thoughts on a rant - writerly divisions

[permetaform]

Rant on fandom by gwyn_r

I love this whole discussion if but for this comment by morgandown alone:

"We care. But we care like the trippy hippies cared. Like the butterflies care as they float on the breeze. You don't think a butterfly does *not* care if it flies into a spider's web? It does, but until it does, it is perfectly happy floating..... and when it finds itself stuck, with Shelob inching its way closer, the butterfly says: look, there is another butterfly. Oh and a bee....we're all trapped together in this web. Well, that's not so bad, is it? I am after all a butterfly and butterflies are happy."

::wry giggles:: so true::

Though, dude, some of the comments there...::hugs Saiyuki fandom:: stay cool, yes?

Interesting thought occured from reading one of the comments by stakebait: there might be two types of writers (with a huge spectrum of grey area), the kind that can map out a story, whole, in their head, and the kind that has to write their story to be able to see the full story 'cause it changes with the move from head to paper or digital text...and I *think* this might be the dividing distinction between people who "write for fans" and people who "write for themselves".

Or rather, that the people who tends towards "write for themselves" are almost forced to produce the artwork that appears in their head 'cause they wanna know what happens next, or what the vid would look like completed, say. Therefore, posting it is comparatively little effort.

However, if one tends towards being able to visualize the entire product, then the effort of recreating the artwork in physical form for post is entirely "for fans"...which means that such a fan would theoretically be more community orientated and be somewhat more feedback hungry because the cost is producing the artwork and the benefit is knowing that people read it.

Whereas for people who tend to be more that they can't fully visualize the end-product, the cost of producing the artwork is allayed (subsidized?) by their being entertained during the production of the art itself, and therefore feedback is viewed slightly more as icing on cake than would a person who writes "for fans", who would then view it more as payment, or rather, the cake itself.

Huh.

Or, I could be completely off the mark. ::wry grin::

[edit] more clarifications (in a thread in the original post)

Comments

[guede-mazaka.livejournal.com]

and I know exactly what you mean. do you lie awake until 4 AM because your brain will not stop plotting your latest story, too?)

*points to severe eyebags and Post-It and pen kept by bed*

And actually, I'm glad you jumped in because I think you put it better than I do. Upon further reflection (i. e. not the last couple minutes before work), I doubt that how a writer works really has too much of a connection to what their goal is. I mean, just look at the matching possibilities. You've got what seems to be a million different ways to work, even if you generalize, and only two goals: write for you, write for others.

Anyway, why should it matter whether you're telling it for yourself, or telling it for others? Why this almost elitest sense (and I convict myself of it sometimes) that a 'real' writer only does it for themselves? Hell, I tell stories to myself all day--boring classes, anyone?--and I get as much enjoyment out of those as I do out of the fanfic I write. It's just a different kind, same as it's different speaking to your sister and speaking to an auditorium of people, though the speech may be exactly the same.