Slate suggests that CSI might be the most fanfic-generative show on TV.
Say wha?
I understand the need for a hook for a story, and I have no beef with anyone who does write and/or read CSI fic, but that's just annoying ignorance. (OK, when I checked on ff.net, CSI was a lot closer to the top of the list than I thought it would be, but even assuming ff.net is a good bellwether for overall numbers, Buffy beats it by an order of magnitude, and the Slate story's links to two archives with a total of about 300 stories between them does not help persuade me.) I'd be interested in a story about Grissom's attractiveness, but not a story that has to get its punch by making up an exclusivity/preeminence that doesn't exist.
Say wha?
I understand the need for a hook for a story, and I have no beef with anyone who does write and/or read CSI fic, but that's just annoying ignorance. (OK, when I checked on ff.net, CSI was a lot closer to the top of the list than I thought it would be, but even assuming ff.net is a good bellwether for overall numbers, Buffy beats it by an order of magnitude, and the Slate story's links to two archives with a total of about 300 stories between them does not help persuade me.) I'd be interested in a story about Grissom's attractiveness, but not a story that has to get its punch by making up an exclusivity/preeminence that doesn't exist.
Tags:
From:
no subject
*snicker*
ROFL!
From:
LOL
From:
no subject
Or, they're just dumb.
From:
no subject
I've read two, count them two, good pieces of C.S.I fanfic. And not just because I was looking exclusively for my pairing but because so much of it is just horrible.
300 whole stories! WOW! THAT'S AMAZING! ((eye roll))
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I think it's really interesting that a wildly popular hobby which gets so much media attention is still so roundly condescended to. Taking other people's characters and making them your own is a tradition as old as oral storytelling. Why can't we get a little respect?
I blame the copyright lawyers for this. ;)
From:
no subject
Either somebody did exceedingly lousy research or just skewed the statistics to the extreme in order to get the results they wanted. Either way=sloppy, bad journalism.
Did you read the article in the Boston Globe in 2003 about fanfic? It used Harry Potter fic as an example and began with an excerpt from a pornfic (as representative of all fic.) I hit the roof. Bad journalism irks me as a rule, but when the result is to misrepresent my hobby--(Snarl!)
CSI is very popular. Probably out of the TV dramas, it's definitely among the top fic-generators, but why the Slate writer couldn't say THAT, who knows?
From:
no subject
I read the Boston Globe article; periodically some culture writer at a paper will "discover" fanfic and write that very same article, changing only the fandom name. Maybe news writers are particularly interested in distinguishing the "real" professional writers from the ones who are just faking it; or maybe it's just natural in a news story to single out writing that allows them to point and laugh.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
One of my earliest fandoms was L&O, and for some reason L&O fanfic never really took off. There's always been a fair-sized fanwriting crowd, but not to the extent of other dramas.
The way I read the Boston Globe article was that it wasn't merely distinguishing "real" vs. "fake" writers for point-and-laugh purposes (the BBC did that) but rather to portray fanwriting as something perverse and shameful. The equivalent of trying to represent all literature by showing an excerpt from a yellowback novel. The Washington Post, on the other hand, was surprisingly fair.
From:
no subject
I'd have sworn there were more XF fics back in the day. I seem to recall downloading hundreds--way more than I ever did of BtVS. But perhaps my taste has gotten more selective over the years.
From:
no subject
I would *love* to find more good CSI fic... but I will not tread the halls of ff.net.
From:
no subject