Fan Fiction (2005 radio show)

Podcast
Title:	Fan Fiction
Created by:	Christoper Lydon and guests Naomi Novik, Francesca Coppa, Lee Goldberg, and Rebecca Tushnet
Date(s):	June 13, 2005
Focus:
Fandom:
External Links:	Fan Fiction; archive link
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Fan Fiction is a 2005 radio show (podcast) from "Radio Open Source: arts, ideas, and politics with Christopher Lydon."

The topic is fanfiction and the commentators are Christoper Lydon and guests Naomi Novik, Francesca Coppa, Lee Goldberg, and Rebecca Tushnet.

Introduction

Fan Fiction

It is a truth universally acknowledged that good writers borrow, and that great writers steal. But have a look at some of the fan fiction sites where classic literature and modern TV scripts are rewritten every day—and try to describe what’s going on. At Austen.com, for example, where the author of Pride and Prejudice is continuously revised in stories like this, called Something in the Rain: In the wine country of California, Lizzy Bennet and Fitzwilliam Darcy come into conflict as she advocates for workers and he owns a large vineyard. Or this retake of Star Trek, The Original Series: in which Captain Kirk wants to know what it’s like to kiss and cuddle with Spock in Zero Gravity. Fan fiction is bigger than a cottage industry, approaching the breath and depth of a folk culture. On Open Source: The art, the fun, the sexual politics and the law of it all.

Some Topics Discussed

• copyright
• Lee Goldberg
• fan fiction
• authorial intent
• Anne Rice and George Lucas
• Creative Commons

Fan Comments

At the Posting

zanbird]: I caught your show by accident on Seattle's KUOW- as a fan fiction writer for a soap opera I was interested in hearing the 'debate'. I am a 45 yr old female and have been writing fan fic for about 2 yrs now- I have been writing for 2 sets of couples on the soap Guiding Light. I got into it by reading the fan fic of others on fan message boards but it took at least 2 yrs for me to get the nerve to try it myself. I don't pretend to be any great writer- it's just to have fun, be creative, and be a part of a 'fandom' community- and yeah ok I get some ego strokes as well by the responses of my readers. In fact reading the responses on the sites where i post the stories are half the fun of it all. I used to do 'creative writing' as a teen so I am just rediscovering that part of myself again. (Also relearning basic spelling and grammer [sic] that one forgets after many yrs out of school or composing). With my current story I have been learning the "art" of writing "cliffhangers" and some Farce related techinques [sic].

I do agree with the two woman on the show that the main reasons I do fan fic is because I love/indentify [sic] with certain characters. In soaps some characters can get " backburned" in the show so fan fic is a way to keep them 'alive' for the fans. Also soaps tend to go through head writers and producers frequently and characters get axed, changed, or left out of the main storylines. There is also now the "FCC" factor for soaps as love scenes are being fewer and often less graphic than before the Janet Jackson 'unbareing' at the Superbowl. While i don't write X rated material I do write R to NC17 scenes for the characters.

I have read fan fic where it mirrors the tv show version, the same characters placed in different time eras, what happens after they leave the show, and what I call "missing scenes"- scenes that happened off camera or Should have happened. Now yes there is some average to less than average fan fic out there but occasionlly [sic] the 'fan' writer is a Better storyteller than the professional ones. Fan fic writers have no deadlines, networks/producers/actors to please, and often have a better grasp on the characters and their history than the tv writers usually because We Are more Emotionally attached. For me it' just fun, a way to be "a part of a community", and a chance to be creative.

rbarenblat: It would be a shame for the show to devolve into the predictable argument about whether or not fanwriters have the right to engage in what Henry Jenkins has famously called "textual poaching." As a teacher of poetry (and a poet), I adhere to the theory that once a poem is published, its author can't (and shouldn't) control how it's interpreted or read. If it's legitimate for a reader to derive her/his own sense of meaning from a Shakespeare sonnet, independent of what Shakespeare may have intended the sonnet to say, then surely it's legitimate for readers of assorted pop-culture texts -- from fantasy novels in print, to cop dramas on TV -- to do the same. Is writing something (a poem, essay, story, novel, script) in dialogue with something else a valid form of "reading"? To suggest so blurs the line between author and reader, and I think that's one of the interesting questions at the heart of this conversation. Writing new works in response to old ones is as old as storytelling, and strikes me as a legitimate way for people to engage with the stories that move them. Judaism is rife with people taking our core stories in new directions, writing from the viewpoint of minor characters, and seeking to tie up textual loopholes -- we call this kind of exegetical storytelling "midrash." And just as midrash doesn't diminish Torah, I would argue that fanfiction doesn't diminish the works from which it arises, either. I can understand being offended by those who might try to pass their derivative works off as the originals from which they are derived, but as long as responsive, fanwritten, or midrashic work is clearly labeled as such, I don't see it as problematic.

[noteon]:

But I do think novelists and fan fiction writers would both benefit if there could be some kind of simple, consensual arrangement by which fan fiction writers could license characters or other kinds of literary inventions for their non-commercial usage.

There is.

Write and ask permission.

It's really that simple.

The reason fanfic writers don't do it (I assume) isn't that it's complicated--because it's simply not. My assumption is that they don't do it because they already know what the answer will be.

It would work best if it weren’t something a writer could opt out of.

For whom?

Just as background: I've been releasing my original music for free on the Internet since the early days of MP3.com. I post poetry and the occasional bit of short fiction at my blog. I believe in sharing some of what I make with no expectation of payment.

[Amardeep]:

Noteon, I wouldn't say that fan fiction writers are the "true" victims. The way the law now stands, what they're doing when they work with and distribute other people's intellectual property is clearly infringement. And you're right that Creative Commons only solves some problems, some of the time.

But I do think novelists and fan fiction writers would both benefit if there could be some kind of simple, consensual arrangement by which fan fiction writers could license characters or other kinds of literary inventions for their non-commercial usage.

In his book Free Culture, Lessig suggests something along these lines, though his main focus is on audio and televisual media. He argues that the current structure of licensing is so byzantine and complex that it stifles creativity. There should be a simple system by which someone who samples a rap song should be able to pay a low-ish fee to a central licensing authority, who in turn pays the artist. Currently a lot of that work happens in a kind of gray area.

If we adopt this with fan fiction, FF writers should be able to pay a straightforward, one-time fee for the right to distribute material that makes use of a published writer's intellectual property.

It would work best if it weren't something a writer could opt out of. In the short run, some writers might be unhappy about losing control of their inventions (though arguably, this happens anyways when they publish their works). But there would be less complaint if/when the checks were to start coming in.

Just an idea...

[Noteon]: No misrepresentation, please. I'm opposed to distribution, not writing. And I'm opposed to borrowing without permission.

I'm also opposed, as a human being, not a novelist, to the sense of entitlement that allows fanfic writer/distributors to sincerely believe they're the injured parties when a copyright holder objects to unauthorized usage.

The Creative Commons is a great idea, as long as it's possible to opt out. Works by people who choose not to participate in it should be left alone.

For me, the real point is the one under the usual debates about rights and usages; these things only become the focus of argument because they're the most tangible and easily batted around. But didn't any of these people learn that it's not nice to use other people's things without asking first?

And if the answer is no, does anyone really think the right thing to do is go ahead and use it anyway?

Successful characters are the result of somebody's hard work. They're inventions; the result of conscious effort and considerable trial, error, and experience. They're not natural resources, just floating free in the air. Using them without permission shows their creators great disrespect.

[Chris Williams]: I'd like to address the constitutional question: In the US, Congress has the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." So, does fan fiction promote the progress of "useful Arts," or impede it? That to me is a more important question than who owns it. (Fun tangential questions: Does Star Trek qualify as a useful art? Or does Star Trek itself inhibit the progress of *science* by promoting psuedo-science?) I'd love to hear Larry Lessig and noteon debate this on the air! noteon emphasizes the "exclusive rights" part of the equation, while Lessig has focused on the "promoting progress" side. I'm on Lessig's side, to be sure-- I disagree that it's as simple as writing and asking permission, for example. What happens when the creator is dead? Who grants permission then? Lessig fought that battle in Eldred and lost at the Supreme Court. And what happens to the notion that the creator gets to decide, when a musician signs a recording contract with a label? Fiona Apple finished a new album over two years ago, but Sony Music has refused to release it. Does Fiona own it, or does Sony? There's a bootleg on the internet and I've listened to it and it's great. Who did I harm by downloading it? Fiona, or Sony? Or nobody?

[dijaquay]: I'd love to hear the angle about "are we allowed to do this?" explored more. Seems like George Lucas has a reputation for being hard on the fanfic community, and the idea about needing permission to create in one of these worlds (the opening question of "does he own it, or do we?") is only going to get more important. (And is something I'm keen to hear explored in more depth.)

[noteon]:

There's also a huge amount of friction between fanfic writers and the people who actually create--and, in many cases, own--the characters and situations they appropriate. The Internet has done more than allow these people to come together; it's also allowed them to distribute derivative works of original fiction without regard for the wishes of the copyright holders.

The STAR TREK creators understand that pursuing legal action against STAR TREK fanfic writers would be detrimental to business.

One place where fanfic regularly comes up is Lee Goldberg's blog: leegoldberg.typepad.com.

[...]

If you haven't already, you might also look into Anne Rice's history with fanfic.

As a novelist, I personally don't have a problem with the writing of fanfic--or, at least, not an ethical problem, though I don't think it deserves much respect as a creative endeavor, since the major building blocks were already created by somebody else from scratch--but its distribution is another thing entirely, a distinction that's often lost in the heat of argument.

To me, the web distribution of fanfic is a fundamental affront to the concept of intellectual property, since the ability to deny usage is, in essence, the definition of intellectual property ownership. The "who does it hurt" argument is beside the point--which is that somebody else made it, so the decision to allow or deny usage should be theirs. It's romantic to think of fanfic as folk writing--which, indeed, it is--but very silly and self-serving to cut the person who actually created the original out of the decision-making process. Internet fanfic does for fiction what MP3 files did for music: allow consumers to screw the artist directly, without a middleman.

[Jae]: I'm Jae, aka The First Caller aka "What about Harry Potter Paedophilia fanfic?" I am dumbstruck at the back-pedaling and causustry [sic] of Novik et al..... more side steps than an Arthur Murray dance studio there....

I'm not sure you know exactly who you hosted when you hosted Naomi Novik. Perhaps you wonder at why she would not read any of the fanfiction she's written.

[...]

... [she] thought that Peter having sex with Jesus in heaven was a perfect example of a fanfic for exploring all the unexplored places in Narnia that we're certain CS Llewis [sic] wanted explored. Thats [sic] what she told "The Fandom Jammers" in any respect.

Elsewhere

A few years ago there was a radio program (Open Source, or something like that?) that did a whole show on fanfiction. They talked to him, as well a Francesca (I think) and Naomi Novik (before her first pro novel was published). The debate between the three was entertaining, making him seem like a total dick, and the host of the show seemed to come down firmly on the side of fanfiction.