I'd like to tell you about one of my favorite fanfics. It doesn't appear on this site, unfortunately, but I can tell you how to find it. It's a crossover fic, actually - an odd one, between Sherlock Holmes and H. P. Lovecraft. It was called "A Study in Emerald," a reference to the Holmes title "A Study in Scarlet," except the victim had green blood. The detective and his loyal companion were placed in a world where the Great Old Ones had long ago conquered the world and become its royalty; a prince, son of one of these creatures, had been mysteriously murdered. The author started each chapter with a fake ad, each one referencing another old story - Dorian Gray, Dracula, Jekyll and Hyde, Frankenstein - it was a cute trick. At WorldCon 2004, "A Study in Emerald" earned the author a Hugo award for Best Short Story - the Hugo is generally considered the highest honor in science fiction and fantasy, voted by fans.
The author's name was Neil Gaiman. You can find "A Study in Emerald" in its original publication in the anthology Shadows over Baker Street, edited by Reaves and Pelan, or in Gaiman's own collection Fragile Things. It was still, without question, fanfiction: every character in it was the creation of another famous author - Holmes, Watson, Moriarty, Lestrange, Shub-Niggurath. It was also, without question, literature: it was creative, disturbing, thought-provoking, award-winning.
I believe that fanfiction can be great - that it should be great. We all know, in our hearts, the inherent geeky awesomeness of the fundamental concept of fanfic. But we also know, whether we admit it or not, that fanfiction is almost always terrible. We can't all be Neil Gaiman, of course - in particular, fanfiction is often the first thing a young writer does except for school assignments. It would be silly to expect instant perfection.
But there's a perception in fanfiction communities that it doesn't matter if we write crap. There's an attitude that any criticism is a flame, that all reviews should be good reviews, that no one has the right to tell you anything bad about your fics. This attitude is poison. People who could have been good writers someday, who could have produced good stories both inside and outside fandom, are turning into self-important hacks who think they're entitled to praise no matter what they produce. Neither they nor anyone else finds the flaws in their work, and so they will never, ever improve. Writers who are already on the way to becoming good come to these communities, try to share what they know with new writers, and take so much flak for daring to offer criticism that they give up and get lost. Any truly excellent writer who stays in the community has, or soon acquires, a crushing self-esteem problem.
(Of the novels I've read in the last year, my three favorites are Catch-22 by Joseph Heller, Suburbia by Falaphesian, and The Telling by Ursula LeGuin. In that order. Falaphesian's profile says her work isn't worth reading. Every review I leave her advises her to publish professionally; my advice is ignored.)
Rather than sit around and whine about this, I've decided to do something about it. Always before, I've only reviewed stories I thought were good. I did give constructive criticism occasionally, but only to stories I thought were basically good. As of now, this policy is changed. I intend to periodically go into fanfiction archives and give honest, constructive, courteous reviews to the entire front page - all the first twenty-five stories, no matter what. If they're bad, I'll tell them so, and exactly how, and suggest ways to improve it. I will not discriminate based on pairing or other clear matters of taste, but if the basic concept or plot of a story is flawed, I will tell the author so, and why, and suggest how the story ought to be rewritten. Anyone I review - or anyone else writing in a fandom I know - can drop me a PM and ask me to beta it.
I don't claim that my fanfic is better than everyone else's. My fanfic is better than some people's, because some people are so absorbed in their own badfic that they write terrible dreck almost on purpose. I might even be better than average, but I'm not fantastic. The idea that to offer critique one must be a better writer, or whatever, than whoever you're critiquing, is a myth. Very few professional literary critics are professional authors themselves. If they were, they would be writing books and stories instead of critical articles. The fact is, it's easier to judge whether a work of fiction is good or bad than to write something good yourself. The criticism can still be correct, insightful, and useful to the author. While anyone is completely welcome to offer constructive criticism to any of my own work, the flaws I find in other people's work do not magically vanish just because other flaws - or even the same flaws - can be found in mine. I'm no more immune to tunnel vision than any other writer, and some of the stories I have up, I wouldn't judge good enough to post today. (I just don't believe in taking stories down once I post them, so that the few people who like them can still find them.)
Once again, feel free to give me a taste of my own medicine. I can always use the help. Just remember the bits about "helpful" and especially "courteous." I'm not trying to start any flame wars, here. I just more think fanfic writers should start wanting to improve themselves. Even Neil Gaiman tries to get better.
FanFiction.Net - unleash your imagination
