I have read an interesting article on deviantART, by $techgnotic posted Mon Apr 3, 2012, that asks the questions:

As a writer, have you ever experienced being pressured to change an important part of a story, either at a prospective publisher’s or editor’s insistence, or simply because of a reader’s impassioned entreaties?

No, I have not, save in cases where the thing being written was for a grade in a class.

As a reader or viewer (of movies, TV shows, videogames, art, etc.) do you feel a sense of entitlement giving you the right to not only criticize but actually demand changes be made to a disappointing work?

No, I do not. This is firmly grounded in two ideas that come to mind: first that I know what reality is and have a firm disconnect between reality and fantasy; the second is of intellectual property rights – it’s not my place to tell the author what to do or not do, unless hired as an editor/collaborator.

Do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of both money and time in the work?  Or do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of your head and heart in a particularly resonant storyline?

I feel that anyone who is so invested in an idea that the idea/subject of the idea becomes an idol of worship/religion had really better check their gauge and disconnect between reality and fantasy. Further that unless there is an intellectual property rights issue or monetary issue at stake, than criticism may be given but the sense of entitlement is based on a false notion.

As a writer or visual artist, is the connection between you and your audience important enough for you to want to make a change pleasing to them?

Yes, but to a point. There must be a balance between pleasing the audience and pleasing one’s self. Commission pieces are done for the primary audience of whoever is paying for it. Most other work is done for the artist who is producing it. Pieces put out for public consumption require some awareness of the audience, and what will please them. However it is a true principle of always keep them wanting more. A counter-point principle is to end the story without any room for continuation.

As an online reader of Knite, Romantically Apocalyptic, or Off-White, is there an increased value or special connection you experience in being able to connect with the authors of your favorite works-in-progress and contribute your feedback?

I am not an on-line reader at this time, so I cannot answer in that regard. As for other works, I simply have not ever tried to give such feedback, viewing it as not necessary – the work is fiction, or a depiction of the person’s faith, so my criticism might only be needed on the level of improving the artist’s craft/skills, and I have not been interested in contributing to in that regard.

Does the ability to offer comments, suggestions, criticisms, and encouragement bond you creatively to a property in a way eclipsing passive fandom?

To some it may, but to me this bond moves in the direction of religious idolatry, and I prefer not to give that sort of energy of soul or bond to an idea or work.

Does Fan art and Fan Fiction created around an online story with author/reader interactivity become more of an integral part of the property than traditional offline fan art tributes?

That depends on the creator of the original/source work. One of the long standing unofficial rules is ‘the original creator is the God of the universe of the story(s) set there.’ If the creator is going to interact with his fan base and adjust his work accordingly, let him. If this extends to ‘canonizing’ work from outside his own efforts, that is his choice.

Personally, I have thus far had little interaction with online-works.

Offline there are works that have been abandoned by the original creator; some modern where the creator has simply moved on and refuses to interact with that work; some now public domain where the creator has died and the estate has let the copyright lapse. Some of these have been picked up and taken in new directions by fans.

A good real world example for this may be the estate of E.R.Burroughs which I understand holds the copyrights to most all of the authors works, and apparently also intellectual rights to creation of new or derivative properties. The Tarzan-rights have passed around from various comic- and movie- and even TV- studios. This has met with various levels of approval from the estate. Others of the ERB properties have not been let out, for whatever reason.

There are works that have not been abandoned. Of these there are some right’s holders who have forbidden meddling with the property; on-going properties may simply want to maintain the control and direction of where the work is going, and are utterly resistant to outside meddling, for whatever reasons; others simply do not want a finished work to be continued.

An example of non-abandoned work might be the ‘Star Wars’ body of work. George Lucas and his companies have maintained the property rights, yet they have also responded to fans in one form or another. The 501 Legion started as a fan-community, but it got canonized in “Revenge of the Sith.”

If you played ME3, how did you feel about the ending? TMNT or TANT?

I have not played, and cannot give any kind of opinion of any worth about ME3.

As for the Ninja Turtles, I would like to see them in their original published form, without the differing colors of head bands or belts, and where Splinter started out as an unusual rat instead of a human. None of the video-productions have done this that I am aware of.

I am left to consider whether to start publishing my works on deviantART. I wonder what kind of critique I might get from it. I do not feel that my art is up to professional/finished snuff, but my writing may get some of the feedback I have needed.

My largest underlying question is about intellectual property rights.