That...is a good question! I'd definitely say that if we're talking an obvious take off of a Disney movie (as can be told by unique character names or side characters, for instance) or other popular adaptation, then that is fannish and not original.
Also, I'd say that if you're just using fairy tale tropes (the plucky princess, the princess trapped in a tower, the prince waking someone with a kiss) but with characters that are not named the traditional names and possibly not in the original settings, then that is original.
All the in between is harder! And will be left up to the creator's discretion, really. We're too lazy to be origfic police here. But no original names and no obvious take-offs on unique adaptations/characters/plot devices (ie, no aladdin-esque stuff where the princess has a tiger and the vizier has a talking parrot, for instance) is a good baseline. We just encourage people to...well...be original!
no subject
That...is a good question! I'd definitely say that if we're talking an obvious take off of a Disney movie (as can be told by unique character names or side characters, for instance) or other popular adaptation, then that is fannish and not original.
Also, I'd say that if you're just using fairy tale tropes (the plucky princess, the princess trapped in a tower, the prince waking someone with a kiss) but with characters that are not named the traditional names and possibly not in the original settings, then that is original.
All the in between is harder! And will be left up to the creator's discretion, really. We're too lazy to be origfic police here. But no original names and no obvious take-offs on unique adaptations/characters/plot devices (ie, no aladdin-esque stuff where the princess has a tiger and the vizier has a talking parrot, for instance) is a good baseline. We just encourage people to...well...be original!
Does that make sense?