Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
December 16, 2009
Image Size
9.3 KB
Resolution
99×56
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
13,081 (6 today)
Favourites
1,177 (who?)
Comments
212
Downloads
71
×
Stamp: Fanchars are not OCs by Jammerlee Stamp: Fanchars are not OCs by Jammerlee
UPDATE: I AM NOW IGNORING ANY QUESTIONS I HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED. I'm tired of repeating myself. Have a question in regard to this stamp? READ THE COMMENTS FIRST. I've most likely already answered someone else over the exact same thing.

This is a major major pet peeve of mine, and it confuses the crap out of me. Why are the terms "fanchar" and "original character" used interchangeably? A fanchar is a character created within the universe of another person's marketed work - Sonic the Hedgehog, Inuyasha, Harry Potter, whatever - a fandom, if you will. While an original character belongs to the universe created by that person's mind.

My character Darian Shiloh is an original character. He exists within Idika, an original story I'm writing not based off of any pre-existing fandom. My character Midnight the Bat is a fanchar. She exists within the Sonic the Hedgehog universe. My character Lance Argentum has both an original incarnation in Idika, and a fanchar incarnation in Sonic the Hedgehog. It's... really not that hard.

It took me ages to realize people were using these terms interchangeably when "OC" became popularized - it still causes me confusion, actually.

And for the record, I don't really care if you don't agree with my opinion, and I don't care what kind of arguments you have against it either. I've heard them all, and I find them incredibly weak. Can you market the character without infringement? No? Then it's a fanchar. Don't agree? Fine. But I refuse to change my opinion about this.

RELATED STAMPS BY ME:



Other stamps I've made: [link]
Stamps I've collected: [link]
Add a Comment:
 
:iconfoxypika:
FoxyPika 5 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
So if I have a Pokémon character. (actually a lot of them) Are they fan character or oc? Because, while they are pokemon, and some of anime/game logic applies to them, most of them live in a different universe alltogether, not the one in anime/videogames?
Reply
:iconxg912:
XG912 4 days ago  Student General Artist
To be fair this is my opinion. Since you are calling your character a Pokémon it is still a fan character. Though you mentioned your characters live in another universe, they are still created and influenced from Pokémon. Original characters are created from scratch and fabricated into your own ideas and creations. I hope this helps, your question. 
Reply
:iconabsolhunter251:
Absolhunter251 Mar 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I agree with you there! :)
Reply
:iconvelvetturkey:
velvetturkey Jan 22, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
Whats a fanchar?
Reply
:iconseadoq:
a fancharacter is a character from a canon universe like Sonic or Avatar.
while a original character is from your own made up world! c:
Reply
:iconvelvetturkey:
velvetturkey Feb 27, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
Hehe thankies
Reply
:iconpeacefulinvasion:
peacefulinvasion Jan 19, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
I say yes and no. A fan character is a category of oc. There are two types of ocs. Fan characters and stand alones. Stand alones have their own universe fan characters live in somebody else's canon universe.


But not all ocs are fan characters.
Reply
:iconzentono:
I know they aren't, I use to call my OCs FCs. But now I call them OCs and still call characters I created that are based off of something OCs, but I'll try to call them FCs.
Reply
:iconwwwarea:
I think this idea that they are "not" the same is honestly lacking knowledge on how culture works. Basically every work has came from another mind.
Original character is based on customs, I say if I have a character inspired from sonic or sonic fandom for example, it's a OC, because you used your own mind to create a new form. Which is not anything different than people how created any character in the first place. I say when someone makes characters based on a movie/show/comic/etc, it's the fresh light that a new culture (Well a even bigger culture because move/show/comic/etc was from somewhere too) has been created, and THAT is what Culture and creativity is about.

I think the separated delusion of "fan-inspire" and "non-fan-inspire" is very delusional and completely made up, which can be very harmful about others who believed strongly about there inspired characters. Basically, fan-made works can be turned to a "original" work, or even is.
True Originality doesn't exist, especially that every movie/show/comic/etc has got ideas from others and fan-made. I just don't think it's fair to pretend that a "Harry-Potter inspired character or fan-made inspired" (For example) character is "fake" or pretend that people "not" coming from that actually are the only OC. lol

If FCs are just to recognize poeple of where they often got inspired by, maybe it doesn't hurt but at the same time, it's also a OC often. (Or Custom Character like anything else is)
These "FCs" as some call it are often burst sprouts of culture like things.
I guess why I said that is that ever since I learned that every idea came from somewhere, and that to create something, you must get ideas from others in the first place, accepting anything (Even based on "fan-made") would be considered the same creation of any work to a new.

Note, I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just saying it's a bit unfair and dangerous that we should separate these things without knowing that Culture and creativity doesn't exactly work that way in the "label" way of fan-works and "non"-fan-works.
Reply
Add a Comment: