oh you know, just casually finding this post 3+ months later and replying. thanks for writing this up, i really enjoyed reading it and thinking thoughts about it.
many of these ideas hit home with things that have been on my mind for a while now. it does sometimes feel as though the fourth wall is really a one-sided mirror, and how we behave and/or how we create art and share that work is held to a much different standard on this side of it.
i recently watched a series of videos that made me think and were generally very informative and interesting. here is the website, maybe you've watched them too? http://www.everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/
If we think about what we get out of creating fanworks, it's probably safe to say that the most valuable currency in fandom is acknowledgement of our work. it's maybe not the only thing we get out of what we do, but it's easily the most traded currency in fandom.
That said, my personal belief is that fan to fan transformative works do not prohibit, limit or otherwise harm the original fan artist, ie: it does not keep them from receiving or diminish previously received acknowledgement of their work. In fact, transformative works (when credited) tend to send even more fans to the source material which can lead to an even greater acknowledgment of the original work than was first received.
(if uncredited, i suppose the original fanperson could be said to have been harmed in not receiving any further acknowledgment of their original work since in all probability they could receive new acknowledgement as a result of the transformative work if properly credited. but that's sort of a weird since without the transformative work they wouldn't necessarily be getting any further acknowledgement anyway, so it's a bit too muddy for my liking and i'll just hand wave it for now, lol.)
You are correct that name and reputation is all we have as fans. The possibility that any (or some) derivatives of a person's fanworks could affect that reputation is a potential problem in terms of policies and procedures in fandom culture. The enforcement of permission etiquette is one way fandom has tried to solve this problem, by leaving power/control up to the original fanartist. however i personally find it very limiting and stifling as a fanartist, especially in terms of podficcing stories i did not write, but certainly also in terms of "policing" anyone who would create transformative works based on something i have created (how tedious).
Of course it will all sort itself out in the end, fandom culture is a constantly evolving organism and whatnot. I'm just watching it from the sidelines totally fascinated, and maybe especially because of how it's affecting more mainstream societal views about art currency. for example, i came across on tumblr the other day and found it very interesting: http://blog.ted.com/2013/02/27/trust-people-to-pay-for-music-amanda-palmer-at-ted2013/
no subject
many of these ideas hit home with things that have been on my mind for a while now. it does sometimes feel as though the fourth wall is really a one-sided mirror, and how we behave and/or how we create art and share that work is held to a much different standard on this side of it.
i recently watched a series of videos that made me think and were generally very informative and interesting. here is the website, maybe you've watched them too? http://www.everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/
If we think about what we get out of creating fanworks, it's probably safe to say that the most valuable currency in fandom is acknowledgement of our work. it's maybe not the only thing we get out of what we do, but it's easily the most traded currency in fandom.
That said, my personal belief is that fan to fan transformative works do not prohibit, limit or otherwise harm the original fan artist, ie: it does not keep them from receiving or diminish previously received acknowledgement of their work. In fact, transformative works (when credited) tend to send even more fans to the source material which can lead to an even greater acknowledgment of the original work than was first received.
(if uncredited, i suppose the original fanperson could be said to have been harmed in not receiving any further acknowledgment of their original work since in all probability they could receive new acknowledgement as a result of the transformative work if properly credited. but that's sort of a weird since without the transformative work they wouldn't necessarily be getting any further acknowledgement anyway, so it's a bit too muddy for my liking and i'll just hand wave it for now, lol.)
You are correct that name and reputation is all we have as fans. The possibility that any (or some) derivatives of a person's fanworks could affect that reputation is a potential problem in terms of policies and procedures in fandom culture. The enforcement of permission etiquette is one way fandom has tried to solve this problem, by leaving power/control up to the original fanartist. however i personally find it very limiting and stifling as a fanartist, especially in terms of podficcing stories i did not write, but certainly also in terms of "policing" anyone who would create transformative works based on something i have created (how tedious).
Of course it will all sort itself out in the end, fandom culture is a constantly evolving organism and whatnot. I'm just watching it from the sidelines totally fascinated, and maybe especially because of how it's affecting more mainstream societal views about art currency. for example, i came across on tumblr the other day and found it very interesting: http://blog.ted.com/2013/02/27/trust-people-to-pay-for-music-amanda-palmer-at-ted2013/