Hi! This feels a bit pretentious but... I studied English literature (BA & MA) at York St. John and University of Leeds, and Education & Training (PGDip) in Brad
Junior Contributor I
literatureWrite this topic
Fan Fiction: Credible Art Form or 'Kind of Lame'?
Fan fiction seems to be a bit like Marmite: fans of original fiction either love it or hate it.
When I took my ‘first foray’ into the realms of fan fiction, I was surprised to encounter a wider range of sub-genres, tropes and terminology than I had realised…
Sequels and prequels to other authors’ narratives, along with spin-off texts, new characters and ‘non cannon’ rewrites can prove contentious–especially when fans feel that the new text undermines or distorts aspects of the original work.
Yet, for some people, it extends the enjoyment gained from the original text and adds dimensions to the fictional universe in question. It can prove satisfying to read (or write) a character’s backstory or find out what happens next–even if these events and characters were created by someone else and/or not generally considered to be ‘cannon.’
In some cases, prequels, sequels and rewrites by different writers–without the approval or authorisation of the original author-have become published or otherwise firmly established in mainstream culture. Examples include Jean Rhys’s ‘Wide Sargasso Sea’ (a prequel to Charlotte Bronte’s ‘Jane Eyre’), and Andrew Lloyd Webber’s stage adaption (and rewrite) of Gaston Leroux’s ‘Phantom of the Opera’ and a sequel, ‘Love Never Dies.’
In the case of the latter, Lloyd Webber’s narrative is arguably better known than the story it was based on.
Does this mean that, what essentially began as a form of fan fiction has now entered the literary/cultural ‘cannon’? If so, at what point does this happen and how do we decide which ‘fan fictions’ become ‘cannon’?
I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts on the topic of fan fiction, particularly with regards to ‘intertextuality’ and Barthes’ theories on ‘The Death of the Author.’
This is an enjoyable read in itself but, if I had read this article as a slightly ‘Shakespeare phobic’ teenager, it would certainly have helped to pique my interest in plays other than ‘Romeo and Juliet.’
My own favourite is ‘Othello’, which I studied at A level. Vindictive and manipulative characters like Iago are terrifying to meet in reality, but morbidly fascinating in fiction!
This probably goes without saying, but, one of the main barriers to studying and appreciating Shakespeare is the fact that English has evolved and changed so much. Even if you read a narrative summary of the story, it can be difficult to understand exactly what’s happening in the play.
Shakespeare was a remarkable wordsmith and there are lots of nice bawdy jokes in his plays. However, without an interpretor to explain intricacies and historical contexts, this can easily be lost on both readers and audience members (though, of course, dramatised versions will generally be more accessible than scripts without annotation.)
Fortunately, I had great literature teachers who helped us to decode the difficult language and help us to engage with the texts. Also, it didn’t hurt that we were given the opportunity to watch an excellent production of ‘Othello’ with a pretty hot actor playing the titular character!
This is fascinating.
As a mental health services user, I’ve found that many people with mental health problems and conditions tend to poke fun at their own ‘craziness’ as both a coping mechanism and a way of bonding with other people with MH difficulties.
So many of us seemed to share this ‘gallows humour’ about times and circumstances that were sometimes sheer hell to live through.
As a child, I took Queen’s ‘I’m Going Slightly Mad’ song and video at face value and found it hilarious. Later, I read that Freddie Mercury wrote it because his illness is known to cause insanity. While I continue to appreciate the intentional humour of this work, I’m simultaneously struck by the tragedy behind the witty and quirky lyrics and comical video.
When you think about it, the human capacity for ambivalence and feeling apparently contradictory emotions at the same time is pretty weird and wonderful!
This article is very well written and argued; I agreed with pretty much everything you said.
Having been in a monomous long term heterosexual relationship, it’s often assumed that I’m ‘straight.’ However, because I am romantically attracted to both men and women, I identify as ‘bisexual.’
I too noticed that, even when other characters speculated about Piper’s sexual orientation or discussed her sexual identity, it was almost exclusively in terms of ‘gay’ /’lesbian’ or ‘straight. ‘
As you mentioned, Piper does acknowledge her attraction to both ‘hot men’ and ‘hot women.’ Yet, the obvious terminology for this type of orientation (‘bisexuality’) is avoided…
I can’t help but wonder why a show that otherwise gives rich and complex representations of LGBTQ identies, experiences and relationships seems to go to such lengths to avoid actually speaking the “B word.”
Different words/terms carry different meanings and connotations for different people. It could simply be that the writers/producers feel that the actual portrayal of bisexual characters and their experiences supercede the ‘labels’ ascribed to them (” What’s in a name? A rose by any other word would smell as sweet”) Similarly, they may feel that other descriptions and phrases are synonymous with the words ‘bisexual’ and ‘bisexuality.
Alternatively, it could be a more conscious decision to avoid using these terms. Either way, I’d be interested to know.