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.

(NOTE FROM ENNA: River is going to be helping me a lot with reviews for a little while. I'm doing my senior project this semester, and it's kind of consuming my life. I'm in class/work/rehearsal from about 9-9 every day until March. Hopefully I can get my act together on the weekends and schedule some stuff. Until then, enjoy another River Review!)

Release Date: August 28th, 2012
Genre: Dystopia, Sci-fi
Publisher: HarperCollins
Pages: 320
Rating:
Amazon Link*: Click here
Goodreads Page: Click here
Summary:

Sixteen-year-old Noa has been a victim of the system ever since her parents died. Now living off the grid and trusting no one, she uses her computer-hacking skills to stay safely anonymous and alone. But when she wakes up on a table in an empty warehouse with an IV in her arm and no memory of how she got there, Noa starts to wish she had someone on her side.

Enter Peter Gregory. A rich kid and the leader of a hacker alliance, Peter needs people with Noa's talents on his team. Especially after a shady corporation called AMRF threatens his life in no uncertain terms.

But what Noa and Peter don't realize is that Noa holds the key to a terrible secret, and there are those who'd stop at nothing to silence her for good.

Review: I wasn't blown away by this book, but it was still fairly good. I had really high expectations for it at the beginning when the first chapter was so action-packed, but they slowly slipped away as the protagonist seemed to spend a fair amount of time perched on her Apple laptop (This is a complete exaggeration, but I feel like the words "macbook" or "apple" were used more than the main character's name, which was annoying- there were just way too many references to her computer!) in coffee shops, wondering where she was going to sleep for the night. In all fairness, considering Noa's circumstances and her history as a computer hacker, it made sense that she would be rotating coffee shops and that she would be fairly obsessed with her laptop, but it still made for boring reading for me at times. 

However, it wasn't all boring, and in retrospect, most of the book was lively and fast-paced. When I first discovered what had happened to Noa, I admit I was fairly unimpressed, but the author managed to turn it into something interesting and curious, dropping mysterious hints about future sequels as I read. Noa herself was a likable protagonist, even if she wasn't the usual kick-butt, hard-edged heroine that I like. She was still smart and the other main characters were equally well-written.

Michelle Gagnon vanquished most of my doubts about the novel in the last few pages when she completely turned the tables on me, which frustrated the snot out of me. Things were finally looking for the main characters and for humanity as a whole, and she viciously squelched my rising hopes with a crusher of an ending that, of course, made me feel obligated to read the next book to find out what happens. Overall, I guess my final description for the book is that it was pretty good, and I ended up liking it for a book that really didn't seem like my type from the get-go.


*I am an amazon affiliate. If you purchase this book using my link, I will get a tiny fraction of the purchase, which goes toward contests.

I have a treat for you guys today! To celebrate the release of the NEW KIKI STRIKE BOOK(!!!!!) Kirsten Miller is going on a blog tour and I get to participate! Check out this awesome interview from her and then enter the giveaway for the first two books in the Kiki Strike series!


You have two series that are quite different from each other (THE ETERNAL ONES and KIKI STRIKE). Can you write two such different stories simultaneously, or do you only write one story at a time?

I don’t think The Eternal Ones series really represents me as a writer. (Writing romances does not come naturally to me.) If I had to choose two books in order to demonstrate my true breadth, I’d pick the latest Kiki book, The Darkness Dwellers and my new teen novel (out in February), How to Lead a Life of Crime.

I wrote them back to back. (Sometimes I’ll edit one book while writing another, but I never write two at once.) And while the two books are VERY different (How to Lead a Life of Crime is extremely dark and violent), they share many similarities. They’re thrillers/adventure stories with kick-butt characters and a weird sense of humor. That’s what I do best. I honestly believe that my two latest books are by far the best novels I’ve written.

What were your worst and best subjects in high school?

Best: English
The One I Loved Most: Chemistry
The One I Despised Most: Gym
Worst: Staying Out of Trouble

Do you read your books after they've been published? On a similar vein, do you read reviews? Why or why not?

I will occasionally ready my own books. But only the good parts—and I know just where they are.

I try to avoid reviews, although I’m not always successful. Writing books is one of the most difficult things a person can do for a living. (At least it is for me.) In order to keep going, I need to believe that people will enjoy the results of my labor. From what I’ve gathered, most readers have been quite happy with my novels. But there are always a few folks out there whose reviews seem to be designed to make me miserable. And you know what? They can—at least for a little while. So I do my best to stay away.

Are you a Vespa riding dare-devil like Kiki, or do you prefer transportation with four wheels?

It’s so funny you ask! I live in New York, where you don’t really need personal transportation. But I did have a cherry red Vespa for years. Just yesterday, I mentioned to a friend that I’m thinking about getting another one. (And yes, I am an AMAZING driver. Watch out, pedestrians. Ha.)

What's the single greatest piece of advice you've received since you sold your first book?

Here’s the piece of advice I wish I’d received . . . Always stay true to who you are as a writer.

Do you read the same kind of books that you write? Do you ever worry about accidentally "copying" another author's voice?

I read mostly non-fiction these days. (I’m always on the look-out for weird facts that can provide fodder for my books.)

No, I never worry about copying another author’s voice. Every writer has his/her own set of insecurities, and I don’t possess that particular one. My biggest problem is a lack of patience. I expect everything to be perfect the second it spills out of my brain. (Something that almost never happens.)

If you could jump into the world of Kiki Strike and join her team, would you do it? What if you had a guarantee that you would live?

I would LOVE TO. I don’t need a guarantee, either.

And finally, can we do a mad-lib? Please provide 3 random nouns, verbs, and adjectives.

Reptile
Cadaver
Wig

Excavate
Lick
Tangle

Hidden
Sassy
Fiendish

I haven't had time to get my hands on one of Kirsten's book to fill out her mad-lib. But I will soon, and it will be AWESOME!


a Rafflecopter giveaway

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.