If I may... That thing that, I agree, can almost always be spotted, is the same thing you spot when comparing copy to an original. There are some subtle differences and, almost invariably, these differences are not to the copy's quality. The one explanation I have is that as long as you are trying to copy something, you are limited in ways to express your thoughts. And if fanfic writers want to do something different, they more often then not start twisting and tweaking the original book, rather then coming up with the idea of their own.
To illustrate this point, there is one book I can think about that is not worse (indeed, some would say - better in literary qualities) then the original, and in that book the writer really made the world and the characters his own. To the extent where he continued to write sequels to his book, which also proved quite good. Can you guess which book I am talking about?
It's more like this: the writer takes the world and the characters, then makes some subtle changes that make the world and characters his own. There are also quite a few original characters and original ideas. The original work is rather an inspiration for the new book, kind of like with poetry. The thing is, the writer who can do all that is not likely to spend time writing a lot of fanfics. S/he would rather write something original.
Oh, and one more thing. In a good original work, there are always something left out of the story. The "лакуны" that the other post is writing about. That's exactly what allows the reader to exersize brain and imagination. Fanfic often leave nothing out, rather, they fill out the blanks. There are not much work for readers' brains there.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zvi and
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 05:37 pm (UTC)That thing that, I agree, can almost always be spotted, is the same thing you spot when comparing copy to an original. There are some subtle differences and, almost invariably, these differences are not to the copy's quality.
The one explanation I have is that as long as you are trying to copy something, you are limited in ways to express your thoughts. And if fanfic writers want to do something different, they more often then not start twisting and tweaking the original book, rather then coming up with the idea of their own.
To illustrate this point, there is one book I can think about that is not worse (indeed, some would say - better in literary qualities) then the original, and in that book the writer really made the world and the characters his own. To the extent where he continued to write sequels to his book, which also proved quite good. Can you guess which book I am talking about?
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:33 pm (UTC)Well, it would seem then that the farther fanfic is from the original, the better it could be. I'm not sure it is so.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:53 pm (UTC)Also, think about "Buratino" :)
No, I would not formulate it this way.
It's more like this: the writer takes the world and the characters, then makes some subtle changes that make the world and characters his own. There are also quite a few original characters and original ideas. The original work is rather an inspiration for the new book, kind of like with poetry.
The thing is, the writer who can do all that is not likely to spend time writing a lot of fanfics. S/he would rather write something original.
Oh, and one more thing. In a good original work, there are always something left out of the story. The "лакуны" that the other post is writing about. That's exactly what allows the reader to exersize brain and imagination.
Fanfic often leave nothing out, rather, they fill out the blanks. There are not much work for readers' brains there.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 07:20 pm (UTC)