i'm tired of shakespeare

You know, the reason you will never see me arguing about fanfiction as a legitimate creative enterprise is because I can't conceptualize the idea of a hierarchy of creativity. It causes a communication breakdown from the first word; I stare blankly at the counterarguments that might as well be sanskrit for all the sense they make; how do you answer sanskrit? In sanskrit. You see the problem.

As much as I support the Organization of Transformative Works and all that comes with it, I can't quite get past the fact that with this movement comes this: as a fanfic writer I'm being asked, my culture is being asked, to prove why we should have the right to exist.

I resent it on behalf of myself, who luckily won't be asked to personally stand up and represent--I leave that to those who are involved in the OTW, to the scholars and the intellectuals, what I am not and what I will never be. But I resent my culture is being asked to do so; worse, I resent the fact we are being asked to represent fandom as a single culture in itself, asked to homogenize ourselves into something singular instead of plural, and asked, in essence, to explain why we want this.

I read about the transformative process, the history of literature, Homer and Shakespeare and Chaucer; modern reinterpretations of Cinderella and Jane Austen and the Illiad. Here's the thing; they aren't my ancestors, not in what I write.

My genealogy is a long one; my creative ancestors were poor bards and village elders and traders who wandered the world and brought stories back from wherever they went. Shakespeare doesn't legitimize what I write; it is legitimate because I wrote it. I'm following in the footsteps of those who did it as I did; not for money, for compensation, for a king's pleasure or a publisher's profit. I do it because I love to tell the story I heard and I want to share it with others.

Here's the thing:

I've always wanted to be able to create a perfect sentence; a sentence that encapsulates a concept, an idea, that can speak an absolute truth. I think all writers do; we spend a million words searching for it, read for it, hope for it, and sometimes, we're so close we hurt. I'm not even close right now; I don't know how to argue something I've always known.

I respect the arguments made for my hobby: yes, Shakespeare and Chaucer and Homer. I just don't think that they are our only models.

Mostly, I want to not be tempted to read these damn discussions. It's bad enough to read how your hobby is the equivalent of letting the terrorists win; it's worse when you realize that even as a practitioner, you don't have the necessary authority to defend it.

Comments

[ladycat777.livejournal.com]

I resent it on behalf of myself, who luckily won't be asked to personally stand up and represent--I leave that to those who are involved in the OTW, to the scholars and the intellectuals, what I am not and what I will never be. But I resent my culture is being asked to do so; worse, I resent the fact we are being asked to represent fandom as a single culture in itself, asked to homogenize ourselves into something singular instead of plural, and asked, in essence, to explain why we want this.

THIS.

If a bunch of people who scrap book put together an ultimate scrap-booking site, no one will ask them to prove why they love scrap-booking or how it can be 'legitimized'. No one looks oddly at the millions of upon millions of sports sites out there, which is just as much a fandom as what we are. They just utilize it in a different way.

I think, seriously, that a lot of the problems come down to the fact that we aren't in this to make money. We're a choir that gets together and sings and sings and sings and blinks when people ask us, as a whole, why we aren't trying to sing professionally. Some of us want that. Many don't. And no one can seem to understand that both are okay.

I have a hobby. It is a hobby. I'm not killing babies, I'm not actually stealing dollars out of anyone's pocket (that argument is getting so. damned. old), and I'm not forcing anybody to look at what I'm doing.

Why the fuck do we have to prove anything?

[seperis.livejournal.com]

I think, seriously, that a lot of the problems come down to the fact that we aren't in this to make money. We're a choir that gets together and sings and sings and sings and blinks when people ask us, as a whole, why we aren't trying to sing professionally. Some of us want that. Many don't. And no one can seem to understand that both are okay.

I agree with this completely, considering the pressure I get from family to publish something; the unpleasant kind of pressure, the kind that intersects with the idea that being good and being happy can only be achieved with monetary award attached.

I don't know how many times and how many ways we can say this: we do not want money. I want my writing, what I love, and my community, that I enjoy, and my culture, that I help (we all help) to build and maintain. I want to write a fic, read comments, read fic, send comments, mock literary tropes, discuss with my friends.

How is that hard for anyone, anyone at all, to understand?

[maxinemayer.livejournal.com]

I remember when I first started writing fanfiction years ago, before I knew about the internet (I think only Star Trek fans were really on the internet at that point). Everyone (family, friends) seemed to think I was crazy to write stories about characters in a TV series, and not try to write something I could publish "professionally" (i.e., get paid a lot for!). When I found out about fanzines (does anyone here remember fanzines???) and published that way (self-published) and actually earned a few shekels above the printing and mailing costs, folks let up a little bit on the "professionally" song. But it was always hard, and still is, to explain what fanfic means to fans, and what writing fanfic means to me.

Now I'm an old gal and finished explaining myself to anyone. Love, mxm
PS - Except, of course, you all!!!

[ladycat777.livejournal.com]

I don't know how many times and how many ways we can say this: we do not want money. I want my writing, what I love, and my community, that I enjoy, and my culture, that I help (we all help) to build and maintain. I want to write a fic, read comments, read fic, send comments, mock literary tropes, discuss with my friends.

How is that hard for anyone, anyone at all, to understand?

Apparently, you're speaking a foreign language.

What really gets to me is that we are the ultimate consumer. Publishers and media outlets should be lining up and drooling in our general direction. We buy the dvds, the books, we go to the movies, the cons, the rallies. We buy the webspace, the pictures (when we can't get them for free), the magazines.

All we do is pay, of our own usually happy volition, to play in a world we acknowledge someone else created. This should not cause drama. Hell, there should be focus groups by the hundred finding out ways to sell us yet more crap.

But instead we have people who think we're 'stealing', whether it's ideas or actual money or potential money when all of us decide to go pro (thankfully, I convinced my family not to ask me about that anymore, but I know they still think it), and we're treated like lepers.

It doesn't make sense. And it drives me wild -- why the hell should we have to make sense? We exist. We're not quiet. We're not going away. Get the fuck over it and deal.

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

See, that's the thing though. They are! Drooling.

Except that they want us to play by THEIR rules, use their web sites, color inside the lines. That's why FanLib was such a big deal. It was industry collaboration using/creating the fans they wanted.

Did you read sokkpuppett's post (http://sockkpuppett.livejournal.com/472559.html?style=mine) on transformation not just transforming text but thought. I think that's when we get dangerous and what they fear. In a way, the constant specter of slash is not just about the gay and the sex but about this total rewriting of what they consider sacrosant.

So, in a way, the irony is that the more we write like they want, the less we can claim transformative fair use...

[ladycat777.livejournal.com]

They are! Drooling.

See, I don't think they are. I don't think studio executives and the like understand enough to drool. All the know is that there's a potential for money in a group they consistently don't seem to realize exists when it comes to media-that-is-not-Oprah: the woman, of all ages shapes and sizes.

Except that they want us to play by THEIR rules, use their web sites, color inside the lines. That's why FanLib was such a big deal. It was industry collaboration using/creating the fans they wanted.


I think this is more a paltry attempt at them cashing in rather than them shaping lines we have to color inside of. I mean, of course they'd like that -- then it'd be easy and they could go back to making money hand over fist without thinking about it. So there is a clear move in that direction. But while the easy money is a factor, I think the lines are them trying to put up a breakwater before the tsunami hits -- only their breakwaters aren't made of sand, but of ...

Yes, okay, that analogy just vanished out from under me. Sorry.

But basically I don't think they're actually attempting to control things because they want to limit us. It's beacuse they don't understand where the lines are. And that may be a semantic argument, but I think it's one that's incredibly important to make.

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I see what you're saying (and the constant rediscovering of fan cultures kinda supports your point), but I still think it's about control and money flow. And we're unruly in every sense of the word--moreover, we don't even exist in the same value economy. Most don't want money; many don't want external acclaim; and not everyone actually wants the meet and greet with TPTB.

We're like the wrong type of fan for their convergence culture in every sense (i.e., not the right demographic but also not the right attitude)

[ladycat777.livejournal.com]

but I still think it's about control and money flow

Oh, definitely. The end result for them is always how they can set up the easiest system that provides the maximum amount of money.

But I think the problem of the execs not understanding what's going on, and therefore on how to approach it, is one of the biggest problems we have. Their lack of knowledge and insight is creating more problems than it's providing them money. In a perfect world, one of them would wake up and make overtures to the OTW and the fantastic people who run it, trying to learn what the landscape actually is before trying to figure out how to milk it.

But, you know, we write perfect worlds for a reason ;/

[seperis.livejournal.com]

...can I say I love that analogy so much? For serious. That was awesome.

*grins*

I am so friending you for that.

[ladycat777.livejournal.com]

I get friended for the really really bad analogy? That... oddly, makes sense :)

[seperis.livejournal.com]

It was a deeply, deeply awesome analogy.

[stefanie-bean.livejournal.com]

Hi, here from metafandom

Yup, at bottom of all of this, as I see it, is the pressure to publish. It's quite telling, the looks on people's faces when you tell them that you've written two books in the past two years, and have a third in progress, but you're not actively seeking publishing. It's like a big Do Not Compute sign goes on over their heads.

I think it's more than money, though. It's a matter of deliberately not fitting into a socially acceptable role. For some reason, we tend to think writers should be affiliated with a publishing house.

What's really funny is that no one looks down on actors who work their tails off in community theater, simply for the love of it. We know a woman here who's worked with a troupe for almost 40 years, all as an amateur. I don't know why it shoul be acceptable in theater but not writing.

Of course, amateur painters get sneered at as "Sunday painters."

I liked your point about your predecessors being the bards and fireplace storytellers. I do play the Shakespeare card, sometimes, usually when people say that published writers are "better" because their "plots and characters are original."

Interesting post; thanks.