Materialism in Fanfiction

[Terdwilicker]

One of those things which keeps popping up in fan fiction, in several fandoms, is obsessive materialism. I see it as childish, but I was raised in poverty in the 1970's and know the taste of Government Cheese. Money was worth around 10X as much then, so a quarter would buy a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk was around 65 cents. Picture that. I keep running into stories where impoverished characters, instead of embracing their inner MacGuyver that made me like them in the first place are replaced with Gary Stu characters that go on shopping sprees to buy stuff they mostly don't use again in the rest of the story, or worse inherit lots of money and buy their way out of problems (sometimes legal) rather than solve them in their usual frugal and clever way. I really wish that the young folks writing these stories understood that they're literally ruining the character they're writing (Xander from Buffy, Harry Potter, Ranma, any anime otaku lameboy).

I realize that fan fiction is written by fans, and that in most cases they're Gary Stu self-inserting and that's why they're OOC, ruining the whole thing. I get that some writing is better than none, that the practice can lead to improvement. For those who improve, I'm forgiving and will wait for their next story in hopes they don't ruin it the same as their first. Some folks, however, only write the same story over and over, like they've got Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and can't stop themselves. There are authors who clearly have mental health issues and the writing is making them worse, not better. I dearly hope they get proper medical attention and start their Rx and stay on them so this compulsion can end. OCD is a serious disease and can ruin lives or lead to Suicide.

When I read a story, I hope to see a new way to tell the story, a clever take on an idea that uses even fewer cheats, or a really clever delivery of dialogue that is better than the original. I've seen many examples of this, which is why I keep reading fan fiction. Its also less hassle than going to the library and the back button is easier than returning the book.

I know that many of the young people reading this grew up with rampant materialism in their parents, in Rich Times. Those times are largely over. We're all getting poorer if not going completely broke. It would follow that stories about materialism should be phasing out and ones about cleverly using available junk to get the job done start to replace them. Ranma never had money, and most of the things he owns get broken in a fight. Harry Potter has a wand. What the hell does he need a bag of holding for? He can transfigure any tool as needed. That's Ultimate MacGuyver right there. Xander Harris is all about Heart and never giving up. Making him into a supermagical hero kinda ruins his appeal. He stops being Us when he's turned into a monster or superhero. He doesn't need money to be happy, just to keep on trying, like always. He lost his eye saving lives. He stops being awesome if the eye comes back or he turns into a Hellsing super-vampire. Would Saito Hiraga still be awesome if he'd fought off that army third season with Void magic instead of his usual sword? I liked that he fought thousands with nothing but a sword. Again, that's Heart. Heart is what we're reading for, not "how can I ruin this character by unbalancing him against his enemies?"

There is a place for materialistic and overpowered fanfiction, I just think its one for authors to be ashamed of later. For those who keep doing it, maybe its time to stop?

 

[The Eromancer]

Well all I can say is, "money makes the world go round".

Aside from that you make the exact point of overpowering the main character as to make them unreadable, its why I hate superman.

 

[Terdwilicker]

The only Superman I liked was Lois and Clark, mainly because it was done as Parody. Gotta love that. The cultural context of Superman is usually overlooked. He was a direct response to the Nazis. No really. The Nazi superman was blonde with blue eyes. Clark Kent? Brown hair, blue eyes. The Nazi Superman is all about dominating the weak because he is strong. The American Superman helps the weak because he is strong. Its the Hegel vs Nietzche argument from Crime and Punishment, from which we get the phrase "Beating a dead horse". Its one of the metaphors in the book. Superman was supposed to be counter propaganda to the Nazis. It just sort of took off on its own after that.

But even Clark Kent has to work for a living and pay his rent.

 

[daniel_gudman]

So I'm reading your whining, and I'm like, "prove your assumptions, because they are crazy assumptions."

Here are some especially ridiculous things you just said:

1) Shitty writing is the result of medication-severe mental problems.

2) Terdwilicker can diagnose medication-severe mental problems by reading shitty writing.

3) Most young people (and their parents) (these days) grew up in Rich Times.
(Unrelated but interesting: 2010-1970 = 40; 1970 - 40 = 1930).

4) Rich Times cause "rampant materialism".

5) Growing up in Rich Times is related to writing about characters that solved their problems with money instead of cleverness.

6) The Gandalfr isn't magic.

 

[Christopher Robin]

But Superman was first published in 1938, almost a year before the "official" start of the war. And conceived of even earlier. Also, not the origin of that phrase.

 

[trevelyan1983]

Some folks, however, only write the same post over and over, like they've got Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and can't stop themselves.

Yup. I completely agree. Some people just don't know when to shut their damned mouths and go do something more productive.

It's especially annoying when they put on this superior, know-it-all attitude and soapbox about stuff they have only vague knowledge of, to an audience that cares not one whit.

 

[Terdwilicker]

Here are some especially ridiculous things you just said:

1) Shitty writing is the result of medication-severe mental problems.

It can be inexperience. I'm forgiving of a first effort. When the problems repeat, I get less forgiving. Don't you?

2) Terdwilicker can diagnose medication-severe mental problems by reading shitty writing.

If the author does it in EVERY story (Skysaber, Carrotglace, Perfect Lionheart who is probably all the same person) then I'm saying that's someone with a problem. We've all seen authors who keep writing the same story over and over like there's something really wrong with them. I should think that's pretty obvious it's mental illness. Do you have difficulty identifying such? There was another thread that mentions Pstibbons and Less Wrong as examples of clear mental problems. I agree with that assertion.

3) Most young people (and their parents) (these days) grew up in Rich Times.
4) Rich Times cause "rampant materialism".
5) Growing up in Rich Times is related to writing about characters that solved their problems with money instead of cleverness.
3-5 are the same point. And you're identifying what I said, not disagreeing with it.

6) The Gandalfr isn't magic.
Point. He's magic, but his magic is to use physical weapons, not shouting, glowing yellow, and bellowing with his furious hidden inner power which somehow makes a mushroom cloud. He had to fight that army one at a time, 3000 times, only with crowds of them surging at him. That's a respectable accomplishment. Xander fought vamps with human strength and takes a lot of hits over the years. Remarkable endurance and willpower. That makes him a hero.

You want answers? Okay.

 

[Terdwilicker]

It's especially annoying when they put on this superior, know-it-all attitude and soapbox about stuff they have only vague knowledge of, to an audience that cares not one whit.

Are you one of those repeating Gary Stu character fanfic writers? Or do you just really enjoy reading them so felt compelled to post about a subject you just stated bores you?

 

[daniel_gudman]

....

You want answers? Okay.

So I'm reading your whining, and I'm like, "prove your assumptions, because they are crazy assumptions."

y u cut most important sentence???

 

[trevelyan1983]

I've written some shitfics in my time, yeah. Setting aside the deflection, however;

I just think your recent flood of opinionated shitposts is on par with Lionheart or Carrot's efforts, and indicates a similar disconnection with reality in favour of ignorance and opinionated blethering.

 

[Terdwilicker]

So I'm reading your whining, and I'm like, "prove your assumptions, because they are crazy assumptions."

y u cut most important sentence???

That's not really a discussion is it? I conceded your point re: Saito's magic. I stand by the remainder of points.

Do YOU have a position re: materialism and Gary Stu characters in fan fiction dominating certain authors writing "styles" to the point that's all they do? Are you fond of that? Is that what you read fanfiction for? Are you all about shopping trips, bling, and babes?

I like good writing. It's a preference. And I started this Discussion commenting on my preference and what I avoid and why. Is there some reason all you express is attack on my ideas rather than have any of your own? Really, I'd love to hear it.

 

[Terdwilicker]

I've written some shitfics in my time, yeah. Setting aside the deflection, however;

I just think your recent flood of opinionated shitposts is on par with Lionheart or Carrot's efforts, and indicates a similar disconnection with reality in favour of ignorance and opinionated blethering.

And you're not seeing the irony in what you just wrote?

 

[trevelyan1983]

Nuh-uh, I turned your words back on you first. Get your own party trick.

 

[daniel_gudman]

Hey hey, I know offense is the best defense, but I'm not going to defend myself against your attack-of-hypotheticals, this is about you proving you're not making stuff up, this isn't about me.

I'm not saying those aren't your points, I'm saying you didn't prove they were true.

Like,

If Skysaber = Carrotglace = Perfect Lionheart, that's ONE data point, and if not, that's THREE, but in either case, "materialism" isn't their problem. The stories attributed to those authors have jack to do with your argument, so don't bring them up. So even if that dude(s) has problems, it still doesn't support your point about materialism and OCD or whatever you were going off about on in OP.

Other than that, you're like, "yeah, that's what I said," but that doesn't address my criticism, which is, "I don't believe what you said is true."

I mean if you're going to complain about "The shopping trip is a crappy plot device because it's a boring Deus Ex Machina", that's valid. But you start attributing its use to the socioeconomics and demographics of the people using them as a group.

That's a huge leap and I don't think you've bringing enough game to even get your retro high-top shoes off the court, let alone dunk the ball.

 

[Terdwilicker]

But Superman was first published in 1938, almost a year before the "official" start of the war. And conceived of even earlier. Also, not the origin of that phrase.

It's true that Superman was largely a copy of a Pulp novel character from the 20's. Boingboing.net did an article about this. But the Nazi party was actively trying to convince people they were heroes prior to the war and the US govt found them dangerous and started their propaganda in 1938. This has been in documentaries on TV. Based on reactions here, that's clearly not common knowledge.

Do you enjoy the character of Superman or do you think he largely sucks the heroism out of it because he's pretty well invulnerable (except kryptonite and magic)? Compared to Xander Harris, who is more heroic?

Dostoyevsky was popular reading a long time ago and mandatory back in AP English. My teacher could have lied about it but you might be misinformed. Who DID come up with popularizing the metaphor if not Crime and Punishment, since you claim to know otherwise without citing your own reference? It's only fair.

 

[Christopher Robin]

Even if Superman was published around the time of the war, I don't accept that in itself as prove he's the anti-Nazi. Or reverse Ubermensch or whatever.

Generally, I find Superman more enjoyable. I find Xander annoying, much like most of the Buffy characters. I realize he's supposed to be the everyman I relate to, but I don't generally don't like those types of characters that much.

Also, <a href='http://lmgtfy.com/?q=beating+a+dead+horse' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>let me google that for you.</a>

 

[Terdwilicker]

If Skysaber = Carrotglace = Perfect Lionheart, that's ONE data point, and if not, that's THREE, but in either case, "materialism" isn't their problem. The stories attributed to those authors have jack to do with your argument, so don't bring them up. So even if that dude(s) has problems, it still doesn't support your point about materialism and OCD or whatever you were going off about on in OP.

Carrotglace/Skysaber/Lionheart structure their stories identically and nearly always drag in unrelated and unnecessary crossovers, claims ownership to popular media in the story, and then commit atrocities against women, before going Mormons-mormons-rah-rah-rah. And he's always loaded. Considering how he treats women in his stories, I have to consider them and the music/movies as part of his materialism. And sadly I'd read too many of his fics not to notice that. That author has been discussed in other threads on this forum. I would be shocked to learn that CSL isn't the same person.

There are many other examples of these problems, I just pointed at CSL because he's particularly prolific with that pattern of writing. Would you be more comfortable if I'd included ChemProf, LessWrong, RedJacobson, Pstibbons, JoeHundredaire, Razial, Dragen, and whoever it was that wrote Witches Secret? Maybe they just like writing that kind of story, but I just like avoiding what they write because they're writing the same one, pretty much, over and over. Maybe they're trying to perfect the message. Or maybe they need a friend to talk about their troubles. From what I can tell, their writing isn't helping them though.

Other than that, you're like, "yeah, that's what I said," but that doesn't address my criticism, which is, "I don't believe what you said is true."

My initial statement, see above, that I found materialism annoying as a Gary Stu problem is we usually read, or I do anyway, characters that are clever and admirable. Having a big bank account is a cheat and not very good writing. It is not admirable. I believe it gets used because modern kids and adults raised after WW2 (baby boomers and later) got spoiled because their parents and grand parents survived the poverty of the Great Depression.
I am hoping that such writing will fade, and that authors working on a 2nd, 3rd, etc story won't cheat with free money and materialism to Gary Stu a character that is more fun to read when poor and clever. Rowling, for example, does a shopping trip at the start of each of her novels, shortly after the summer prison scenes anyway, and presumably there's a strong demographic reason for that particular trope to repeat nearly every novel. Fanfiction authors of that genre tend to obsess on that. It's annoying. Many anime have obsessive food indulgence. That's a demographic thing too, presumably.

I mean if you're going to complain about "The shopping trip is a crappy plot device because it's a boring Deus Ex Machina", that's valid. But you start attributing its use to the socioeconomics and demographics of the people using them as a group.

At least we agree on the the Shopping Trip point. The repetition of the trope by certain authors COULD be a lack of imagination or poor quality writing rather than actual OCD. That it seems to occur consistently, without fail, in certain authors DOES suggest OCD, however. Others have commented on patterns in some authors in other threads on this forum. Are you suggesting they are wrong? Even if its not OCD, the materialism remains annoying to read.

See, there's a discussion worth having. Good. Now we're getting somewhere.

 

[toraneko]

Leaving aside entirely the assigning of motivations to people you don't know anything about except for what they write on the internet...

I got sick a long, long time ago of authors who see underdog lead characters, and then try to give them a big boost via some deus ex machina. Part of what makes a story good is the tension, the struggle, the conflict, and taking the humble beginnings away from a character either makes them less identifiable to the audience, or cheapens the drama of the story immensely, or both.

Take, for example, Naruto. He's the boy who's got nothing - no money, no family, not much in the way of friends, and his skills as a ninja suck balls at story's start. All he has going for him are guts, luck, and a monstrous curse placed on him at his birth.
Now, which of the following has more potential in a story?
A. He uses sheer determination and cleverness to rise above his humble beginnings, gains the skills he needs to defeat his foes, and eventually wins the respect and acclaim of his peers.
or
B. He meets up with a mysterious individual who hands him the keys to a vault full of money and special items that allow him to learn the ninja arts at breakneck speed, enabling him to grow faster than all his peers and defeat his foes almost as soon as they appear.

Personally, I think the only way B could be an interesting story is if it was used as an illustration of how essential it is to take the slow path - i.e. this gifted Naruto, thanks to what he found in his vault, surpasses his classmates and rises in rank so quickly that he leaves them behind, yet the short time-frame of his advancement leaves him without the chance to form bonds with his new peers, and he ends up isolated, which is really not much different than things were before he started wearing the "class clown" mask. Such a story would have to be fairly short, however, lest it become tiresome; it's kind of an Aesop's fable, and those are no good if they stretch too far after they've made their point.

Bottom line is, I think that such serendipity ultimately cheats everyone involved out of a better story.

Now, the literary element aside, I just find it distasteful when a character suddenly has enough wealth to solve all their problems by throwing money at them. If cash could solve all their problems like that, then can they really be called problems?

 

[Terdwilicker]

Even if Superman was published around the time of the war, I don't accept that in itself as prove he's the anti-Nazi.? Or reverse Ubermensch or whatever.

It was a significant topic in AP English when reading Crime and Punishment, Hegel vs Nietzche. I suspect they don't teach that anymore, based on your comments. Here you go: <a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6958782.stm' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6958782.stm</a>
Scroll down a page to the Superman comic book cover.

Generally, I find Superman more enjoyable.? I find Xander annoying, much like most of the Buffy characters.? I realize he's supposed to be the everyman I relate to, but I don't generally don't like those types of characters that much.

So, there's the key difference. You might have said that to begin with.

Also, <a href='http://lmgtfy.com/?q=beating+a+dead+horse' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>let me google that for you.</a>

Point to you. Should have googled it. My bad.

 

[Terdwilicker]

Thank you for your comments, Toraneko. I appreciate you discussing them seriously. I believe that if you write seriously enough, the real you tends to come through in your writing to the point that someone who reads enough of your work will be able to recognize that. Its mostly a matter of writing style and word choice and character motivations. A particularly good author won't do that while still providing a believable character, but such are rare gems in the fanfiction world.

 

[toraneko]

Be that as it may, I'd be wary of running myself into a blind-men-and-elephant scenario, and then basing my reactions to an author off of what may be a grossly incorrect estimation of their character.

 

[Garahs]

You are aware that there are different kinds of plots and conflicts besides combat, right? For example, in Familiar of Zero, the plot mostly revolves around the country's troubles. When has Saito ever needed some kind of training? He has 'master fighter' build right into him with a single rune. That's almost more 'contrived' than any of the fanfic powerup I've seen.

Also, the fact that you're even considering Carrotglace and Lionheart as being the same person is very telling that you don't know shit. Either that or you're trying to troll too hard.

 

[The Ero-Sennin]

Personally, I think the only way B could be an interesting story is if it was used as an illustration of how essential it is to take the slow path - i.e. this gifted Naruto, thanks to what he found in his vault, surpasses his classmates and rises in rank so quickly that he leaves them behind, yet the short time-frame of his advancement leaves him without the chance to form bonds with his new peers, and he ends up isolated, which is really not much different than things were before he started wearing the "class clown" mask. Such a story would have to be fairly short, however, lest it become tiresome; it's kind of an Aesop's fable, and those are no good if they stretch too far after they've made their point.

Never forget the Alternative of Cause and Effect.

 

[Shiakou]

One of those things which keeps popping up in fan fiction, in several fandoms, is obsessive materialism. I see it as childish, but I was raised in poverty in the 1970's and know the taste of Government Cheese. Money was worth around 10X as much then, so a quarter would buy a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk was around 65 cents. Picture that. I keep running into stories where impoverished characters, instead of embracing their inner MacGuyver that made me like them in the first place are replaced with Gary Stu characters that go on shopping sprees to buy stuff they mostly don't use again in the rest of the story, or worse inherit lots of money and buy their way out of problems (sometimes legal) rather than solve them in their usual frugal and clever way. I really wish that the young folks writing these stories understood that they're literally ruining the character they're writing (Xander from Buffy, Harry Potter, Ranma, any anime otaku lameboy).

I realize that fan fiction is written by fans, and that in most cases they're Gary Stu self-inserting and that's why they're OOC, ruining the whole thing. I get that some writing is better than none, that the practice can lead to improvement. For those who improve, I'm forgiving and will wait for their next story in hopes they don't ruin it the same as their first. Some folks, however, only write the same story over and over, like they've got Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and can't stop themselves. There are authors who clearly have mental health issues and the writing is making them worse, not better. I dearly hope they get proper medical attention and start their Rx and stay on them so this compulsion can end. OCD is a serious disease and can ruin lives or lead to Suicide.

When I read a story, I hope to see a new way to tell the story, a clever take on an idea that uses even fewer cheats, or a really clever delivery of dialogue that is better than the original. I've seen many examples of this, which is why I keep reading fan fiction. Its also less hassle than going to the library and the back button is easier than returning the book.

I know that many of the young people reading this grew up with rampant materialism in their parents, in Rich Times. Those times are largely over. We're all getting poorer if not going completely broke. It would follow that stories about materialism should be phasing out and ones about cleverly using available junk to get the job done start to replace them. Ranma never had money, and most of the things he owns get broken in a fight. Harry Potter has a wand. What the hell does he need a bag of holding for? He can transfigure any tool as needed. That's Ultimate MacGuyver right there. Xander Harris is all about Heart and never giving up. Making him into a supermagical hero kinda ruins his appeal. He stops being Us when he's turned into a monster or superhero. He doesn't need money to be happy, just to keep on trying, like always. He lost his eye saving lives. He stops being awesome if the eye comes back or he turns into a Hellsing super-vampire. Would Saito Hiraga still be awesome if he'd fought off that army third season with Void magic instead of his usual sword? I liked that he fought thousands with nothing but a sword. Again, that's Heart. Heart is what we're reading for, not "how can I ruin this character by unbalancing him against his enemies?"

There is a place for materialistic and overpowered fanfiction, I just think its one for authors to be ashamed of later. For those who keep doing it, maybe its time to stop?

Dude, aren't you confusing materialism with wish-fulfillment?

A lot of people write fantasy and wish-fulfillment. Some young kids with no control over their finances write stories where they gain sudden wealth or superpowers. Some rich people romanticize "the simple life", wondering if they could get the love, trust and affection of their fellows if they hadn't been rich. Women fantasize about being kidnapped or forcibly engaged to rogues and bandits who turn out to have good hearts and men fantasize about being attractive to beautiful women despite being utterly average. It's why books like Twilight are so popular despite being a boat of junk from a literary perspective, and why there's a dozen harem anime every season.

Yes, it's cliche and boring, but it's not materialistic. It's simply fantasy, wish-fulfillment and entertainment.

 

[SotF]

I mean if you're going to complain about "The shopping trip is a crappy plot device because it's a boring Deus Ex Machina", that's valid. But you start attributing its use to the socioeconomics and demographics of the people using them as a group.

Expanding on this bit, by definition the shopping trip trope is not, by its nature, a Deus Ex Machina. It exists primarily as exposition and to set up, in intention, a chekov's gun or several of them while giving a source point why this version of the character is different.

They're the equivalent of Bond's visits to Q-Branch or the "Guns, Lots of Guns" scene in the Matrix.

If someone has the money and time, they are idiots not to use some of it to prepare for things. Sure, a lot of authors go overboard, but the concept itself is a sound and logical one.

And from there you have situations in settings where the "everyman" character gets shafted for various things. A big example is that Xander Harris got screwed over when Joss shifted a lot of his attention to Angel in order to get it running and you got idiocy like the freaking slap fight and some of the other stunts.

And Terdwilicker seems to be entirely of the opinion that making any changes to a character ruins them...which ignores what FANfiction is all about, it's changing the story to one the writer finds interesting.