans for you." So it seems to me that Mr. Roddenberry was aware of it, but didn't let it twist his knickers. And as he was the *creator* of Kirk, Spock and all of the others in the original and Next Gen shows, I suspect he just was happy they were getting lots of fan attention, enough to support new shows and movies long past the usual sell-by and forget date for tv shows.

Anyway, move forward to 1990 and my introduction to the internet. And I found fan fiction. Oh lord yes. And y'know what? As a reader, it made no difference to me whether or not it was showing, say, Jane Austen's Mr. Darcy having sex with a kinkajou (no, I've not seen that, but it sounded kinky enough!) -- if I thought it jibed with my interpretation of the character, I'd read it. If it didn't, I hit my back button. The better stories (in my opinion) would add to the impression I had of the character, and often, I would seek out and become a fan of the show/book series BECAUSE I had read something that intrigued me. I'd want to know how the fan fiction writer saw that in those characters, and go look for myself. And so I have bought lots of books, watched many TV shows I would not have originally thought I'd want to see, and all because I sampled a bit of fan fiction about it.

Now, I have gotten involved a bit more with Harry Potter fandom, simply 'cause I joined a role-playing game where I have been playing Draco Malfoy. Before that, I would NEVER have had a shred of sympathy for that character, but I've grown to enjoy finding ways to play him and make him sympathetic at least to me.
I don't see where this has harmed my buying and reading of the texts by Ms. Rowling. It certainly hasn't given any problems to my reading them to my grandchildren and encouraging them to play "Harry and Snape and Draco and Ron etc." with the Legos...

I'm not saying that I think that one shouldn't respect the wishes of the writer, because it is a matter of respect for the person who originated the ideas, but I do not see the harm (as a consumer) to the writer in me finding out that there's something out there that I just might like, and all because I happened to find someone's rather interesting fan fiction about it.

Twila (who does wish someone would teach all the fan fiction writers about *please heaven* grammar and spelling, however! As a copy editor, it burns our eyes, yes it does.)

[P M Rommel]

Kathy Kune wrote: "It's called respect. It's called honor. It's called being a decent, considerate, ethical and caring human being. Apparently those basic values, which civilized society holds in high regard, are beyond the grasp of the fanfiction community."

And Richard wrote: "It is that moral or ethical standards, or cultural standards, have little validity and can be ignored."

Difficult to know where to start with this one; once again someone conflates the legal position of copyright infringement with the moral position. Once again, I repeat my question and perhaps Kathy or Richard will answer since nobody else wants to bite, and once again I use the example of Kipling.

Kipling's work was in copyright until 1987, as the old 50 year rule was then in force. His work came back into copyright in 1996 when the law changed. It goes out of copyright again next year.

The question is, why was it not 'decent, considerate, eithical' to write fanfiction about his work until 1987, and what suddenly changed? What (other than the legal position about which there is no point arguing until a case has been brought) changed again in 1996 and changes again in January?

To reiterate. as Kathy and Richard posed the question in moral terms, this is an ethical, *not* a legal, question.

G. T. Karber wrote, "What about banner ads on the websites that host fan fiction? Or the hosting company that hosts it?"

My experience is that most (not all, but most) fanfiction is held on websites and archives that do not carry banner ads. Usually this is because the host is also owned by fans and run on a non-profit basis, often supported by subscriptions.

"Anonymous" wrote: "Supposedly, it's for educational purposes. They teach young people to write fanfic."

Er...no. I think I might have enjoyed the one I attended more if they had.

[lost_erizo from LiveJournal]

Ms. Kune wrote:
"It's called respect. It's called honor. It's called being a decent, considerate, ethical and caring human being. Apparently those basic values, which civilized society holds in high regard, are beyond the grasp of the fanfiction community."


There's two problems with this line of argument that I'd like to address.

One, consideration (or politeness) is not the same thing as ethics. I realize you listed them separately, but you've assumed that consideration and ethics would dictate the same end behavior and that is not always true. It's possible to be ethical while being rude and it's possible to be polite and considerate of someone's feelings while engaging in morally reprehensible behavior. I generally try not to conflate the two. There is also a difference between respect and admiration for a work and respect and admiration for its author. I think some of Harlan Ellison's early work is absolutely brilliant. I also happen to think (based entirely on reports, I've never met the man) that Mr. Ellison is a narcissist who seems to enjoy belittling anyone who has the temerity to disagree with him. I couldn't care less what his opinion is about me and anything I do. There are other authors who I respect greatly as people and would bend over backwards in order to accommodate. I do, however, feel obligated to stick to my own system of ethics. I think it's perfectly ethical to write fanfiction of whatever genre as long as the fan writer doesn't hurt the copyright holder's profits. When an author expresses an opinion about fanfiction, I do try to take their feelings into account out of courtesy (regardless of my feelings about them personally), but I don't feel obligated to do so.

Second, you assume that all fan writers are in agreement on what is the best approach vis a vis author's wishes, as if "fanficcers" were a monolithic group with a common set of standards. My own informal survey (resulting from 15 years of lurking on fan sites) says that fan opinion runs the gamut from "the original author's opinion is irrelevant" to "I absolutely will not read/write anything that doesn't have the original author's explicit permission", with others who take just about any opinion in between those extremes. I don't assume that Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Ellison are similar in their opinions or behavior just because they are both recent authors who've written for TV. It would be nice if you and the others in these threads would stop making similar assumptions about fan writers.

"A writer creates something unique, magical, and wonderful that entertains and enlights you...and instead of honoring and respecting that person for what they have given, you piss all over them instead, showing total disregard for their feelings, their effort, and their imagination."

I don't happen to think that writing a piece of derivative fiction "piss[es] all over them", rather it's far more often intended as an expression of admiration for and joy in the source material. Everyone interacts with the source material a little differently, and some are inspired to write their own material as well. I think you'll be hard pressed to find many examples of fan authors who's intention is to dishonor or hurt the original author (with the possible exception of really biting parody which, by the way, is not excluded under copyright).

But my preferred method of expressing my admiration may be different from yours. Have you never gotten a gift you didn't like, or a favor that you didn't ask for and might have preferred to do without? Those are the annoyances we put up with as a price for living in a society that includes people whose tastes and opinions differ. But it doesn't mean that the person who gave you the gift/favor did it out of disrespect for you or disregard for your feelings.

[Richard S. Wheeler]

Kete is accurate: I have no reputation outside of my field. And yes, western fiction is the least prestigious branch of literature and virtually defunct. And yes, such reputation as I may have has no bearing on the validity of my comments. But I do stand by my observations, which may be considered my generation's understanding of worth.

[kathy kune]

Kete, ignorance is no excuse. It's just ignorance and not something you should bandy about with pride. I don't read westerns but I am educated enough to know that Richard S. Wheeler is equivalent to Arthur C. Clarke, Ray Bradbury or Isaac Asimov in the world of western literature...which has a much longer and richer history than science fiction. To shrug him off with such disdain shows not only the depth of your ignorance and arrogance but also your profound disrespect for those who are older, wiser, and more experienced than you. You should be embarrassed and ashamed of yourself but you are not wise enough or humble enough to realize it.

[Mark A. York]

"And I've never heard of him before coming to your blog"

Of course you hadn't. If you had looked though you'd find Mr. Wheeler was an editor at a big city newspaper for many years before taking to western fiction. He's forgotton more than a "fanficcer" will ever know.

As miss snark would say, "climb on the cluetrain for Chist's sake."

"I don't happen to think that writing a piece of derivative fiction "piss[es] all over them", rather it's far more often intended as an expression of admiration for and joy in the source material."

I'm sure that's how Rowling feels when she reads stories about Harry Potter giving blowjobs to Snape while getting it up the ass from Ron. Admiration and joy. Right. That's exactly what the fanfic author has in mind.

[anonymous2]

The first anonymous stated that Fiction Alley is a 503(b). This is incorrect. Fiction Alley is registered as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. They claim education as the basis for 501(c)(3) status.

Interesting way to side-step some of the copyright issues and be allowed to profit via utilization of a legal loop-hole.

[Xaedalus]

I'm roasting marshmellows in the heat coming from my monitor screen... I'm truly impressed that this argument escalated from a post about fanfic and into an argument about honor, decency, the entire human race, Harry Potter, and dubious sexual escapades.
Even my two cats are sunning themselves in the radioactive glow emanating from the screen.
I'll just keep my opinion to myself on this one. And have a marshmellow. :-D

[lost_erizo from LiveJournal]

Anonymous responded to my previous comment:
"I'm sure that's how Rowling feels when she reads stories about Harry Potter giving blowjobs to Snape while getting it up the ass from Ron. Admiration and joy. Right. That's exactly what the fanfic author has in mind."

Well, explicit Harry Potter threesome slash isn't really to my taste either, but tastes and opinions differ. And you should note that I said "admiration for and joy in the source material" - not for the author. Some people find characters they enjoy and are inspired to write erotica. Good or bad, that's their reaction to the material. It doesn't follow that they are writing it with the intention of hurting the original author. Most would be shocked and surprised to discover that the original author was even aware of their work (though that is more a result of the rapid expansion of internet fan activities than a realistic expectation of obscurity).

Nor do I believe that Harry Potter porn is particularly representative of fanfiction in general, any more than I think that Mr. Goldberg's work about an octogenarian doctor/amateur detective is representative of all of western literature for the past twenty years. Fanfiction has been written based on everything from the Bible to the works of Jane Austen to Star Wars to, and I kid you not, Tetris. It's been written in every style and every genre. Slash and explicitly adult material (not all slash is explicit) is only a fraction of that material. But those are distinctions that few of the people commenting on this blog seem willing to make, since blanket statements indicting all "fanficcers" for the perceived sins of a few seems to be the the preferred method.

[kete]

Geez, people, I am GERMAN! And Westerns aren't really a mainstream type of fiction here. Mostly they're sold as penny zines at supermarket cashiers and tobacconists at train stations - items to be consumed and thrown away like yesterday's newspapers. So, forgive me for not knowing a guy who isn't even translated into my language. Also I didn't tend to read many American newspapers when I was younger (nor do I now), so that Mr Wheeler's prestigious career in that field was entirely hidden from me.

How many of you know any German writers - other than perhaps Brecht, Grass and Böll? And Patrick Süsskind doesn't count, because "Das Parfum" has just been made into a movie.

kete

[kete]

"I would seek out and become a fan of the show/book series BECAUSE I had read something that intrigued me. I'd want to know how the fan fiction writer saw that in those characters, and go look for myself. And so I have bought lots of books, watched many TV shows I would not have originally thought I'd want to see, and all because I sampled a bit of fan fiction about it."

Absolutely right, Twila! Same with me. I now own tons of DVDs of TV shows I never watched on TV and wasn't interested in, just because I stumbled upon ONE fanfic that made me go, "Huh?! Interesting! What was the source material like?"

If I had stumbled upon some Wheeler fanfic - maybe I would have heard of him before.... ;-)

kete

[P M Rommel]

Anonymous2 wrote: "Interesting way to side-step some of the copyright issues and be allowed to profit via utilization of a legal loop-hole."

I thought a 501(c)(3) was non-profitmaking. How are they profiting if it's non-profitmaking?

And if you're claiming that they are, in fact, profiting from it, wouldn't the logical thing to do be complain to whatever agency in the US deals with that sort of thing? Rather than make unsupported allegations about it on a blog?

[anonymous2]

"I thought a 501(c)(3) was non-profitmaking. How are they profiting if it's non-profitmaking?"

It's easy to make large sums of money without claiming a profit, per se. A 501(c)(3) organization cannot make a profit, but can take in as much money in donations as they like. The way this works is that administrators are paid, often very, very well. 501(c)(3) organizations frequently spend a great deal of money this way. Remember the various outcries against the Red Cross's administrative overhead expenditures post 911 and post-hurricane Katrina? That's a prime example. It's not illegal, and I'm not intimating that it is.

However, the majority of fan fiction writers insist that they do not profit from their fan fiction. In this particular instance, setting up a 501(c)(3) has allowed for a legal loop-hole.

"And if you're claiming that they are, in fact, profiting from it, wouldn't the logical thing to do be complain to whatever agency in the US deals with that sort of thing? Rather than make unsupported allegations about it on a blog?"

I believe these questions were addressed in my response above. As I stated, it is a legal loop-hole. I only sought to clarify the comments of another poster, not to claim illegal activity. Although the legality of fan fiction, unless the author has given express permission or the source material is in public domain, remains a point of contention, that was not my point. I apologize if I misunderstood the purpose of commenting on blogs. Perhaps I was mistaken to believe it is a forum to express thoughts and share information.

The only German writer I'm familiar with is the little guy with the funny mustache who wrote "Mein Kampf." Looked a bit like Chaplin. I think of him often when I read Kete's posts.

[Bill Rabkin]

Kete:

To start:

Goethe
Schiller
Hermann Hesse
Thomas Mann
Heinrich Mann
Peter Handke
Hans Magnus Enzenzberger
Franz Kafka
Robert Musil
Erich Kastner (sorry, no umlaut on this computer)
Karl May
Friedrich Durrenmat
Hannah Arendt
Lion Feuchtwanger
Heinrich Heine
Hugo Von Hoffmanstahl
Heinrich Von Kleist (my favorite)
Erich Maria Remarque
Alfred Doblin
Christa Wolf
W. G. Sebald
Ilse Aichinger
Ingeborg Bachman
Paul Celan
Alexander Kluge

That's off the top of my head. And no, I'm not German. I'm merely not ignorant. And I didn't have to "stumble on" any Hans Magnus Enzensberger fanfic in order to discover what a great writer he is. I merely had to look around at the world. Which is a lot easier to do when your head isn't stuck up your ass.

[Keith]

"I don't happen to think that writing a piece of derivative fiction "piss[es] all over them", rather it's far more often intended as an expression of admiration for and joy in the source material."

Actual urine can be intended the same way.

[kete]

Okay, guys, kudos to Bill Rabkin for being so widely read! Otherwise as you're starting again with Hitler-comparisons and juvenile vulgar language I'm out of here. Thanks for the "discussion" and to Lee for maintaining such a "balanced" forum.

kete

[Twila]

Dear Bill Rabkin,

I'm happy that you're so grounded in German literature -- but I can tell you that I, for one, do not "have my head stuck up my ass". I have a degree in literature, I work as a copy editor, I *am* widely read in genre fiction (primarily sf/fantasy, mystery, romance, but I don't scorn the occasional Western) but I'm not fond of the current "literary" scene, so I can't tell you much about who's hot on that front. On the other hand, you want an opinion on a "classic" writer pre-1900, I'm your woman. So, yes, I like to read fan fiction. It's fun. I enjoy it as a consumer (yes, I am one of those odd people who READS it but does not WRITE it). I really would like to know Mr. Goldberg's and other writers' comments on what wrong I am perpetrating upon them and their creativity, if I buy their books and I recommend them, if it so happens that I found that there was a book out there I might enjoy via fan fiction? I know my local bookstores are not going to carry every book out there, nor is my local library, so I use this channel to help me feed my habit of a book a day. (Yes, I am a severe book-a-holic. Yes, I am trying to cut down. However, since I spend a lot of money at the bookstores, I would think authors would WANT my kind to find out about them so they could have me glom their whole back catalog. Maybe not. Maybe they'd be ashamed to have someone that enthusiastic interested in their books.)

BTW, Mr. Goldberg, just as a datapoint, I saw the latest Monk paperback at Borders and acquired same -- which I only did because I thought it might be interesting to try some of your writing.

[kete]

On second thought, Bill, none of the writers you mention is a genre writer like Wheeler. And you aren‘t going to compare his significance to Goethe and Schiller, are you?

Your Western is perhaps best comparable with what is called „Heimatroman“ in German in that it describes a certain region/landscape and how it shapes those born to it and/or inhabiting it. As we in Germany don‘t have a „wild west“ those stories mostly play in the mountains or on the sea shore.

Famous classical writers for these genre would for example be Ludwig Ganghofer and Luis Trenker for the mountainuous region and Hans Leip for the sea. Ever heard of them?

kete

[Richard S. Wheeler]

Kete: You might add Carl May to your list. I understand he wrote remarkable westerns there in Germany. The American western is indeed a humble literary form. And yet it is the only branch of American literature to have gathered three Pulitzer Prizes: The Travels of Jaimie McPheeters, by Robert Lewis Taylor, The Way West, by A.B. Guthrie, Jr., and Lonesome Dove, by Larry McMurtry. At its margins are two more Pulitzers, for Laughing Boy, by Oliver LaFarge (the story of a Navajo man in transition) and The Town, by Conrad Richter (the story of a town shedding its frontier roots). Once in a while a western bursts free of its genre straitjacket and blooms into a novel of breathtaking power and beauty; the sort of story that makes the heart sing.

[kete]

Richard, Bill Rabkin mentioned Karl May on his list. He is not undisputed in Germany, as we seemingly cannot decide whether we should love him or should be ashamed of him. He's mostly considered a writer for children/young adults. I personally hated his pompous style and the "I know and can do everything"-attitude of his heroes when I was a kid, but as an adult I have learned to appreciate his powerful imagination (after all he wrote about countries and people he had never seen), although I don't feel tempted to read his work again.

Thank you for letting me know about those books you mentioned. I think I've heard about "Lonesome Dove"...?! Was it made into a movie, perhaps? Anyway, perhaps I'll give one or some of them a try when I've finished my Patrick O'Brian. ;-)

kete

[David J. Montgomery]

As far as I'm concerned, it's not REALLY a good discussion until someone threatens to leave the message board and never return.

And then, of course, is only gone for 5 minutes. :)

That's what the internet is all about!

[Diana]

No, David you're absolutely wrong. Give the lady credit. It was 2 hours. 12:59 and then returned at 2:45. Kete, don't threaten to leave every time someone doesn't agree with you. It's not fair. It's like admitting defeat in a debate.

Anyway, you can't change Lee's mind. No matter how many articles you post. As a reader, I respect his opinion as well as yours. And you do make good points on your posts.

But, it's not like the guy is disrespecting you personally. Now, as for my opinion I've read fan fiction and I see nothing wrong with it unless someone is profitting from it and doing sexually explicit stuff. But, I do feel that some of this fan fiction is REALLY unnecessary. Some of this stuff is actually really really good, so good in fact that all they need to do is create their own characters and settings. Sometimes, all they need to do is change the names and it's not even close to the book they're fan ficcing. I don't understand the need to use someone else's characters names. I for one have never written fan fiction and don't see the need to. Changing a name of a character or place names (setting) can't be that difficult can it. They have a really good site called seventhsanctum.com. It's there for a reason. Also, it's a good idea to check and make sure the names aren't from some famous book by putting the name in Google.com.

[Diana]

I want to add more. The reason why I said that I find that "some" of the fan fiction is really unnecessary is because the bad writers you can see why some of them fan fic. The work is so horrible. You can tell they don't have the greatest skill to pull off their own work so they latch onto someone else's world.

The good writers create a cool story with a different world and sometimes different characterization that is nothing like the book and they just used someone's characters names when they could have just changed it.

But, what is really the funniest I read is when someone says "This is the based on so and so's book. Don't you dare steal my work or I will hunt you down and sue you. LOL! Too funny!

[Richard S. Wheeler]

I have not seen my characters appear in fan fiction, but I know that I would feel violated if they were to appear. It would be like having intruders in my house. I would also feel alienated from my character, because whoever uses my character alters the person I created. I believe most authors who have seen their work thus abused find the experience painful.

I also believe that anyone who shoplifts a character really damages himself. That person's growth is stunted. That person is compromising his or her integrity, and endangering his or her reputation. But worst of all, shoplifting a character is really a betrayal of one's self because the person who does it is not trying to be all that he or she can be.