Writing in someone else's universe.

In cruising through some of the newsgroups concerning book series for which I have written, it has become readily apparent to me that not everyone understands how writing in someone else's universe works. I'd like to make that picture clear because there seems to be a lot of people lighting up a lot of phosphers with complaints that are misdirected and, frankly, rather pointless.

Working in a franchise universe is not easy. The first rule is that the publisher or licensor (owner of the property) comes to you; you don't go to them. There ARE exceptions to this rule, but it seems to me that exceptions to rules are the things that happen to someone else, never you. What prompts your selection as a writer for a series varies, but it usually involves your having a certain body of work of which an editor is aware, hence he has a reasonable expectation that you can and will deliver what he wants.

The licensor approves what is done throughout the process of writing. Initially the writer creates an outline or synopsis of the story which the licensor reviews and approves or asks to be changed. If changes are desired, the writer implements those changes or, in some cases, discusses the changes and why they won't work with the licensor. Then the writer makes the changes. This is rule two: the writer does not own the property, so the decisions of those who own it stand. There is room for negotiation, and often compromises are found, but the bottom line is that the licensor's Will will be done.

The writer then begins to write the book. In my case, I footnote the novels. I use footnotes to indicate my sources for previously generated material. I also use them to note material I have invented, why I invented it, what effect I want it to have, and what parts of it are vital. The licensor can use this latter sort of footnote to decide if they want to allow me to use some, all or part of what I have done. By justifying what I have done in a footnote I eliminate one round of question and answer exchanges, which makes approval go faster.

When my manuscript is finished I send it to the publisher or licensor (depending upon who I have my contract with) and wait for approval. Changes are generally asked for within a month of submission and negotiation over minor points takes another week or so. At that point, then, the licensor has de facto vetted everything I have done. They have, if you will, made it official. I make my changes and the book goes to copyediting and page proofs.

During the copyediting and page proof stages the licensor can and usually does review the manuscript, making yet more changes. These two stages are where the final error trapping goes on. Once the book is through page proofs, the book goes to press and you get it in your hands.

Is it possible errors slip through? Yes. Errors in these licensed books generally fall into two categories: factual and interpretational. Factual errors are easy to spot and there's no escaping them, either the author was right or the author was wrong. It has occurred, however, that a reader has not read very closely or has not read all the source material available and, therefore, does not realize that what he sees as an error of fact is, in reality, the truth.

Interpretation errors are more difficult because there is no objective measure that can be used to determine who is right and wrong. For example, reasonable readers have suggested that Luke Skywalker's dialogue in The Krytos Trap "isn't right." To them the sentences that Luke speaks are somehow inappropriate, or in their heads they couldn't hear Luke delivering them. That's fine -- that's a matter of opinion. Those readers are welcome to point out that they don't LIKE that dialogue, but suggesting it is WRONG is, well, wrong. Lucasfilm Limited decided that dialogue worked for them and since they are the sole authority that can determine right or wrong on matters of opinion in the universe, that dialogue is right.

One mitigating factor to take into account on such subjective things is this -- everyone has their own opinion about how characters should act and sound. It is impossible for any author to write things so they satisfy every single reader out there. Moreover, the viewpoint character through whom the scene is shown can affect how the reader gets the information. The above scene was shot through the eyes of Wedge Antilles, Luke's friend. The same scene shot through the eyes of Borsk Fey'lya or Corran Horn would have come off differently. (In other words, authors do pay attention to that sort of stuff and write accordingly.)

Ultimately, though, the final approval of what you get is in the hands of the licensor. Writers work with them as closely as possible, but they still tell us what we can and cannot do. In most cases, when the writer and the licensor are on the same wavelength, this process goes very smoothly. The fact that a reader may disagree with the result is unfortunate, but the writer has please the licensor before he can worry about pleasing the reader.

None of this is to say that a) writers shouldn't be taken to task for factual errors in their work or b) that noting things you don't like about a work is in any way wrong. The reader's opinion is perfectly valid and sharing it is fine. We've all got idiosyncrasies that mean we don't like some things that other folks simply adore. Bear in mind however that opinions, no matter how strongly held or deeply felt are not facts. There's no harm in prefacing any statement with "In my opinion" and that's a really useful way to remember how to separate opinion from fact.

For my own part, I work as hard as I can to get as much as I can factually correct. My interpretational stuff might suffer, but that's because I filter all this stuff through my life experience and shoot it back out through that same filter. All writers do that (as do all readers). It's my hope that, in the end, I'll be within hailing distance of what other folks pick up from the source material, so my interpretations won't punt them out of a story and ruin the reading experience for them.