CRAFT (sort of): Playing in FamousAuthor's World--for money

I'll need to make this quick, as this morning I had one of those "ocular migraines" (where you see a colored halo of sorts superimposed on your visual field), and my eyes are still sore. But I wanted to respond to a couple of questions out of the comment thread, and I figured this is a better venue, as many people don't go back to read comment threads on older entries.

Someone asked how I felt about those who write a follow-up novel to someone else's series (after the original author has stopped doing them) or who write in franchised worlds such as Trek. In other words, do I see that as fan fiction.

Well, if you have a contract, and you have the consent of the original author/estate and/or the "bible" of the franchised series, then obviously you're not just writing as a fan, but are positioned as well as anyone can be. I would LOVE to do even work-for-hire, *if* it were characters I know well enough and *if* others agreed that I had nailed the characters well. I'd do it for the old "Donna Parker" teen mystery series, and I used-to-would've felt confident in doing it for the Bobbsey Twins series, but I'm now distanced so far from the Fab Four (BT) that I couldn't do that. I never did feel that I could get properly into the heads of most other authors' characters, though, so I doubt that I could do any others. *Maybe* Jessica Fletcher, but somebody else has that franchise nailed down.

I think it's a very wise BUSINESS decision to write a follow-up or a series book (complete a trilogy or what-have-you) *if* you can get the go-ahead from the estate and publishing house and have their backing. This can be really lucrative and might get you a contract for your own work later--though I'm not so sure about that any more. An authorized follow-up could be great business-wise. Artistically, though, it might or might not be. I suppose that if fans of the series think that you have a good handle on it, then you've succeeded, but I would always be second-guessing myself as to "what would this guy REALLY do." I used to play what-if games about what would this or that character do when I was acting (during school and into the second year of college), and very often I was cut off at the knees: "No, he DEFINITELY wouldn't do that! Here's what he would really do!" So I lost confidence in my own ability to predict what Character X created by Author Y might do. Your mileage may differ.

If you are doing it out of love . . . then do it. My former objections were based on a belief that any good story should get published, and that the objective in all writing should be to maximize those chances. I've recently recalibrated back to the way I was as a child, so now I say, if you want to write it, write it. If someone wants to read it, read it. Have fun with it.

I do think that writing follow-on books is in somewhat the same vein as fanfiction, but when the original author has given consent, you won't have the author being upset about whatever you do . . . so there's an advantage right there. Also, the editor and staff will be vetting your stuff to make sure that they believe you've done what fans expect, so you have someone on your side to keep you from making some kind of error that would turn fans away. Another advantage, as I see it. Thirdly, assuming you have this go-ahead, you have that built-in audience waiting for the books and expecting/hoping to love them . . . you won't have to hear that your characters are passive, that they are unappealing, that people hate them, etc., and so it's BETTER than doing your own stuff, in that sense. You might even have help with the plot and direction of the work, if the series books have an editor who is sort of in charge of leading the authors along. So it isn't really the same as fanfiction that's done out of love for the characters and world and is generally unpaid *and sometimes even seen as negative by the original authors, which can be uncomfortable*.

I've just never felt as if I could get inside someone else's characters properly. It's better for me if I say, "Here's a person LIKE the persona of the actress Kathy Griffin and the character she played on 'Just Shoot Me," and then I start writing her scenes and I see/hear the actress playing the role, but soon enough I can even rename the character and she becomes enough different from the original I'm basing her on that she's not really a copy or clone any more. Know what I mean, Vern? That works better for me. And if I have my own world that's sort of like another writer's world but isn't it exactly, I can change things that I thought were illogical or unreasonable about the original and then it'll work MY way. That's one of the perks of playing God in your own books.

Even as a kid, I thought the later Oz books written by the other person after Baum quit got pretty bad, and the later Bobbsey Twins books that were farmed out were of variable quality. This isn't the case nowadays, but that probably colored my feelings toward ME writing fan fiction. I adore Doctor Who, especially the Peter Davison incarnation, but I never presumed that I could write episodes or fanfic. I just don't believe I could make proper words come out of their mouths. As children, my friends and I often played role-playing type pretend games, but when we played "The Monkees" or "The Girl from U.N.C.L.E." or whatnot, we inserted ourselves as new Mary Sue characters rather than trying to play existing characters. This is an odd quirk that you probably never wanted or needed to know about me.

Anyhow, I'm not trying to prescribe for someone else. Not any more. You see how well that has ever worked. I'm just hoping now to serve as a warning through being a bad example.

Thinking about it, I trace some of my fanfic attitudes towards events during my upbringing. I was always taught that when you write, you should never knowingly base any character or idea on someone else's, but you had to "do your own stuff, as that is your contribution." This was ingrained in me around fourth grade, when I tried to do a Narnia-set book/story for an assignment in school, and was hauled into the principal's office and threatened with a charge of plagiarism (!) for just re-using Mr. Tumnus and some other characters and the setting of Narnia. ALL grown-ups at that time disapproved of any story or character that was not "original" or looked like a remix of older books and plots. They saw it as my ripping off someone else's hard work, which they said was the nadir of anyone's life. I was really timid about showing anyone any of my writing for a while after that. By junior high, I had a teacher who encouraged me to do little stories and other juvenilia, but even SHE would say, "This is too much like a Twilight Zone episode that I saw one time," or "This character is too much like Samantha on 'Bewitched'--you can do better if you make up your own character, and never EVER copy or recycle parts of others' plots." This attitude among most people has changed, as you can see by reading any how-to-write tome (and seeing that they sometimes teach you how to take apart other films and books and steal the good parts to make new stories--and they approve of this), but my childhood teachings have not.

If you can finish somebody's trilogy and stay true to his voice/style and characters, that would be grand--and it's done pretty often now. It would no longer be seen as a problem. But people in the industry would have to be the ones to hire you to do it, I suspect, and if that author's backlist is not selling well today, they might not go for it.

After my recent reboot in regards to why my work doesn't get picked up, I would encourage anyone to do this--fan fiction or pro fiction or whatnow--IF you feel you can be excited and enjoy doing the project, with no expectations. I can't disconnect from my expectations of being able to publish and be validated (although this is obviously a pipe dream nowadays because of my lack of postmodern thinking), which is why I am so stressed out. You don't need to be stressed. Life is stressful enough!

The 1970s stoners grew up and took over the world. You would think that they'd be more laid-back because of it. But they appear to have recovered completely from that love-one-another mentality. Now everything's about money and business. I suppose it always was, underneath it all. So now my advice is do what you love . . . without thinking that any money will follow. Get a real job that you enjoy, and do the other stuff for love, be it writing, photography, or gardening. Then, if you have any success, it'll be a pleasant surprise.

I used to mock my grandmother for saying, "Expect nothing, and you won't get hurt--and sometimes you'll be pleasantly surprised." I thought she should be a visualizing optimist who could make things happen by working and wanting them. But anyhow, look how crappy that strategy has been for so many people. Maybe grandmother was right. She turned out to be right about that damn hot stove, too.

LJ Idol: A Failure to Communicate--or a success?

LJ Idol Entry: "The Hard Truths That I Have Learned, During My Time On Livejournal, About Myself and How I Interact With People"

YET ANOTHER POST ABOUT MY COMMUNICATION STYLE
Ah, yes. The Writer navel-gazing about how her words come across to others. Aren't you tired of that schtick here on this journal yet? ("Aren't you dead yet?"--Bette Midler's character in "Outrageous Fortune" to Shelley Long's character)

But this is the assigned topic, and it's interesting, so you're stuck (or press PAGE DOWN to read the next journal.)

What Have We Learned after nearly four years of standing on this soapbox preaching, musing, lecturing, or just shouting out loud in every direction?

We already know that some topics are best avoided for the most part, such as politics, which religion is the One True Way, and whether "chili" that has beans in it can still be called chili. (Not in Texas, it can't. But I digress.) However, the larger picture shows us that far smaller details can get us into hot water with our readers. And we do NOT want to be boiled by the readership. They look like they'd enjoy a tough, fatty, stringy old broad boiled up for dessert, and so we want to keep them happy.

I have found that I must be careful with humor and with my tendency to generalize from the specific. People read too much into whatever you say and take it too literally *if* you happen to hit upon one of their pet topics, hot buttons, or favorite subjects (especially if it's something they're sort of an expert on--sometimes they will miss the sardonic tone completely and post a long response to set the record straight as to whether Chaucer wore knickers or bloomers.)

It tends to piss people off--generalizing. But it is a valuable and useful tool. We used to generalize all the time in school, and it's part of the scientific method. There's deduction and induction . . . both leading to generalizations that often are useful for classifying and categorizing, but which drive some people crazy because they're often stated as Rules of Thumb (and the bad ones stick out like a sore thumb.)

The occasional generalization is useful. Some aren't. Some are just plain wrong. Most of them apply "some of the time" or illuminate some other aspect of whatever-it-is. For example, if I say, "Shakespeare's plays always have something in every few scenes for the groundlings," I get it from every direction. "Groundlings are people too!" "In scene such-and-such, there's nothing for the groundlings." "Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare!" And so forth. I mean, you can't win, any more than when you ask, "Do I look fat in this?"* so why not laugh?

* [You don't want them to LIE to you and then have you parade all over town in that outfit looking like you are wearing grandma's muumuu, but on the other hand you don't really want to hear that when you walk in those jeans your butt looks like two pit bulls rasslin' in a pillowcase, do you? So the person who is asked the question, "Do I look fat in Grandma's muumuu?" is always screwed, no matter what answer (s)he gives. The best route is to begin choking, turn purple, and pass out on the floor. By the time the paramedics arrive and carry you to safety, you will have distracted the questioner sufficiently that you won't have to answer, even if she's so fat that she has to iron her jeans on the driveway.]

People have their own issues and bring them to the table, so when they read your writing, they sometimes read stuff into it. It seems that a small number of people always want to play "NIGYSOB." That's an old Transactional Analysis game out of _Games People Play_ by Eric Berne. The initials stand for, "Now I've Got You, You SOB." It's all about some detail that you made an error on, and now you're going to get it with both barrels, you ignorant slob who is trying to spread misinformation! Or some people just love "Let's You and Him Fight." They'll write to person A to tell him or her all about your latest entry that simply SMEARS him or his work, and person A comes blazing over and fires the torpedoes and explains how he/she is Hopelessly Offended, because Helpful Type poisoned the well, and when A reads what you wrote, it'll be SO APPARENT that you were absolutely libeling him or out to get him. (And it could be that you only mentioned him in passing.) Others prefer the game of "Uproar," which in general gets fulfilled any time they start any kind of uproar. Thus LJ Drama in full flower.

You also have to be careful about little insider jokes or things that might sound insulting or bigoted if the humor doesn't come across. Some people hate indicators such as *grin* and smileys; they say these are fourth-wall-breakers and shouldn't be needed. They believe you should be Erma Bombeck or Dave Barry and just be able to signal that it's humor through your tone, but you can't always please 'em all. After all, a huge contingent of middle school stoners still believe that Jonathan Swift seriously advocated eating Irish babies in "A Modest Proposal."

You just never know what's going to light somebody's fire.

When people assumed that I was a bad person because of some generalization that I mused about or tossed off, it used to cause Major Drama and copious weeping and wailing on this side of the screen. But eventually I figured out . . . I'm not perfect. As much as I strive for clarity, I'm going to be misunderstood or misinterpreted sometimes. I'm not always going to be able to get across the proper tone or signal that I'm trying to pull a Dave Barry. Now and then, I'll end up clarifying or apologizing. It's just the cost of doing business by text (or any other way, for that matter, except that when we're not face-to-face, there's no worry about belching or farting out of turn, now, is there?)

People are going to bring their own baggage. They have their own "hot buttons" or sensitive words/topics, and if you happen to step on that sore toe, you will get the blast. It doesn't mean you offended all the world, but just that you picked the magic word and Groucho's duck zipped down from the ceiling.

Some people are going to read into what you say whatever they want to hear . . . or if they're playing NIGYSOB, they'll say, "Gotcha!" So you have to proofread with an eye towards that. The occasional troll who deliberately pretends to misunderstand so they can go on the attack with their agenda will come along--or somebody will just hit a word that is their hot button and go crazy.

This isn't just happening to ME; it's endemic. Look what happened to Garrison Keillor--ol' Dan Savage savaged him because he didn't "get" the gentle winking tongue-in-cheek type of humor being used in the passages that he chose to go crazy over. Again, I think this was a case of pushing the fellow's hot buttons. It wasn't Keillor really saying any of those insults.

This kind of knee-jerk reaction may be fun to watch, but isn't fun for the recipient; after posting one of these, you usually realize that you've overreacted, but then you think that the venting was good and that you DID make many good points, so you don't go back and delete it. However, it just shows you don't share the same sense of humor as the person who understood the piece to be satirical or funny. The comment threads are usually pretty evenly divided for and against you.

(I don't want to be a Keillor apologist . . . I think sometimes his show is positively lame, and he featured a woman who COULD NOT SING on St. Paddy's Day, doing a medley of three "songs usually reserved for Irish tenors." She then made the reason for this obvious, and PLEASE LADY TURN DOWN THE VIBRATO/TREMOLO. However, I didn't think that piece said what the offended fellow thought it did.)

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."--_Cool Hand Luke_, Strother Martin's character

You'd think that we'd all stay away from LiveJournal and other forums because of these minor glitches.

But on the other tentacle, I get so many points of view. My friends list points to MANY fiction writers, memoirists, et alia, but also to people of diverse religions--in diverse locations where there are different holidays and vacation areas. I belong to a few communities that specialize in particular topics: recipes for crock pot cooking, long hair care and nurturing, fat girls who love fashion, cranky editors, copy editors, and belly dancing. There are people who'll teach you about horses, some who are scientists, and many who review interesting books and films. It's a lot of fun to read bits and jots from here and there. . . and illuminating.

Besides, where else would I find a soapbox to stand up on? It's fun. I always learn something from reading various journals. We're learning every day how to improve our communication skills. It's win-win.

And I always do learn something about myself. They say that's one of the benefits of journaling--self-awareness and realization. So we must be doing *something* right.

Carry on!