Originality is valued in every art form; setting yourself apart with new original ideas or forms. Is imitative writing or fan fiction discredited from greatness? Does innovation and creation take precedence over quality? What is more important to qualify a writer and classify their work as literature?
Interesting topic! It could be extended to drawing and filmmaking, or any other art actually. Students that copy their masters to learn and find their own way, but then how can they detach themselves from their style? It's an important question
– Rachel Elfassy Bitoun10 years ago
I believe that fan fiction takes an authors writing someplace that the author themselves cannot go. And adds a deeper breadth of insight regarding the characters in a story. – terry602010 years ago
If I find the time between other articles, I might just take this up. In my opinion, fan fiction is a valuable tool to get started. Imitation is not bad inherently as long as it's done right. These days, originality is hard to come by simply because most people see originality as 'new' and strictly 'new.' This is wrong. Originality is 'new form.' A new way of doing something that has been done before. In that sense, imitation is the starting point and at the end leads to innovation and originality. That's y two cents. – SpectreWriter10 years ago
I think it's C.S.Lewis or Tolkien who writes about designing a new leaf in relation to originality in stories. What are genres and why do we have favourite ones? They are all kind of the same, but also a little different. When does something become "just a rip off of that which came before it" "are there only seven or so basic different stories to be told"? It seems to me innovation is taking precedence over quality in today's culture because people are willing to publish smut because it's new (mostly because no one was willing to publish smut before).
When it comes to fanfiction there's also a quality barrier that could be explored, who is appreciating and expanding on the universe in a unique individual way and who is just being a lazy writer using another person's already developed characters to tell a simple meaningless story? – Slaidey10 years ago
This is an extremely interesting topic given the fact that one of the creative writing techniques taught in high schools today deals with imitating the craft of legendary authors. I think it is extremely hard to be innovative when people, especially writers who are most likely readers as well, are constantly in contact with others and interacting with the craft of other writers and readers. I think that most of the time, depending on the situation and writing style, innovation and creation do not take precedence over quality. On the other hand, having a unique voice as a writer is important to establishing and classifying their work as art or literature. – Morgan Muller10 years ago
This could chime in well with a consideration of how attitudes to writing & originality have changed over time. Centuries back it was much more accepted to lift themes and stories from others' work, Shakespeare did it a hell of a lot, for example. Copyright laws especially have made originality at the forefront of importance in comparison to copying/being inspired by dominant stories, themes, characters, and styles. Could also have something to do with the emphasis on individuality in Western cultures. – Camille Brouard10 years ago
I have learned that there are differences between writing in print and writing for the screen, and that the way we read isn't the same. Is this true, and to what extent? Is this something that will eventually disappear as time goes on, and generations become more and more naturalized to technology?
Another important thing to discuss for this topic would be the value of each method. Is digital more valuable simply because of the technology movement? Or will print always have its own place?
As someone who still writes down all of their notes and to do lists on paper, keeping a paper calendar organizer instead of using a digital one on my phone, I see print as holding a place for quite some time to come.
Afterall, I see the increase in technology eventually translating over to fewer and fewer jobs available to humans, and print is falling to the wayside the same way we are. Saving print might mean saving ourselves.
What do you think? Take this topic in any direction you want.
The way I see it, a similar dilemma to bread making or buy it from the store ready made. Writing with paper and pencil is the all encompassing process of recording ideas for others to decipher. Composing for digital media is basically the entire publishing process compressed for the individual, in a more rapid and efficient manner; but, with many more bells and whistles. – L:Freire7 years ago
It used to be there was "Fantasy" (swords and magic) and "Science Fiction" (ray guns and technobabble explanations). Now there's urban fantasy, dystopia, a much stronger Young Adult market, and a dozen other variations and distinctions at use in the publishing world. A look at what genre classifications are currently in use would be interesting, and possibly a discussion of the extent to which those classifications are helpful in today's marketplace. (Perhaps we should all be learning to think in terms of "keywords" or "tags" rather than genres.)
I for one have wondered where the blurry line is drawn between children's literature like Harry Potter and young adult novels like Mortal Instruments even though the two are alike. – SpectreWriter10 years ago
The Harry Potter series is Young Adult after the first 2 books. What made you think they were children's? The content and thematic material is too mature for children's, not to mention the series is about teenagers, and the film series is mostly rated PG-13. I'd actually say Harry Potter is far more mature and adult than The Mortal Instruments series. – declankc9810 years ago
You managed to get over that writer's block and write. But now comes the hard part – editing. Not everyone likes to do it, but it has to be done. Explain the important things to look for when it comes to editing, or give advice on how to make editing easier.
Perhaps look at editing techniques. Rereading as a reader and not a writer, as if you don't know what happens and see how well you understand your own piece, look for the common misspellings and punctuation, an error in development, inconsistencies, perhaps taking note of everything you build up for and state as fact in your piece just in case you do an inconsistency later. – SpectreWriter10 years ago
Editing is crucial to the writing process. Young writers starting out are especially uncomfortable with editing, but it is a crucial skill that must be developed in order to become successful. Perhaps stress this, and then as mentioned above, provide tips on editing techniques. The editing process at newspapers and other publications is extremely thorough and usually runs on a schedule: hard due dates, one day set aside for flats, another for first draft, another for peer editing, and then blocking. Peer review is extremely beneficial if done at a later time in the writing process. Editing on a "flat", or printed copy, is also a good tip. It's easier to find mistakes on a printed piece that don't show up as well digitally. – Emilie Medland-Marchen10 years ago
Definitely! From self-editing to peer editing to critiques! Perhaps you'd like to look at the difference kinds of editing in the story telling business - TV, film, animation, literature, playwriting. Dramaturgy is a vital aspect of new script writing, and passionate dramaturges are a rare find! A good playwright and dramaturge pairing listen to each other, understand their needs. To find a good editor/dramaturge, I've learned, the writer needs to know how they work and what they need from an outside force to succeed. – yase10 years ago
I think what scares most people about editing is simply how many rules there are. There is such a heavy emphasis on "correctness," and no matter how much you edit it seems impossible to get it perfect. It is definitely much easier to edit other's work than it is one's own.
I'd love to see the writer here explore the differences, or psychological reasons for, editing one's own work versus editing another's. There's some great research already being done on the topic, but I'd love to see it given that Artifice take. – G Anderson Lake10 years ago
I think so much of the writing process is editing. Starting to write is one of the hardest parts, and for me, it involves a lot of free writing just to get the thoughts out on paper. Afterwards, it's looking for grammatical errors, fixing sentence structure, rephrasing different parts to make the words flow more fluidly. Editing is necessary because it's refining those initial thoughts and ideas, and coming back to your writing gives you a chance to read your work over with a new perspective. – Kim10 years ago
I enjoy editing someone else's work but not my own. It makes me very anxious. It's simply not pleasant, and I know it shouldn't be this way. I should enjoy editing my work as much as I enjoy writing it. What helps me a little is having a physical copy of my work in front of me. It reads differently in print, and very often you are able to identify your mistakes more easily. I wonder how the process of editing used to be in, let's say, the 18th and 19th century. I have this pre-conceived idea that writers of that time did not need to edit their work very much. Anyone know if there has been research done on this? I think it would be interesting to compare the editing techniques of that time with the ones today. – Desexualize the Banana10 years ago
Once the work is published, who controls the world the author built? For example, if the author publishes a work and readers interpret something a certain way and the author offers up another interpretation, whose do we go by? Where is the line rawn? Do readers inherit the work upon paying to read it? Or do authors maintain a certain degree of control even afterwards?
To whomever decides to write on this: keep in mind this piece I wrote a while back on the impact that fan interpretations and theories should have on a work: https://the-artifice.com/relevance-of-fan-theories/ – Matthew Sims10 years ago
It's a difficult topic to address. Some offer that once a work is finished and released upon the world - in this case a published work of literature - that nobody controls it. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this passing of ownership is simply that the work, for all intents and purposes, has become unchangeable. (At least, theoretically.) Also I think it's fair to say that much of this comes down to how an individual is looking to interpret the work. I think for the most part a work of fiction, (where these lines are blurred perhaps the most frequently,) once published, stands on its own. Certainly, the author of the published work will have the most insight into the interpretation of the work, insofar as it relates to their individual involvement and creation. But as an outside reader, one is able to interpret the work any way they choose, thus negating any input from the author. A good example is as simple as asking whether or not the reader is aware of the author's intent. If you've never heard the author's input, does that automatically negate your own interpretations? I would argue not. – Chris L10 years ago
This topic is in danger of going to the depths of reader's theory and the author function. I would suggest reading Barthes and Foucault... – Jill10 years ago
Are comic relief characters best reserved for serious storylines where humor is a rare breed? Or are they also welcome in light-hearted storylines? What are the pros and cons of each when a comic relief character is involved in either? What are some of the best ways to write a comic relief character?
Writing a series? What to do? Go for a single story where each book can be read as a stand-alone or an over-arching storyline where it's best to read one and then the other? Some books like Harry Potter go for the overarching storyline yet some, especially in Anime like Kino's Journey, go for the single-story narrative. What's best? What's more popular?
A lot of people look down on Fan Fiction, especially those who do not understand completely what it is about. Some authors refuse to allow fan fictions of their stories to be published online, George R.R. Martin called it a bad practice. But is it? Is it bad practice? Or does is in fact strengthen hopeful writers and help build a base? And what does Fan Fiction do to the fandom? Does it strengthen the fandom or weaken it?
I will have to give my personal experience here to make a case. I started fiction writing with the fan fiction, and I see several benefits. First of all, you don't have to worry too much about world building and work on your styles; the world is already there, and you should have good understanding of it. You are likely to be more motivated since the subject is of your liking, which is a big plus. When I was writing fan fiction for Castlevania, I was only happy to write about the world I liked. Many of my chapters were never read, but I did not care because I was loving every second of it. If the new writer is unsure of how to make the world, fan fiction can be a good practice. Of course, there are several pitfalls with fan fictions. The most dangerous of all is that if you stay with fan fiction for too long, you will have hard time developing your own world. In addition to this, overuse of Mary Sue can create conflict within the fan community, and can lead to disastrous consequence. If certain "interpretation" gains popularity, the writer may become arrogant and stops improving him/herself. So my opinion is that fan fiction is a great way to start writing, but eventually you have to get out from it to be original writer. – idleric10 years ago
For those interested, please take note of the thesis posited within an article I wrote about, especially the final sub-heading: https://the-artifice.com/when-a-story-should-end/ – Matthew Sims10 years ago
