Subject: Semi-OT: Is anger justified?
Author:
Posted on: 2010-06-07 18:38:00 UTC

We all get angry at badfic. We gawp at what has happened to our beloved canon, and realize that the author of such badfic has little respect for the soul of the material and just wanted to play around with it. Which, in and of itself, is okay, as long as we learn from it. That's how most of us started writing. (I myself am guilty of a Zelda/Yu-Gi-Oh! crossover 'Sue, the only redeeming feature of which is that I never let it out of my hard drive.)

But when the story in question is published, piggybacking on a deceased author's body of work, and licensed by the estate (or the copyright has run out), is it still "okay" to get angry about "damage" done to the canon? As the new story is licensed and published, it counts as canon (so far as I understand the PPC's rules) - but what if it violates everything the original canon stood for? What if it contradicts key information that the original author wrote (and cannot correct it due to Author Existence Failure)? What if beloved characters are killed off with no real reason? What if a main character's age is suddenly changed (or disregarded)? Or his backstory? Or his entire personality?

What if the "continuation" is really a different series with this character's/universe's name slapped onto it like a cheap, off-brand Post-it note?

Is "badfic rage" justified in such a case? Does it even technically count as canon if there are such blatant character/'verse replacements?

This Penny Arcade comic pretty much sums up the phenomenon to which I refer. There's a series very close to my heart that is getting this treatment. A new book in the continuations just came out, and I managed to read the inside dustjacket cover without throwing it across the bookstore. Barely. It shreds what little is left of the canon at this point (after far more continuation books published than in the original series). Am I right to be angry, or do I just have issues?

Reply Return to messages