Here's the fourth and final post in my series of posts on authors on fan-fiction vs. retelling. Today's author is Marissa Meyer, author of the fairy tale retellings Cinder and Scarlet. I was UBER excited that Marissa decided to participate. Did you know that she actually got her start writing fan-fiction? Read on, squeakers!

What do you consider fan-fiction?

To me, fanfiction is when a work takes specific characters or settings from an original work and re-uses them. For example, setting a story in Hogwarts, or taking Bilbo Baggins and dropping him into the middle of Manhattan, would both constitute fanfiction.

Alternatively, a story about a boy who discovers that he's a wizard or a band of magical beings who go on an epic journey to destroy a dangerous artifact - while they may have very direct and obvious influences - wouldn't be considered fanfiction in my opinion, because they aren't making use of the world and characters from the original.

Do you consider your book to be fan-fiction? If not, what sets it apart from your definition?

I, personally, don't consider most retellings, like "Cinder," to be fanfiction - although this could vary on a case-by-case basis. While the influences of the Cinderella fairy tale are evident throughout "Cinder," the world and characters are my own creation. Hence, I don't think of it as fanfic.

To give another example: "West Side Story" is a retelling of Romeo and Juliet and, in my mind, not fanfiction, as the characters and setting are brand new. Alternatively, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead," which gives a spin on two minor characters from the play, I would consider fanfiction because those characters were Shakespeare's creation.

Based on your definition, should fan-fiction ever be published?

'm going to start my response by stating that I am by no means an expert on copyright law and anyone concerned with the LEGAL implications of fanfiction and how it relates to concerns of copyright and plagiarism should look elsewhere. My response is based solely on the personal opinions of a writer who has been on both sides of the fanfiction equation.

I am in favor of writers creating the stories that inspire them, whether originals or retellings or fanfiction, and publishing them, whether for profit or not for profit, so long as they pose no harm to the original work or creator.

This is where it gets tricky, as people have different ideas of what poses harm to the original work. There are writers who have requested that no fanworks of their books be posted on the internet, and I feel that desire should be respected. For me, personally, I encourage fanworks of The Lunar Chronicles. Not only because it would be hypocritical of me not to (I did write fanfic myself for years), but also because I see it as a means of connecting the fans of the series and keeping the story and characters at the forefront of their thoughts in between book releases. I feel that the existence of Lunar Chronicles fanworks benefits the series, my fans, and myself.

Regarding publishing fanfictions for profit, I feel that it should be stopped, again, if it harms the original work or creator, such as a derivative work that is so similar to the original that it could create confusion in the market between the two.

Example: If E.L. James had published her book as a continuation or alternate reality version of Twilight, some readers who were looking for Stephenie Meyer's book may have grabbed E.L. James's instead. I would consider this to be harmful to the original.

However, "Fifty Shades of Gray," while it may have begun life as a Twilight fanfiction, has been revised into an original work with original characters, and I don't feel would ever be confused with the original works. Therefore, I am perfectly okay with it being published and doing well in the marketplace.

(Note: This entire issue is further complicated by parodies like "Nightlight," but I won't go into all that.)

So in summary, I recommend that people write what they want to write, read what they want to read, and be respectful toward the authors of both original works and fanfiction.

All right, people, I have discovered something recently. I'm behind the times, but I'm fully invested now. There's no going back. Technically I have discovered two things:

• I have seen every episode of Sherlock. I'm very frustrated that it'll be at least a year before new episodes.
• I have seen up to 7.2 of Doctor Who.
• I did not watch seasons 1 or 2 of Doctor Who. I don't love Rose and I wanted David Tennant and Matt Smith.
• I have come to the conclusion that Matt Smith is my favorite doctor, but it took me a while to get there.
• River Song is my favorite television character OF ALL TIME (I know some people hate her. And I understand why they do. But most of the reasons people hate her are the reasons why I love her. She is literally my hero)

(Warning, there's a chance that these comments could get spoilery. Stay away if you are afraid of spoilers, and you should be!!)

Here's the third post in my series of posts on authors on fan-fiction vs. retelling. Today's authors is one of my favorite fairy-tale retellers: Zoe Marriott!

What do you consider fan-fiction?

I've always understood fanfiction to be any piece of writing which utilises a world or characters that already exist (in whatever form) under copyright to the original author. So, for example, if I were to feel a sudden passionate need to write a new version of Twilight from Jasper's point of view, in which Jasper actually does bite Bella at the birthday party and then the two of them fall in love and Edward goes insane and joins up with Victoria to bring a newborn army to forks, that would be fanfiction. What makes it fanfic is that you're playing with fictional elements which legally and morally belong to another person. That other person may not mind - I certainly don't! - but you're still only borrowing, because no matter what you do, the author is the only one who has the right to change the 'canon' or profit from those creations.

Something is not fanfic if the world and characters that you use are out of copyright - if they no longer belong to someone else. If I decide to write a new take on Pride and Prejudice in which Darcy is an emotionless cyborg and Lizzie is the brilliant mechanic who installs his Heart Chip, that would be a retelling rather than fanfic, because Lizzie and Darcy, and the plot that binds them together, and their fictionalised Regency universe, are all out of copyright and no longer belong to anyone. As a reteller, I still can't change the canon of the original story. But since the author isn't able to profit anymore from that world and characters, it's OK if I do.

Do you consider your book to be fan-fiction? If not, what sets it apart from your definition?

I don't think that fairytale retellings count as fanfic, no. Firstly, folklore and fairytales are not only not under copyright - they've never been under copyright to anyone (not even the brothers Grimm, or H.C. Andersen, although they of course owned their personal takes on those stories) because they're part of a tradition of oral storytelling that stretches back hundreds of years, and those stories have already been told and retold more times than any human could count. In a very real way, the folklore and myths of each individual culture form a part of the identity of its people, and those stories are a birthright, to be dipped into at will. Fairytales and folklore form archetypes, and there's a part of the human brain which is hardwired to seek out and respond to those elemental archetypes. We see the same story shapes and the same kinds of characters crop up over and over again because of that. Cinderella, for instance. There's a Cinderella element in Twilight and one in Pride and Prejudice. That doesn't even make those stories retellings, let alone fanfic. People have been retelling and re-imagining folklore and myths and fairytales in their own ways since we started painting on cave walls. The term fanfic has only existed for about fifty years. I think it's a bit presumptuous to come along and slap that label on stuff which has been a natural part of our cultural evolution for millenia.

Based on your definition, should fan-fiction ever be published?

This is a tougher one. It's in the nature of creative work that you take inspiration from all kinds of sources. There are books of mine which couldn't exist if I hadn't taken inspiration from other books (ME: Argh, I can't believe the author did that to her strong girl warrior! I'm going to write a strong girl warrior of my OWN and mine won't turn into a wimp!) or films, or music, or pieces of art. There's nothing mortally wrong with this process. West Side Story wouldn't exist without Romeo and Juliet. Some of Shakespeare's plays wouldn't exist without the work of Marlowe. My The Name of the Blade Trilogy wouldn't exist without the Robert Graves poem 'The Bedpost'. Cassandra Clare's The Infernal Devices series might not exist without A Tale of Two Cities. And I've read fanfic which diverged so wildly from its source material that it felt exactly the same - like original fiction which had merely taken a spark of inspiration from something else.

Any work of original fiction which started life as fanfiction can't legally be published unless someone comes along and 'files off the serial number' so to speak. If that's merely a case of (for example!) removing the names Edward and Bella from your all-human, zany, college comedy, and if no one would ever guess that the book was originally inspired by Twilight unless you told them, then I think it's OK. You're not profiting from someone else's work there, but from your own original creations - creations which were merely sparked to life by your reaction to the source material. But I think if your characters are exactly the same as the source characters, and anyone reading your work could see exactly where those serial numbers have been filed off - and most especially if your new book is *promoted* using the fact that it used to be fanfic, and benefits from that - well, then morally you may be on thin ice, even if you can get away with it legally.

The true test, I think, is that fanfiction relies on the reader having familiarity with the original material. It falls flat or feels nonsensical to readers that don't. Original fiction, even fiction that was inspired by another work, can stand alone. It's strong enough - it's characters and world and plot are strong enough - to mesmerise a reader who has never read the story from which the inspiration was drawn.

Here's the second post in my series of posts on authors on fan-fiction vs. retelling. The second author is the Jane Austen master re-teller: Amanda Grange!

What do you consider fan-fiction?

I think everyone has their own definiton of fan fiction. I've never thought about it in any great depth but I suppose to me fan fiction is something based on other people's creations, written solely for the pleasure of the fan fiction author or possibly the pleasure of the fan fiction author's family and friends as well ,and then posted online. It doesn't have to meet any standards so it can be good, bad or anywhere in between.

Do you consider your book to be fan-fiction? If not, what sets it apart from your definition?

I think my books are different for a number of reasons. Although I get a lot of pleasure writing them and they are based on someone else's creations, I was a published author before I started my retellings (I'd had about ten Regency romances published), so I'd already spent years honing my skills, whereas a lot of fan fiction is often the author's first experience of writing. There's nothing wrong with this, in fact it gives a lot of people a taste for writing and they go on to become professional authors, but it means that for the most part the fan fiction authors don't have a control of their writing skills and so the results can be uneven. My books can't afford to be uneven. They have to meet professional standards and they also have to meet publishers' requirements. I have to deal with a whole variety of things like accuracy, length, deadlines and consistency, as well as adding something new while being true to the original. I have to do a lot of research to make sure all my historical details are correct, the language is suitable for the Regency period etc. and my book has to pass muster with an experienced editor before it sees the light of day. If I'd written the diaries as my first attempts at writing a novel, they wouldn't have been anything like the published novels they are today. They would have had problems with pacing, style, characterisation, narrative flow and everything else, so I'm glad the idea didn't occur to me until I'd already been through the process of writing my own books.

Based on your definition, should fan-fiction ever be published?

I really can't say. Some fan fiction authors don't want to be published, some publish themselves and some are picked up by mainstream publishers. But it's an interesting topic. I think anything that gets people writing and reading is a good thing!

Here's the first post in my series of posts on authors on fan-fiction vs. retelling. The first author is the amazing Diana Peterfreund!

What do you consider fan-fiction?

Fanfiction is unlicensed derivative work. Derivative work is a legal term, which is why you get workarounds like "filing the serial numbers off" something that might have once been fanfic and then selling it. So that's the legal POV. Here's the personal one. I used to read and write fanfiction when I was a teenager, and to me, the essence of fanfic was sending established characters in established worlds out on new adventures that the creators didn't or wouldn't or hadn't or had only hinted at. The important part of the term is it's being produced by "fans", for fun.

There are currently things being called "fanfic" and posted on fanfic sites that I personally wouldn't consider fanfic. For instance: someone who types up the words of a published novel and then changes the names of the characters in that novel into the names of the characters in the "fandom" -- that is not fanfiction. That is not "crossover fanfic." That's not "AU fanfic." That's just plagiarism. (It's happened to me and it's just baffling -- they're missing the whole point!)

I suppose there were genuine "AU" (alternate universe) fanfics around when I read and wrote them, but they never interested me at all. I was in that fandom for those characters and that story. Why would I want something totally different with the same names? Like why would i want to read Buffy fanfic where Buffy wasn't a vampire slayer, but just a high school student named Buffy? I'm not sure why people would even call it fanfic, except they want the established fandom. I've read that's how 50 Shades started. Had I not been told that, I probably would not have seen the connection between the stories. There is almost no similarity in plot and only vague and generic similarity in characters. (this is how they got away with publishing it with the names changed).

Finally, I wouldn't call the people writing fantasies about meeting and dating rockstars or other real people fanfiction either. They are fans, and it's fiction, but that doesn't make it fanfic.

Do you consider your book to be fan-fiction? If not, what sets it apart from your definition?

It is not unlicensed derivative work because there is no license. All of Jane Austen's works are out of copyright. But beyond the legal perspective, I think it's different because of the "essence" I talked about above. When I personally think of Jane Austen "fanfic", I actually think of books like Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife or Lost in Austen any of the other sequels or books that feature the actual Jane Austen characters in the actual Jane Austen stories and put them on new or different adventures. But I think we all have a lot in common, in the sense that we are all fans writing fiction inspired by Austen's works. So you can call it fanfic if you want. I don't have any moral feelings about that term. I'm in the same boat as "fanfic" like West Side Story... and that's a very happy place to be!

Based on your definition, should fan-fiction ever be published?

It's not a "should" question. If one attempts to publish and profit from unlicensed derivative work, the owners have the right to come down on you. But it's important to recognize that there is plenty of LICENSED derivative work going on. When you see a Star Wars novel, it's because Lucas (or I guess, Disney now) has hired someone to write it. (Just like Lucas hired someone to write the scripts of the original Star Wars movies.) When you have something like a movie or TV show, there are dozens of creators who have already gone into that production, and novelists working with Lucas to bring forth a particular vision (I know a few Star Wars novelists) are doing the same thing a scriptwriter or a production designer are.

Same thing with the new Bane Chronicles where other writers are writing in Cassandra Clare's Mortal Instruments series.

A few weeks ago I wrote a post on fan-fiction and an interesting question was brought up: where is the line between fan-fiction and retellings?

I spent a long time talking with Nicole on twitter about this issue. And she just wrote a post on her opinion on the matter. I agree with pretty much everything she said, so rather than restate a similar opinion I decided to take it to another level.

I have contacted four authors of "retellings" and asked them the following questions:

What do you consider fan-fiction?
Do you consider your book to be fan-fiction? If not, what sets it apart from your definition?
Based on your definition, should fan-fiction ever be published?

Their answers are very interesting and very different. Here's a preview of each of their answers, and then I'll be posting their individuals answers over the next few weeks.

Marissa Meyer
Author of the fairy tale retelling Cinder

To me, fanfiction is when a work takes specific characters or settings from an original work and re-uses them. Alternatively, a story about a boy who discovers that he's a wizard or a band of magical beings who go on an epic journey to destroy a dangerous artifact - while they may have very direct and obvious influences - wouldn't be considered fanfiction in my opinion, because they aren't making use of the world and characters from the original.

I've always understood fanfiction to be any piece of writing which utilises a world or characters that already exist (in whatever form) under copyright to the original author. Something is not fanfic if the world and characters that you use are out of copyright - if they no longer belong to someone else.

Amanda Grange
Author of numerous Jane Austen inspired novels

I suppose to me fan fiction is something based on other people's creations, written solely for the pleasure of the fan fiction author or possibly the pleasure of the fan fiction author's family and friends as well ,and then posted online. It doesn't have to meet any standards so it can be good, bad or anywhere in between.

There are currently things being called "fanfic" and posted on fanfic sites that I personally wouldn't consider fanfic. For instance: someone who types up the words of a published novel and then changes the names of the characters in that novel into the names of the characters in the "fandom" -- that is not fanfiction. That is not "crossover fanfic." That's not "AU fanfic." That's just plagiarism. (It's happened to me and it's just baffling -- they're missing the whole point!)

Want to see more of their answers to the other questions? Check back each Wednesday to see what each of them have to say in more detail

I'll try to make this a short-ish story:

I've always loved the idea of cosplay. I was an actress all through high school and the idea of dressing up and pretending to be a well-loved character is great. I was always too self-conscious to do it until I made these new friends who also think that it's cool. Hence, I now do cosplay (I'm working on one right now and it's epic).

HOWEVER, I have always looked down on fan-fiction. To me it was the "lesser art" meant to be sneered at. Creepy, anti-social nerd-geeks in their basements wrote fan-fiction. (How many of you have I offended yet?) BUT, these same friends are writers of fan fiction. And... after a little bit of persuasion I tried my hand at it.

It's. So. Fun.

Do I still think of it as a "lesser art"? Heck yes. The majority of the people who write fan-fiction have very little talent. But there are gems hidden within the dreck. But the real magic in fan-fiction is how easy it is. I recently posted on twitter: "[my] fan-fiction is now over 3000 words. Why am I so much more motivated to write this than my current WIP?"

Two which a very wise person (who will remain unnamed since I didn't get his/her permission) responded: "Because there is no pressure and you love the characters, of course."

And that got me thinking. Fan fiction is the perfect stepstool to original story writing. The world and characters are already there, and so it's just an exercise in creating true characters, interesting plots, and engaging dialogue. There's no pressure to come up with something totally new and original.

Of course, this is still coming on the heels of this post over at WORD for Teens, which I totally agree with. I do not believe that fan fiction should be published. I just don't. But, at least for me, it has been very eye opening.

I have often convinced myself that I'm just not cut out to be a writer because I don't have the passion for it. But this has showed me that I DO. I'm writing a prequel right now, and with some idea of where the story should end up, I get SO EXCITED to write new things! In the past three days I have written FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED WORDS. In THREE DAYS.

(For your comparison, my original WIP (which I started in January 2012) is currently 9,400 words long and I haven't written anything since July.)

Needless to say I'm now conflicted. I used to think fan-fiction was a dark pit where characters went to die. But now... I kinda like it. Writing it, at least. I'm still warming up to reading it.

So how do you feel about fan-fiction? 
Do you read/write it? Do you ignore it? Are you passionately against it ? I want to know!

All right, if you've been following this blog for a while then you know about my grandparents tradition. Every Christmas they take all of their grandkids out to eat, and then to the bookstore to choose books for their Christmas presents. I am incapable of choosing right away, so my grandma gives me time to make a list and then go home and think about it.

That's where you come in.

I've narrowed it down to five books, which is not as many as I usually get. So if you have any suggestions for more, please share! I also want your opinions on these five. Most of these I'd never even heard of before today (which is so exciting!), which means I'll need all the help I can get. If you've read any/all PLEASE take a minute to comment with your thoughts. In general I'm looking for four things:


By profanity I mean does it have more than 2 f-words. I'm fine with pretty much anything else. So here are the books:

Ripper Stefan Petrucha (Goodreads | Amazon)	The Bridge Jane Higgins (Goodreads | Amazon)
My Thoughts: I do love serial killer books. However, the description says it has "whip-smart" dialogue, which usually means annoying and petulant in my experience.	My Thoughts: The most interesting thing about this book [for me at least] is the idea of the "hostiles." I'm imagining something like I Am Legend or something. But it's published by a relatively small publisher. And I'm always wary of those.
The Last Dragonslayer Jasper Fforde (Goodreads | Amazon)	Warm Bodies Isaac Marian (Goodreads | Amazon)
My Thoughts: Magic is fading away because of technology? COOL! Or really cheesy.	My Thoughts: The movie trailer for this looks SO FUNNY. And I've wanted to read the book for a while anyway. What do you think? Winner?
Stormdancer Jay Kristoff (Goodreads | Amazon)	Your recommendation goes here! I didn't find as many books as I like to. And I'm not uber-excited about most of these. If you have suggestions, please feel free to suggest them! I generally prefer books that I haven't heard of before for this list. Not sequels, etc.
My Thoughts: Some of my blogger friends have RAVED about this book, but I haven't gotten it yet. Anyone else want to rave (either positive or negative)?

THANK YOU! I'll let y'all know which ones I choose! And if you're curious, here's the list from 2010 and here's 2011.

This is something I've wanted to talk about for a while: why do authors write under pseudonyms (which is defined as anonymous, fictitious, etc. etc.) and then print right on the book who they really are?!

I mean, I totally understand writing under a pseudonym. Especially if you're someone like JK Rowling, and you're kind of known for one thing. I was really surprised to find out JK wasn't writing under a pseudo.

And I can even understand Janette Rallison deciding to publish her sci-fi fantasy books under CJ Hill. Because they are totally different from her contemps, and I don't blame her for wanting people to see them in different lights, or whatever the reasoning was. But she still keeps the two names separate. It's not a super secret that JR is also CJH, but it's also not shouted to the rooftops (at least, not that I've noticed).

<--- But what about this? I feel like this defeats the purpose. Why would you write under a pseudonym, and then WRITE YOUR REAL NAME ON THE BOOK?! Were the books not as successful as your other books? DUH! You should have known that going in! You should have just published a mystery series under your actual name! Mystery and romance aren't that different, right?


So I want to know what you guys think. How do you feel about authors using pseudonyms in general? And how do you feel about them not keeping those pseudonyms a secret? Does anyone know why already-established authors choose pseudonyms? What's the main reason? And why do they not keep the names separate?

Maybe I'm just extra passionate about this because I am a pseudonym writer, and I take almost neurotic care to make sure that my pseudonym and my real name remain totally separate. If you google both of my names together, you get no results! So... why don't authors take pseudonyms as seriously? I'M SO CONFUSED!

A while ago I asked for adult fiction and non-fiction recs. There were far too many adult fiction recommendations for me to organize into any kind of list. But, I was able to take the non-fiction books and gather the top 14. Here they are:

Any of these that you think are one of those "YOU HAVE TO READ THIS RIGHT NOW!" kind of books? Any I should avoid? For instance, I love Tina Fey (well... I love Liz Lemon) and I'm worried that Bossypants might be crass (by which I suppose I mean swearing for no reason or distasteful) or something and make me stop liking her... thoughts?

Anyway, to make it easy I made this poll. Vote for any and all books you think I should read. Yup. Thank you!

Okay... I'm a little nervous to be posting this discussion post, but I'm really curious as to what you guys think. Let's talk about self-publishing. Here are some prompting questions to get the discussion flowing:

• How do you feel about self-publishing?
• Do you consider it a "legitimate" form of being published? (i.e. do you consider a self-published author a "published author"?)
• Do you think self-publishing is awesome and totally under-rated?
• Do you read self-published books?
• If you're a reviewer do you ever accept self-pubs for review? Why or why not?
• Are there any great self-published books out there?
• What about indie-pubs? Do you treat them like self published books?
• What do you think about those who just self-publish electronically vs. those who print physical copies?
• Are you a self-pub author? Why did you decide to go that route?

I want to hear it all! I'll join in the conversation in the comments. Anonymous comments are fine, just be sure to see my "be courteous" note below. Any cruel/unnecessarily rude comments will be deleted.


BE COURTEOUS. I know this can be kind of a sensitive topic. As always, try to remain kind. I know lots of people who don't like self-publishing at all and others who think it's awesome! Please be respectful of all opinions in the comments. No personal attacks or blanket statements. I want this to be a place we can learn about other people's opinions, not kill each other. :)