Gather 'Round the Fire: On the Value of Fanfiction

[the_arc5]

Title: Gather 'Round the Fire: On the Value of Fanfiction
Author: the_arc5
Genre: Meta/essay

Comments

[dreamflower02]

Good, great, rant! And thank you for linking, dear. Here's a few more I've found you might like!

http://facetofcathy.dreamwidth.org/143380.html?format=light

http://dwg.livejournal.com/1106860.html?format=light

http://ithiliana.livejournal.com/802676.html

You know, I think the thing that irritates me the most is the money thing. I am so very, very tired of the idea that the only worthwhile reason anyone would put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) would be to MAKE MONEY! *sigh*

Because what Ms. Gabaldon's rant boiled down to (and it goes for many another author who has forbidden fanfic of her work) is "Nanny-nanny-boo-boo! I make money from my writing and you don't! That makes me BETTER than you!" Uh, like having a more expensive house or a fancier car or Clothes With Names make someone better than someone else.

But I seem to be out of touch, because apparently that's how a whole lot of people think.

*sigh*

[the_arc5]

Clearly. Because money is the only thing worth anything. Relationships? Who needs 'em? Heightened literacy? How ridiculous. The creation of useful and helpful social spaces? Darn hippies. If something's worth doing, it means you're getting paid for it. Which is why everyone should stop volunteering, all teachers should quit their jobs (because they may get paid, but not ENOUGH), and pastors, Sunday School teachers, volunteer fire fighters, library aides, suicide hotline operators, social work assistants, childcare volunteers, soup kitchen workers, and nice people who feed hungry college students should just give up now. Because THERE'S NO MONEY IN IT.

It's ridiculous. I have more hope in humanity than that. It's like telling me to stop cooking because I'm not a professional chef, or to stop singing because I don't have a record contract, or for little kids to stop drawing because nobody's buying their art. Sheesh, woman, get a life.

Ahem. Rant #2. My point was that I agree with you, and thanks for the shiny links.

[anivad]

<3

- a darn hippie

[the_arc5]

<3

-fellow darn hippie

[dreamflower02]

LOL!

Reminded me of an analogy that I thought of including in my little post, but then didn't, because it really wasn't necessary:

Imagine, a World Famous Chef writes a best-selling cookbook! Then he says: "You are welcome to make any of those dishes to feed yourself or your immediate family. But do not make them for a party or large gathering and do not ever share them with anyone else because that is stealing from ME. You should be more original and think up your OWN recipes for that!"

BTW, just came by to check this post, because apparently LJ is not sending out comment notices right now!

[rhapsody11]

You know Dreamflower, you are right. Last night a friend asked me what copyright initially was for (when I graduated from college it was on a part of copyright). It came into being at the end of the medieval age when they discovered book printing. Authorities sought means to keep control of the situation since books were copied immensely fast compared to the monk's work, they felt they had to protect the business of publishers and sought means for censorship. This was late 15th century. Later laws showed some development, but it was all about control and protection of business. Only in the 20th century during the talks of the Berne convention, the role and author's moral rights to their works and protection throughout life was officially documented (not like a short timespan).

Makes one ponder what business actually was protected all along huh? I can see that the copyright law can sustain heirs after their loved one passed on, or that it gives the author a (meagre, unless you are a bestseller author) income, but I am not that naive to assume that it only protects the rights of artists. I have been wondering all along what her publisher thinks of the current wasp nest Miss Gabaldon has stepped into.