“Better Than Canon” vs “Better Than THE Fic” – A Double Standard?
Been thinking about how differently fandom reacts to comparative praise depending on what is being compared.
It’s very common for people to enthusiastically say that a certain long retelling fic aka. THE fic is “better than canon” — it gives more depth, fixes what they saw as flaws, offers catharsis, expands side characters, or makes the emotional beats hit harder. And that’s fine! AUs and retellings exist for exactly that reason: to explore paths the original didn’t take.
But the second someone says:
“I actually prefer this other retelling because it preserves more of the original tragedy, avoids over-redemption, keeps certain characters less softened, or handles conflict in a way that feels more grounded…”
…suddenly the replies can turn to:
“Why compare?” “The first one is perfect as it is.” “If you want pure tragedy, just read the original.” “Don’t hate on it just because you prefer something else.”
I get it — when a fic feels like it healed you or became your personal canon, criticism (even comparative) can feel personal. But it’s worth remembering: fandom is supposed to be a space for multiple takes. If one retelling is allowed to be “better than canon” without apology, then another should be allowed to be “better than THE fic or the popular retelling” in certain aspects without being met with defensiveness.
Just a thought.
Curious if anyone else has noticed this pattern in your fandom too.