The Difference Between TBAY and FF (WAS FF: Speculation; Fanfic is like TBAY

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 39023

Hana wrote:

>Here on this list we have TBAY where people make up all sorts of 
>anagrams to explain their views, on other lists people write 
>stories to explain theirs.  It's really the same thing in a lot of 
>ways, just presented in different formats.

AV wrote:

>And honestly, the TBAY posts differ from fanfic only in writing 
>style.

I hope it's OK if I weigh in with a few thoughts about TBAY versus 
Fanfic, as the references to TBAY in this discussion really caught 
my eye.  

First, a few disclaimers.  Everything I'm going to say is simply my 
own view as a list member.  My opinion (and I'll bet we can all 
agree on this bit) is that people are free to enjoy or not enjoy 
Fanfic, and people are free to enjoy or not enjoy TBAY.  Both TBAY 
and Fanfic are legitimate ways of enjoying HP.  

I sense, however, a feeling that TBAY and Fanfic are the same 
thing.  I think there are some important distinctions between TBAY 
and Fanfic as they pertain to their treatment of canon, and I'd like 
to spell out my views on those distinctions.  I'll start with 
Penny's post of yesterday:

************

Penny wrote:

>Let's continue with the Snape as a Vampire thing, since Amanda used 
>that example too.  Is there substantively any difference at all 
>between the following?
> 
> (a)  Poster A, who writes a really long post citing all the canon 
evidence that suggests that Snape is a vampire and refuting canon 
points that suggest he might not be (using sort of an "academic" 
straight narrative format);
> (b) Poster B, who has written a fanfic exploring how Snape became 
a Vampire, using the same canon evidence that Poster A marshalls to 
his side in his narrative post; or
> (c) Poster C, who takes Poster A's points and manipulates the 
material into what we're calling a TBAY post
> 
> Obviously, these are 3 different *forms* of writing.  They can all 
>be classed as persuasive writing perhaps -- the objective of all 3 
>posters is to convince other readers that Snape *could* be a 
>vampire.  Same objective -- just 3 different ways of arriving at 
>the same place.    

I think I understand the argument here, but I can't quite get on 
board with the idea that TBAY and Fanfic can be equated in quite 
this way.  

In my opinion, there's a *big* difference between Examples (a) and 
(c) versus (b), for purposes of discussion on this list, anyway.  
The straight narrative format and the TBAY format rely on canon and 
*only* on canon.  Fanfic writing (compared to TBAY) is one step 
removed from canon in three important ways:

1.  Fanfic writers are allowed to make things up.  They can make up 
spells/magical devices/potions/characters/magical beasts – anything 
they'd like.  Indeed, I think one of the hallmarks of a good fanfic 
is whether the writer thinks of clever ways to extend the HP world 
(Magid, the Magid Sword, Marauder's Map Pencils, the Calling of Dark 
Creatures, to use great examples from one popular Fanfic).  I 
understand that Fanfic writers work very hard to conform their fics 
to canon.  But at the same time, Fanfic writers are not strictly 
*constrained* by canon.

Are TBAY writers allowed to make things up?  Well, if you've been 
following the recent TBAY threads, a TBAY post that makes up 
something that is not in canon draws a Yellow Flag.  And in a 
straight narrative post on the main list, straying from canon will 
draw posts that ask "Where did you get that?"  That suggests to me 
that there is a much higher standard for conformity with canon in 
straight narrative posts and TBAY posts than in Fanfic.  

Now, I enjoy presenting speculative theories in a TBAY format 
(although I also do it in straight essay style on occasion).  So I 
can tell you that when one is writing a TBAY post or a straight 
essay, one most definitely feels the effect of these canon 
limitations.  

Indeed, I think "The Night The Jobberknoll Screamed" would make a 
decent fanfic if you added in a whole bunch of new canon facts.  I 
mean, wouldn't it be nifty if I added some sort of MOM panic button 
that Frank lunges for as Mrs. Lestrange enters?  I mean, that would 
allow all manner of Aurors to storm the place and would give Mrs. 
Lestrange a reason to flee before she gets a chance to kill the 
Longbottoms.  I could solve huge gaps in canon (Why weren't the 
Longbottoms killed?) with that sort of creativity.  

As a TBAY theory, though, I have to present the Jobberknoll idea 
using only canon, which is a tough sell, as you can all see.  ;-)  
The ability to cure problems in theories by making things up is a 
major difference between TBAY and Fanfic, IMO.

Turning back to Penny's three examples, then, I'd agree that all 
three examples describe posts that might share the same *goal* 
(arguing that Snape is a vampire), but only two (the narrative and 
the TBAY post) are limited to using the same *tools* because they 
cannot introduce concepts not contained in canon.  

2.  The second relevant difference between TBAY and Fanfic is that I 
believe the *canon analysis* in TBAY posts is more transparent and 
accessible.  By that I mean that the TBAY writer should be 
*explicit* about the canon basis for everything said and the 
reasoning that supports each conclusion.   

I mean, no one has to guess why I think Mrs. Lestrange would have 
used Imperio on Frank Longbottom – it is explained in black and 
white in the post, and we can (and are) debating whether that bit is 
canonical and logical.  Had I written a fanfic, however, there would 
have been lots of dialogue, movement, description, a climax, new 
characters and what have you, and it would be much more difficult 
for the reader to strip out the Imperius assumptions and debate 
them.  

In my experience, the Fanfic canon arguments are not presented in 
the same straightforward way as the TBAY canon arguments are.  That 
makes perfect sense, of course, because the Fanfic writer is 
(hopefully) working hard to entertain.  Now, I imagine that people 
do debate the canon basis for various parts of fics, but the Fanfics 
themselves tend not to, in my experience, stop the action and 
explain the basis for various canon interpretations that form the 
basis for the Fanfic.  Again, there is nothing wrong with the Fanfic 
way of doing things -- my point is only that TBAY and Fanfic are 
different.

So, despite the paddles flying around, the unsweetened Kool-Aid and 
the other silliness, TBAY canon arguments are a lot more accessible 
and easy to evaluate, IMHO.  Fanfic, IMHO, is one step further 
removed from straight canon analysis in that respect, which is 
another reason I think that TBAY and Fanfic are not the same thing 
at all.   

3.  Another difference between TBAY and Fanfic, IMO, is that the 
talent of the writer is much more important in Fanfic.  In other 
words, whether a Fanfic theory works actually depends *less* on the 
canon analysis than whether a TBAY theory works, IMHO.  A middling 
Fanfic theory in the hands of a poor writer (someone who struggles 
with dialogue or description or pacing) will not be persuasive; the 
very same theory in the hands of a talented writer might be a 
romping good time and people might buy the theory more because it 
was presented in such an entertaining and believable manner than 
because of the strength of the theory itself.  

With TBAY, all you have are the canon points (laced with silliness 
like extended metaphors).  So, for instance, whether people buy the 
Jobberknoll theory doesn't depend on whether I write good dialogue 
for Mrs. Lestrange; it depends on the canon and the logic as applied 
to the canon.  Again, this makes TBAY different from Fanfic in my 
eyes, anyway.

So.  What does it all mean?  Well, IMO, it doesn't mean TBAY is 
*better* than Fanfic or *worse* than Fanfic.  It just means that 
TBAY is *different* from fanfic, that's all.  

Cindy