Original Fiction vs Fanfiction.

kafka.:

You might mean no offence, but that doesn't mean you won't cause a lot of offence and a lot of pain. 1 in 4 people are sexual abuse survivors, just because most people don't talk about it doesn't mean that people making jokes or stories about it doesn't affect them. It's just a painful topic, I think it's extremely inconsiderate to ignore that fact.

I guess that means no one should write about those things. That would mean the majority of good fiction shouldn't be written. I understand that it may affect people, and I would never joke about those things. Writing stories on the subject is a different issue. I don't think people should avoid writing those things.

And, I for one don't ignore that fact. That's what ratings and warnings are for.

leaf's wierd:

Well, it's one thing to joke about it, it's another to write about it as a meaningful element of a story, in a serious manner.

I agree, but that wasn't the point. The point was that she said stories could set people off. By that standard eating disorders, mental disorders, parents dying, pregnancy, rape, getting yelled at by a teacher, breaking up with a boyfriend, getting in a fight with your best friend, etc shouldn't be allowed because they could really upset someone.

The Pies Endure:

I guess that means no one should write about those things. That would mean the majority of good fiction shouldn't be written. I understand that it may affect people, and I would never joke about those things. Writing stories on the subject is a different issue. I don't think people should avoid writing those things.

And, I for one don't ignore that fact. That's what ratings and warnings are for.

I didn't say no-one should write anything about rape, I said that people shouldn't write about real people (and celebrities are real people, they're not fictional constructs) being sexually abused because it's extremely inconsiderate. It has absolutely nothing to do with how ordinary readers might react to the story and thus ratings and warnings don't really come into it, it has to do with having some kind of basic respect for human sufferance and not exploiting the sufferance of famous people as a means of entertainment just because their being famous somehow makes their painful experiences public property.

I don't see anything wrong with it if's written tactfully. It's fiction. It's not like we think it's real or should ever happen. Again that's what warnings are for.

kafka.:

[...] and not exploiting the sufferance of famous people as a means of entertainment just because their being famous somehow makes their painful experiences public property.

The fictional painful experience?

the same dru.:

I agree, but that wasn't the point. The point was that she said stories could set people off. By that standard eating disorders, mental disorders, parents dying, pregnancy, rape, getting yelled at by a teacher, breaking up with a boyfriend, getting in a fight with your best friend, etc shouldn't be allowed because they could really upset someone.

But it's not simply thef fact that it's included in the story that sets people off. It all comes down to how it is presented in the story.

Aside from extremely polar topics like abortion and sexuality, I don't see how anyone would get upset unless it was presented in a manner that wasn't taken seriously.

kafka.:

I didn't say no-one should write anything about rape, I said that people shouldn't write about real people (and celebrities are real people, they're not fictional constructs) being sexually abused because it's extremely inconsiderate. It has absolutely nothing to do with how ordinary readers might react to the story and thus ratings and warnings don't really come into it, it has to do with having some kind of basic respect for human sufferance and not exploiting the sufferance of famous people as a means of entertainment just because their being famous somehow makes their painful experiences public property.

All in all, writing about real people in a "negative" context without their consent, in any way, shape or form (be it fictional stories or newspaper articles or any type of writing) can be regarded as inconsiderate. And it's not limited to writing, either, photos or film can be inconsiderate. Though, what is "exploiting the sufferance of famous people as a means of entertainment " and what is a way to communicate something with the purpose not to hurt the person it involves but to portrait a concept, a thought or a view? If someone was to write, or otherwise make public, something that has happened to a person for the purpose of personal gain then, yes, that's terrible. If it's not for personal gain but to raise awareness then that's at least for a good cause (though best would probably be if it was made public with the consent of the person affected). But if it's fictional trauma written about a real life person then at least I don't regard that as equal to actual trauma written about a real life person. Yes, it might be somewhat inconsiderate to create such a fictional piece solely for personal gain. And even to do so because it communicates something of importance might be questionable, though I disagree that communicating such a thing is only "exploiting the sufferance of famous people as a means of entertainment" and nothing else.

However, are you guys sure you are talking about the same thing here? Otherwise it's just me being confused. Because I get the feeling you're talking about a real life traumatic event, and the person affected, is being used for the sake of a story? And that The Pies Endure is talking about fictional trauma happening in a fictional story to a character modeled on a real person. If not I suppose I'm just confused here.

I'm talking about fictional events that have never happened. It is after all fiction. I use real people from my favourite bands but the situations are fictional. After all, Pierre Bouvier isn't really a vampire. Or a bounty hunter, or a Marine Biology lecturer, or gay [as I have portrayed him in my stories]. It's fiction and isn't meant to offend. It's just what I want to write.

^Yeah, that was what I thought you were talking about. And, like I said, fictional events about a character based on a real person doesn't bother me at all (though I can understand if fan-fiction bothers other people even though I'm okay with it).

The Pies Endure:

I'm talking about fictional events that have never happened. It is after all fiction. I use real people from my favourite bands but the situations are fictional. After all, Pierre Bouvier isn't really a vampire. Or a bounty hunter, or a Marine Biology lecturer, or gay [as I have portrayed him in my stories]. It's fiction and isn't meant to offend. It's just what I want to write.

This is how I feel about it. I don't see why it would be okay to write about an original fictitious character getting raped, but it's offensive to write about a fictitious representation of a celebrity or a fictitious pre-existing character getting raped. It's not like if I wrote about Lauren Conrad getting raped in a seedy back alley I would be implying that she really was raped or that I want that to happen to her or that it would be funny. It's fiction. I don't think there should be any boundaries as long as a story is rated appropriately.

And honestly, if no one was ever allowed to mention sensitive issues because it might offend someone, the majority of stand-up comics would be out of a job. Just saying.

the same dru.:

The fictional painful experience?

But how can you know if it's really fiction? As I've said before sexual abuse is extremely common but most people don't tell their close friends and family about it.

The Pies Endure:

I don't see anything wrong with it if's written tactfully. It's fiction. It's not like we think it's real or should ever happen. Again that's what warnings are for.

If you want it to be entirely fictional, don't write it about a real person.
Again, what do warnings have to do with this?

kafka.:

But how can you know if it's really fiction? As I've said before sexual abuse is extremely common but most people don't tell their close friends and family about it.

Unless I'm psychic, the fictional experience I create isn't reall.

Quote

If you want it to be entirely fictional, don't write it about a real person.

That's like telling someone not to write in their native tongue. Not everyone can write original fiction nor should they have to if they don't want to.

kafka.:

If you want it to be entirely fictional, don't write it about a real person.
Again, what do warnings have to do with this?

If someone doesn't like reading fanfiction with real people in it if it has topics of rape etc the warnings often mention the triggers if they're written about so people can avoid the story. Don't like? Don't read.

As to writing about famous people, how many of them actually see the stories people write? And how many give a rats?

And even if I am writing about real people it is still entirely fictional, I don't know the people I write about.

Yeah, I don't think there's anything wrong with writing about sensitive topics such as rape, incest, molestation, etc and using real people in the stories. It's just a story, we're not claiming it's real, it's fiction. It's just creative writing.

Jewel Nicole:

Yeah, I don't think there's anything wrong with writing about sensitive topics such as rape, incest, molestation, etc and using real people in the stories. It's just a story, we're not claiming it's real, it's fiction. It's just creative writing.

Wording it that way, however, doesn't paint a picture of the most... er, "flattering" medium.

What you said just rubs me the wrong way, is all. Probably because that's the same argument that people tend to use when claiming that lolicon is okay, because it's just a drawing, and that i's not real, however, it still holds a strong association with child pornography.

But that is seriously off topic. Sorry for going there. Just thought I would point out how flawed a statement that is.

leaf's a buzzard:

Wording it that way, however, doesn't paint a picture of the most... er, "flattering" medium.

What you said just rubs me the wrong way, is all. Probably because that's the same argument that people tend to use when claiming that lolicon is okay, because it's just a drawing, and that i's not real, however, it still holds a strong association with child pornography.

But that is seriously off topic. Sorry for going there. Just thought I would point out how flawed a statement that is.

In lolicon's defense though, it's not real. Sure, the idea of it can rub people the wrong way, but it's not real. It's fiction. I don't think things should be censored just because it's a sensitive topic. If someone wants to write those things I don't think they should feel like an outcast for doing so. Now, if they are going out and acting on their writing (like if they become so obsessed with the idea and commit the crimes, etc) then of course that's when and where we should be concerned. However, until it gets to that point I only see it as being creative (no matter what the subject is).

*I didn't even know what lolicon was until this post, I had to google it.

^Because the problem isn't what it is, it's how we interpret it. It may *just* be a work of fiction, but that won't stop people from acting hostile towards it, or act wrongly as a result of being inspired by it.

It's not a problem that can be solved, though. I don't think it should matter if it's sensitive, like you said, it's fiction. The problem is us. We won't let go of those associations, we will act on them, and we'll blame the works of fiction for making us do so.

(Before I get into the discussion I just want to say that it may seem like I'm angry and it may come off as harsh but I'm not angry and I could express myself in a milder way but due to the topic I choose not to - since I find the topic as such mildly upsetting.)

leaf's a buzzard:

^Because the problem isn't what it is, it's how we interpret it. It may *just* be a work of fiction, but that won't stop people from acting hostile towards it, or act wrongly as a result of being inspired by it.

It's not a problem that can be solved, though. I don't think it should matter if it's sensitive, like you said, it's fiction. The problem is us. We won't let go of those associations, we will act on them, and we'll blame the works of fiction for making us do so.

Wait just a second here, everyone is entirely responsible for their own actions. Even work that isn't fiction, but actual propaganda or the like, isn't ultimately responsible for what an individual decides to do, it's the person making the decision and preforming the action who is. Work of fiction, especially that which doesn't even aim at encouraging what it portrays, can't be blamed for a person's wrongful actions. With your logic nothing can be written because everything holds the potential to upset someone and there are those who are able to get ideas from everything, no matter topic, I assure you.

Everything can be blamed, society, religion, whatever excuse there is, but that doesn't change the fact that the individual did it by his or her own decision. (And mitigating circumstances is a whole other discussion so I will leave that part out.) You say yourself that the topic shouldn't matter since it's fiction yet you seem to conclude that "we" can't write anything because "we" will act upon the associations "we" do and blame what "we" read for "our" actions. First of all, I rather you'd leave me out of your argument. I, for one, does not feel included in your "we" and rather you wouldn't generalize to the point where you seem to assume everyone reacts and acts the same because that simply isn't true. Secondly, it would seem you're suggesting censorship to an extreme since, like you said, there is no getting around the fact that everything carries the potential to spark an idea, which for some individuals might carry out as a hurtful or criminal action, thus the conclusion must be not to write anything as everything is open to interpretation and therefore no topic is safe to write about. You stated nothing can be done about that some can get ideas which they turn into actions from reading something and I agree with you. However, your solution is that no one writes anything? Or what is indeed the point of your argumentation?

The way I see it, we don't write fan-fictions about the person being raped in case they read it and are upset because something like that happened to them. We also shouldn't write about them knowing somebody who dies because they're bound to be upset by that. And also, we shouldn't write about them fighting or arguing because that's bound to upset them and remind them of things. And we shouldn't write about them having sex in case they had a bad experience. We shouldn't even write about them breathing in case that once went wrong for them.

If we start dictating what people should and shouldn't write, where does it stop? It's just silly, really.

What's in a name?:

With your logic nothing can be written because everything holds the potential to upset someone and there are those who are able to get ideas from everything, no matter topic, I assure you.

Exactly.

What's in a name?:

You say yourself that the topic shouldn't matter since it's fiction yet you seem to conclude that "we" can't write anything because "we" will act upon the associations "we" do and blame what "we" read for "our" actions. First of all, I rather you'd leave me out of your argument. I, for one, does not feel included in your "we" and rather you wouldn't generalize to the point where you seem to assume everyone reacts and acts the same because that simply isn't true.

You're making the assumption that I was only referring to blaming fiction for the negative things we do. That's not true at all. We all get inspired by works of fiction. Whether it be a book, a tv show, a movie, even a song.... after reading/watching/hearing it you walk away a changed person because of it.

The point I was making with that is that if we are inspired to do something like murder, or rape, we'll blame it on a work of fiction. These negative things are taboos in our society. If someone sees that same taboo in a work of fiction, they'll call out the work of fiction as if it was a person. Why? Because just as every other work of fiction, it has the ability to inspire people.

What's in a name?:

Secondly, it would seem you're suggesting censorship to an extreme since, like you said, there is no getting around the fact that everything carries the potential to spark an idea, which for some individuals might carry out as a hurtful or criminal action, thus the conclusion must be not to write anything as everything is open to interpretation and therefore no topic is safe to write about.

That would be a very extreme response, and not one that I agree with, but given the problem before it that is what some people would say. I'm only taking a look at this dilemma and playing a bit of devil's advocate. The very idea that I would be pro-censorship, after what I endured a few months ago is one of the sillest things I've heard in a very long time.

What's in a name?:

You stated nothing can be done about that and I agree with you. However, your solution is that no one writes anything? Or what is indeed the point of your argumentation?

You just answered your own question. Nothing can be done. I don't see how there can be a solution if nothing can be done.