elisi | Fanfic essay.

Entry tags:

essay

Fanfic essay.

This is an essay about fanfic definitions (or something), and came about because of this discussion with

stormwreath. Meta began eating my head, so I figured I might as well just get it down and over with. This stuff has probably been said a million times by people more eloquent than I, but there you go. These are my thoughts. (Kinda short and written down in a morning, but I think I manage to put my main points across.)

Basically I think there are two types of fanfic: story-based and character-based. Not sure these are good names, but let me explain what I mean:

1. Story-based:
This kind can be divided into two subcategories: ‘What happens next?’ and ‘Fill-in-the-blank’. What they have in common is that they do the same job as the show, and the authors essentially try to do the same thing as a show-writer does: Continue or add to the existing story (canon).

Fit-B: On a show there will (if necessary) be flashbacks, and a lot of FitBs fit into this bracket (f.ex. how many ‘William & Angelus meet for the first time’ stories must there have been written before ‘Destiny’ told us what happened?). But fic writers will also take throwaway lines (“I ate a decorator once,”) or scenes we never saw (Buffy telling the Scoobies that Spike had a soul), or things that were never properly explained (why do vampires show up on film?) and try to find suitable explanations. For this to work it is of course of utmost importance that everyone is in character and that the story is plausible.

‘What happens next?’: This kind of fic tries to continue the story we saw on screen. F.ex. post-’The Gift’ there must have been a ridiculous number of fics, trying to work out a way of bringing Buffy back to life. Ditto with Spike post-Chosen. Of course if the show is still on air, the fic will be Jossed sooner or later. But if the show is finished, then this is the main way of still living in the ‘verse we loved. Who lived, who died in the alley? Did Buffy and Spike meet post-NFA? What happened to Illyria? Fics of this type adhere strictly to canon, and try to see where the characters could have gone in the future, given their past and their situation. Keeping them in character is the point.

2. Character based:
This type of fic springs from that eternal question: ‘What if?’ And although I have named this category ‘character-based’, this sort is much more likely to go down the OOC route. Because once you choose the AU path, anything can happen (which, btw, isn’t a *bad* thing!). These kinds of fics branch off from canon at any point (or can be completely AU, such as turning everyone into pop stars), and the possibilities are literally endless. What if Angel had turned Spike? What if Buffy had fallen for Xander? What if Angelus hadn’t been re-souled in ‘Becoming’? What if Jonathan was part-demon? What if Jenny hadn’t been killed? Etc. It is possible to roughly divide this type into two parts: Character-centric ones, where the interest comes from throwing a character (or characters) into a completely different situation and seeing what happens, and story-centric ones where the character(s) is (are) used to tell a different story to the one on the show. (Does that make sense? I hope so, because I don’t have time to delve into it.)

Now post-show fic can of course fall into this category also, but the distinctions become a bit blurry, because obviously category 1 also depends on the ‘What if?’ to have a story at all. I think however that there is still a distinction to be made: post-show stories that ret-con part of canon for the sake of their own story would fall into category 2. It is the difference between taking what’s there and working with it, or taking what’s wanted and discarding (or changing) what’s not.

(And - going back to what started this in the first place - this is why I think AtF fits category 1 and ‘season 8’ category 2.)

Please discuss, but I might not join in, OK? Am horribly busy and shouldn't be here!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Am afraid I feel too stupid and full of cold to join in what will probably be a very interesting discussion.

However, going by your definitions, which seem very fair, I'd agree with you about which catergories to two comics series fall into.

Am afraid I feel too stupid and full of cold to join in what will probably be a very interesting discussion.
Hope you feel better soon! (And just writing this down almost gave me a headache - I like meta, but this stuff is on the heavy side.)

However, going by your definitions, which seem very fair, I'd agree with you about which categories to two comics series fall into.
Thank you - I was worrying that I'd not managed to be very clear. Also I've tried very carefully not to say that one is 'better' than the other. I just know which I prefer. *g* ETA: When it comes to 'official continuations' that is.

Edited 2008-01-31 14:29 (UTC)

Hmmm. It sounds to me, actually, as if your main distinction is between stories which are consistent with canon and stories which aren't. Category 1 is stories which attempt to conform to canon (the most extreme type being Missing Scenes) and Category 2 is stories which deliberately flout some or all aspects of canon.

It sounds to me, actually, as if your main distinction is between stories which are consistent with canon and stories which aren't.
And yet again someone has turned all my thoughts into one sentence! *g* But yes, I think that's the main point - what with this all stemming from a conversation about whether s8 is or isn't like fanfic. And now I'm getting a headache again. If I'd bothered to go into the whole comic side of it, then there is the question of whether an 'official' continuation ought to adhere to former canon - f.ex. I believe that the second Highlander retconned tons of stuff from the first one.

It's exactly like fanfic. Bad fanfic that goes so far as to refute the show, written by polarized fanboys, but I digress. *stone-face*

This is the best theory I've seen so far.

That's exactly my opinion, that they're based on rather than a continuation. Which is basically what fanfic is. As I mentioned in an IM once, I think, the liner notes I think say the story is 'based on' which lends to that and goes along with what shipperx said about the movie and the series. The only canon is the series in my view.

Even if I'd have liked them and I got exactly what I wanted, I wouldn't be able to see them as canon because, well, to me, BTVS was so much more than Joss Whedon.

As I mentioned in an IM once, I think, the liner notes I think say the story is 'based on' which lends to that and goes along with what shipperx said about the movie and the series.
Yes, I remember that! Good point.

Even if I'd have liked them and I got exactly what I wanted, I wouldn't be able to see them as canon because, well, to me, BTVS was so much more than Joss Whedon.
That is my view exactly. And I can even prove that this is true, because I really, really like 'After the Fall', but it isn't canon. Even though I'll probably end up writing fic based on it, and certain developments fill me with great joy. But it's not the show.

Hmm. I'm not sure I see any difference between what you're calling "What happens next" and AUs that branch off from a particular point in canon. Both of them are canon-based explorations of a different path the story could have taken. It's just that with post NFA, we didn't know until recently (and some would say we still don't) know what 'really' would have happened next.

I agree that there's a difference between that type of story and the kind where elements of canon that the writer finds inconvenient are swapped out without explanation. I'm not absolutely positive that that is what Joss is doing, though, since it's possible he's worked out a backstory which explains everything.

If we never get to see it, of course, I'm not sure it matters.

Hmm. I'm not sure I see any difference between what you're calling "What happens next" and AUs that branch off from a particular point in canon.
I think the difference is that in an AU you're deliberately writing something different from what we've seen. Um, let me think. It's the difference between speculating ahead, and re-writing/changing something.

It's just that with post NFA, we didn't know until recently (and some would say we still don't) know what 'really' would have happened next.
I'm firmly in the 'we still don't know' camp! (I think it's a brilliant story, and I will probably write AtF fic at some point, but it isn't canon.)

I'm not absolutely positive that that is what Joss is doing, though, since it's possible he's worked out a backstory which explains everything.
That's quite possible. But considering his 'I forgot Warren appeared as The First' blunder, I'm not all that confident... or rather, he's probably got a master plan, but he's happily ret-conning away to make it work.

At this point I'm sure that he has a backstory worked out AND that he's planning on letting us know what it is in a sequence of 'reveals'. He's a big fan of Battlestar Galactica, and he seems to have adopted their narrative structure for their big leap forward. I wasn't sure if I liked it at first. But I'm now firmly sold. It wouldn't be right to take up space in Elisi's journal to talk about all the ways the recent revelations have made sense of oddnesses that went before AND added depth to the story that we already saw on the series, but suffice it to say that of a sudden I'm finding that there's a lot to think about with the comics, and that's worth a lot to me.

Oh I'm sure he has a plan. I actually really like

shipperx's 're-imagining' theory. That could really make it work me!

I definitely agree with the idea of equating a 'what-if' story with something character based. If you go off on an AU tangent and can't keep the characters true than it goes back to the old argument that you might as well just be writing original fic. That is not to say you can't make changes in the characters, obviously you need to have them change to conform to their situations, but if you are going to call them Buffy, or Spike or Angel or whatever, they need to have basic traits that fans will recognize from the characters.

Of course the opposite it true as well. If you are going AU by changing the facts of canon then you had best reflect that in the characters. To take an example from my own fic, rather than alluding to anyone else's, one of the big questions I've had to wrestle with in a world where Angel became a father long before he met Buffy, is would Angel the Father really fall for someone only a few years older than his own son. Because BtVS Angel and Angel as a father are two drastically different people, so you can't just plug characters into the same situations and assume they will act the same.

And I've hijacked your journal, sorry, you just got me thinking when I have too much time on my hands. And now, off to the library.

Lots of good thoughts (people are *always* welcome to hijack my journal, except for flames & stuff), and I don't really have anything to add, except that I was nodding a lot.

Because BtVS Angel and Angel as a father are two drastically different people, so you can't just plug characters into the same situations and assume they will act the same.
Exactly - and that's why fanfic can be so mesmerising when going down the AU route. Change just one detail and the whole world tilts! :)

I see the distinction you're making, though I'm not sure of the terminology you've used. A fill-in-the-blank can be character based, after all: there were those two drabbles I once wrote about Willow and her pencil sharpener, one set in season 4 and one in season 6 - they had almost no plot to speak of, but were entirely about her character. Maybe "extending canon" and "extrapolating from canon" would work as descriptions?

Imagine a row of terrace houses, and the one in the middle has fallen down. Extending canon would mean restoring that house as an exact copy of its neighbours. Extrapolating from canon would mean using the existing foundations to build a brand new house with a modern design, but using materials and architectural details that allowed it to blend with and complement its neighbours. (And an AU crack!fic would be building a plate glass and concrete towerblock in its place...)

However, the 'extrapolating from canon' stories still need that canon as a base. They might change one specific element for the sake of the story ("What if Spike fell in love with Dawn instead of Buffy?"), but that makes it even more important to maintain the rest of their continuity - otherwise they're just original fiction with characters who share names with the more familiar people from the original story.

I see the distinction you're making, though I'm not sure of the terminology you've used.
Well it was written down inbetween lots of other stuff, so I made up things on the fly. Changing terminology is more than fine!

A fill-in-the-blank can be character based, after all: there were those two drabbles I once wrote about Willow and her pencil sharpener, one set in season 4 and one in season 6 - they had almost no plot to speak of, but were entirely about her character.
Well exactly. What I mean with 'story-based' was really more 'canon-based', that is, fitting in with the story we have on screen. And therefore it is very important to keep everyone in character.

However, the 'extrapolating from canon' stories still need that canon as a base. They might change one specific element for the sake of the story ("What if Spike fell in love with Dawn instead of Buffy?"), but that makes it even more important to maintain the rest of their continuity
That is true. But the more you change, the further you move away from what you once had (butterfly effect and all that). I like the 're-imagining' theory best of all. That really works for me, I think.

Making a flash appearance, just to suggest a third category, fanfiction that explores themes which interested you in the verse. I guess that sort of story could be considered as the most proximate to an original fiction, but at the same time it needs to draw deeply from the show.

a third category, fanfiction that explores themes which interested you in the verse.
Ooooh, interesting. Will have to ponder that one!

I think fanfic covers a fairy continuous spectrum, with the only common factor being that it is in some way inspired by the original canon. So although a sample of fics might be fit-able into particular categories such as the ones you suggest, another sample might easily fit across exactly those apparent boundary lines.

So for example, I started writing my stories as 'fill in the gaps' types, but they have now drifted off and become a AU of their own, becoming ever more divergent from their canon roots. Especially since they have coincidentally been Jossed and thus can't be considered as filling in the gaps any more. I think a lot of writers do that.

On the other hand, marking out categories from a spectrum is always a useful exercise and the first stage to any sensible study so, er, don't let me put you off. :o)

Not really a study, just some stray thoughts... but it did help me to work out where the comics fit in. :)

another sample might easily fit across exactly those apparent boundary lines.
Oh absolutely. This is one reason why I very carefully didn't actually use any specific fic examples. *g* Although, it is worth pointing out that the whole thing came out of an argument about the comic books, and whether or not they're 'like fanfic'. Which led me to ponder the different types of fic - because anything written is of course fic of some sort or other.

I think a lot of writers do that.
*nods*

Hmm. Are your categories supposed to be assigned by readers or writers? Because basically I agree with azdak’s simplification that you’re talking about canon-compliant versus canon-flouting stories but which is which surely depends a great deal on what the reader or writer believes canon to be or say. There are fics like herself’s current one that many seem to think continue the show in exactly the way it should have been continued had Joss/Marti only come to their senses but that to me read like no Buffy and no Spike I ever saw or would have wanted to. And even if people agree on canonical content, no story gives every little facet of its source text equal weight, there’s always some selectivity about what’s deemed important, what matters and what doesn’t.

Taking it back to the comics I’m really enjoying the characterisation of Buffy and Faith in S8, particularly the sense that they’re not simple recapitulations, but are about revealing new aspects to both women. And yet you and others are adamant that both are complete re-imaginings. Actually I rather like the re-imagining concept although unlike shipperx I would have said Aliens was more a re-imaging of Alien than a continuation. Literally it has to have been because hey, different director. I think you could make a strong case that every season of Buffy was a re-imagining of what had gone before, the seasons are so distinct thematically, while still being connected in some overall narrative sense, like that fable about the blind men and the elephant. Maybe some blind men find it exciting to discover the tail while others cling to the trunk as if to the one true pachyderm.

Because basically I agree with azdak’s simplification that you’re talking about canon-compliant versus canon-flouting stories but which is which surely depends a great deal on what the reader or writer believes canon to be or say.
I think I should probably just have called them 'canon based' and 'AU'. :) And I quite deliberately didn't mention individual perceptions, because that's where everything turns all grey and fuzzy and any categories blend according to who's looking at them. (Agreeing v. much re. the fic you mention by the way. The central premise is totally unfathomable to me. She's a skilled writer however, which makes me sad that I can't read her stuff...)

And yet you and others are adamant that both are complete re-imaginings.
Actually, it's only just Buffy that I have a major problem with. Faith is a bit off, yes, but then I can see *why* she's being portrayed the way she is - and when I take into consideration that BKV has never written in the 'verse before, I am mostly OK with her. Buffy however has become a stranger, but going with the re-imagining idea I think I'll be able to enjoy the story a lot more. (I also have a few reservations re. Angel's characterisation in ATF btw. Nothing major, but I hope it gets sorted out!)

Aliens was more a re-imaging of Alien than a continuation. Literally it has to have been because hey, different director.
Can't really comment on that because I haven't seen Aliens, but that is a good way of looking at it.

that fable about the blind men and the elephant. Maybe some blind men find it exciting to discover the tail while others cling to the trunk as if to the one true pachyderm.
In which case I've enjoyed discovering more and more of the elephant over the course of 7 seasons, only now Joss stuck antlers on it! ;) Oh - or maybe he just decided that he liked mammoths more? They're kinda similar after all...

(PS sorry about replying so late. The weekend was v. busy!)

Here from

metafandom ...

I'm also possibly an ignoramus here, since I've never seen the shows you're talking about, but I will offer my opinions as a writer. :)

I totally agree with your assessment of plot-based stories, but the character-based feel a bit ... off. You said, of the two types, of character-based stories, "Character-centric ones, where the interest comes from throwing a character (or characters) into a completely different situation and seeing what happens, and story-centric ones where the character(s) is (are) used to tell a different story to the one on the show." I completely agree with the first part; actually, this is how I've defined my own character-based stories in the past. Because they don't necessarily hinge on a single event in my canon, then it is hard to explain to potential readers what the story will be about, so I often explain it as tossing a whole bunch of people in a room together during a certain canonical time period and letting them decide what happens next. Hence, the events evolve directly from the personalities, temperaments, and so on of the characters. For example, in a ridiculously long character-driven novel that I wrote, one of my young male characters is fiercely jealous and needy for his brother's and father's affections. Hence, when I introduce a same-aged cousin who begins to compete for both, the conflict evolves naturally from these characters' traits. Put together two other characters and a different plot would emerge. These stories often feel inevitable to me, the way that I will know that to spend an evening with two friends who don't particularly get along will inevitably result in an argument.

But the second half doesn't seem that it would necessarily have to be character-driven. I agree with the commenter who remarked that to keep an AU hinged to the canon, one must be extra careful to stay in-character. In that regard, it makes sense to me, but staying in-character and being character-based or -driven are necessarily synonymous, I don't think. One could still end up with a very plot-driven story using cookie-cutter characters given by the canon. I'm hampered by our different fandoms to come up with a compelling example, but I'll try. :) Say I have a character whose primary trait is his pride. Even people with cursory knowledge of canon understand him to be prideful to a fault, so writing a story where he is prideful doesn't necessarily say anything new about his character, and the plot isn't necessarily driven on the basis of this trait. However, it is in-character and true to canon. But the story itself remains very plot-based, and I could feasibly toss another canon character into his place, stay true to the new character, and have the same story, with minor changes to accommodate canon, of course.

I hope that this makes sense. :)

Personally, I think that the best stories do something of both: The author is informed enough about his/her characters that the story treats those characters in a thoughtful--but true-to-canon--manner, the plot believably derives in part from the characters' traits and interactions, and yet the plot is compelling, the story moves, and the author doesn't get embroiled in too much navel-gazing. Easier said than done, I know. :)

Thanks for an interesting discussion!

Here from metafandom ...
I got linked on metafandom??? *hides under desk* (Seriously, it had to be the essay I knocked up in a morning, rather than any of those that I agonised over forever...)

Anyway, thank you so very much for your very long and indepth comment - and also sorry that I've not replied until now. Usually I'm very good, but RL has been eating me recently.

but the character-based feel a bit ... off
You know, I think I misnamed the groups (as others have pointed out). I should have gone with 'canon compliant' and 'not canon compliant' - or maybe had three categories. Because you're absolutely right in your examples. (And this is why I should never post something without thinking it through!)

Personally, I think that the best stories do something of both
Exactly. Although sadly not easy, as you say...

Thank you again lots and lots for your thoughts - I love trying to look at the nuts and bolts of writing (I wrote another essay a few years back about what genres inspire fanfiction, and why), so your comment gave me lots of food for thought.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Fanfic essay.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject