Talk:Original Fiction

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

Profic vs. original fiction

Could we please remove the redirect from profic? There is some overlap but these two terms aren't synonyms. Profic doesn't have to be original fiction (example: tie-ins) and original fiction is only profic when it's professionally published, someone got paid, etc. --Doro 19:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Good point, I thought you were saying that they shouldn't be listed in the synonym section, but I'm all for making profic its own page. Easy enough to do, just click on the 'redirected from' link under the title, or do a search with the "List Redirects" box checked. Or add the parameter redirect=no, like this: http://fanlore.org/w/index.php?title=Profic&redirect=no . Then remove the redirect line, stick in a glossary template and you're good to go. --Msilverstar 19:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Do you want to do it, or should I make a stub? --Msilverstar 06:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Done. :) --Doro 11:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Revising first paragraph

Does anyone have any objections to taking out the first paragraph of this? It's such an incredibly strict definition of original fic that it even says right in it that almost nothing matches that standard (I've never even heard it defined that strictly). It feels like overkill for something meant to help someone trying to find out what it means in a fannish context. --Arduinna 23:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I wrote it that way specifically to contrast with the usual lines of attack against fanfiction, i.e. you're not original because you didn't make up your plot, character, or settings. I wanted to point out that original fiction typically fails that litmus test, too. --zvi 23:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
That sounds like it should move to a "controversy" section. I agree with Arduinna that it looks out of place as the first paragraph of the definition.--Doro 11:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want to reframe it as a controversy in relation to original fiction, I wish you luck. I can't see how it would be done, though, since the controversy is more related to fanfiction. --zvi 14:47, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I actually like the first paragraph, but I think Doro has a point that maybe it could just be moved. I'm going to play with it a bit, you guys see what you think of the change. -- Liviapenn 18:40, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

2010 meta on original fiction

The recent debate over hosting original fiction on AO3 produced some interesting meta and comments about original fic as/vs. fanfic that could be linked here. Also, from what the commenters say, I get the impression that not all original fiction that is fanfictiony is "original slash". And that what media fans might call original fiction might be a part of the fannish experience for anime fans, etc.

"I get the impression that not all original fiction that is fanfictiony is 'original slash'"
Definitely not. I have a list of LJ communities connected with the fan fiction community which accept the posting of original works. Many of them are communities devoted to all types of original fiction: slash, het, and gen. There's no original gen community or original het community in the same way that there's an original slash community, but there are plenty of fan fiction authors who are taking fannish tropes and practices (bingo, for example) and applying them to original works of gen and het. In addition, there are a fair number of original works that combine slash, gen, and het storylines.
So original slash is the largest portion of the fannish original fiction community, large enough to have spawned a community of its own, but fannish original fiction exists beyond original slash.
duskpeterson 14:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)