It's interesting that you ask this now, blacktop, because I literally just finished up a Julie Wilson-centric ficlet (whom we know nothing about, so it was like writing an OC without having to think of a name). I guess with OCs, you first have to consider their purpose. For me, I wanted to write something that made Julie seem more sympathetic than she usually is in fics - this led me to give her a job (not wanting to portray her as the gold digger that she seems to be in most fics). I also needed to get her into such a place that she would believably cheat on Wilson, whilst still making her seem sympathetic. All of these small points helped to set a foundation for her character and once I had that, she basically emerged fully formed in the writing (and it was only a short piece). An OC, as Axilotl said, has to have a purpose in a story and so should be tailor-made for that specific purpose. I do remember writing one OC that was purposely faceless - a girl Wilson was cheating with. I gave her little more than a name, because to Wilson, that's exactly who she was. He knew nothing else about her, only cared that she had a body and so that's all I saw her as. With OC's, you generally have to be careful - you don't want to describe them in too much detail, or give them so much of a personality that they take away from the characters that your fic centres on. My 13-year-old girl phase was spent in the Harry Potter fandom, where the opportunities for OC's were vast. It was not a good thing. All I know if the line between regular OC and Mary-Sue is a slippery slope.

Until you asked the question, blacktop, I didn't realize just how many times I've created OCs: almost half of my fics have them. Wilson's mom has been in four (with variations on her character each time). Several minor canon House characters have also appeared (the poker guys from House v God, Steve McQueen, et al). The trick to OCs for me is, first, to create them only when they're needed, and second, to flesh them out so that I can see them as real people. Each OC needs his or her own personality and motivations - "just like House but female" doesn't work. (Unless you're writing House as a woman.) An outside perpsective can help illuminate the characters, or provide comic relief, or just give the characters something new to react to. Also, as sherlock said, there are more people in the world than just the main six. In many plots, you couldn't tell the story properly without some sort of interaction with other people.

What do you feel about creating an original character for your House fan fiction? I've created them left, right and sideways, blacktop, and with better success in some stories than others. (One of my stories is told entirely from the point of view of an OC who is one of Wilson's patients, and that's one of my personal favorites.) I think OCs, if they're done well, are like the facets on a diamond. They reflect more light on what's there. And they seem like a natural component of creating a more complete world. Were House, Wilson and Company real people, they would not exist solely in the rather claustrophobic environment we see on screen. Patients, relatives and other people would pass through their lives. OCs are fun to create once in a while. It opens up lots of possibilities to, say, write a story from the point of view of an airport night janitor who sees House and Stacy sitting in the hallway during "Failure to Communicate."

Thanks for all these great answers, people! I would bow down lower, but my forehead is already planted in the linoleum!

Sometimes it's necessary to create an original character. I try to not give too much time/attention to original characters, but they are a must-have to make a story go along in a realistic way.

Oh, cripes, I knew that, despite my disclaimer about arrogance, I'd come across as arrogant and elitist and putting myself above those who lack degrees in English. So I'm the jerk that thinks I have better editorial skills that someone without a degree. All I can say is no, no, no, I am not better at editing than anyone else. On the other hand, that's how I feel about editorial services and I can't pretend that any ol' person will do, and who cares if they can spell or write a complete sentence or keep tenses consistent or pay close attention to detail because it's arrogant to expect that ... let me put it another way: when I'm writing computer code, and I need someone to look it over to make sure that it is tidy and logical and the flow of execution makes sense, is it arrogant for me to seek out an excellent programmer, someone who is at least as skilled as I am, to review my code? Perhaps, but I'd consider that perfectly reasonable criteria. I would hold an editor to the same standard. More important than any Lit. degree is facility with language. I'd prefer an avid reader to a person with a degree who does not enjoy reading. Most avid readers are also good writers. But I never intended for everyone to post their CVs and justify their excellence in writing and editing. I did originally write: I'd expect anyone editing my work to have either a similar, or higher, level of education in writing and literature, or else a clear demonstration of skill and expertise in those areas (plenty of excellent writers have no university education whatsoever). I guess that last part was lost in the mix. That is not to say that a person who cannot spell or write complete sentences will perform no useful service at all when editing my writing. There are always typos and errors that I miss and that cannot be caught by a word-processor's spell-checking program. But ideally, an editor will be more scrupulous, more skilled in the nuances of grammar and punctuation, and a better stylist than I am. If they are not, then how can I rely upon them to spot errors that I will miss? Leaving aside my p0rnographic fiction, which I haven't shared with anyone in real life, I do not consider an editor to be a person who helps me write - that is my job. I ought to add that I write p0rnography, and make no apologies for that, and I do not hold it to the same standards as I do my non-p0rnographic, non-fanfic short stories. Because it is p0rnography, House and Wilson are always out of character, it never keeps to canon, and the plots are merely scant frameworks upon which to drape the sex. So perhaps I don't really belong in this discussion about writing. But even though my writing is p0rnography, I still want it to be good p0rnography, so that's why I've been following this thread closely. Edited by Poeia to keep search engines from flagging houseofwhining as a house of something else.

I'd expect anyone editing my work to have either a similar, or higher, level of education in writing and literature, or else a clear demonstration of skill and expertise in those areas (plenty of excellent writers have no university education whatsoever). One thing I should point out: a good writer does not necessarily make a good editor. They may have some elements in common, but the skill sets are not the same. I know lots of excellent editors who can shape prose but can't write from scratch, and a number of great writers who shouldn't be allowed to edit anything.

What do you feel about creating an original character for your House fan fiction? Do you abhor the idea of going so far beyond canon as to create a character of your own (I am assuming that we are not talking about inserting a Mary Sue into the tale, of course)? Or do you find that a new character injects freshness into your story that could not be achieved with the manipulation of the familiar cast of characters? How do you go about the task of constructing such a new character, if you do use one? Great question! It's funny, because it's one that has come up a lot for me the last year. I'm usually not a fan of reading fics that heavily develop original characters. Secondary ones, especially for romance purposes is okay, but often characters introduced end up being Mary Sues, intentional or not. Then, I wrote my two huge fics in which I gave Foreman a wife. I found that by heavily developing that character and giving Foreman a partner, it actually made his character more fun and redeemable. What's great about it is that no one has accused me of going OOC with Foreman because no one knows how he would act with such a pairing. So, in cases like that, where an unlikeable character actually comes across as a character you want to read about, it's a good thing.

I'm not a big fan of OC's either. I only create them when I need them for something and I try to keep their involvement at a minimum because I'm really more interested in the central characters. Even watching the show- the PotW is not so much interesting as is House's reaction to them (or nonreaction). I've never cried along with a PotW or really felt much of anything for them. In watching reruns or my DVD's a few times over, I'll notice that the actor did a good job with it or at least understand their plight. I'm a cold cold character.... OC's for me are difficult to write and pay attention to in Housefic as well- though there have been a few good ones created by various authors. Anything that has a summary that includes "House meets (insert description of OC) pretty much throws me off of it (next please).

Coming out of lurking to pat MissViolet on the shoulder and say she should never put down the prOn. Your prOn is lovely, my lady, simply lovely and clearly a work of art -- and I like the scanty plot. My boys should never be too distracted by storylines. It is good stuff. Nuff said.

MissViolet, I didn't mean to upset you. You brought up education and experience, so I chimed in. I didn't find what you said arrogant at all. And FWIW, I write pr0n, too. ;)

Oh, thanks, perhaps I was just a wee bit too irritable about all that ... but, one thing I've learned from reading this thread is why a beta reader isn't necessarily the same as an editor. If I needed someone to tell me whether a story was good, whether it makes them want to turn the proverbial page (or keep scrolling), then any person will do. Doesn't matter if you can spell or or write or edit or whatever - if you like to read, then you can certainly tell me whether my story is interesting. So maybe that's more of what a beta reader does for the writer. However, if I need an eagle-eyed person to spot errors or typos or style transgressions like using the same word too frequently, or comma abuse, irrational paragraph breaks or lack thereof, awkward tense shifts, etc., then I'd still stick with someone who has these skills. I know there are great writers who cannot spell, use proper punctuation and grammar, or good style - I guess I'm just a real hard@ss about it and I'm afraid there's lots of good writing I dismiss altogether because I just can't consider a piece of writing with lots of easily-corrected errors as "good." That is not to say that writers who can't spell or use proper punctuation are lacking in talent. Nor that those who can are great writers. But I guess it's just a matter of personal taste. I can't consider something to be "good writing" if there are too many errors. I guess I just cannot turn off that part of my brain that sees these errors and is so distracted by them that continuing to read the story is nearly impossible. I probably ought to mention my obsessive-compulsive tendencies at this point! Though I recognize that there are good writers who cannot spell or use proper punctuation and grammar, it's a little harder for me to accept that there are good editors who do not possess these skills. But, as I have pointed out, I'm not what you'd call a serious writer of fan fiction. I am not being self-deprecating by calling myself a pR0nographer (new squeaky-clean spelling, Poeia!). I happen to love House/Wilson pR0nography! So I consider that a self-compliment. But it's not written with the same intention as a regular fan fiction. So I don't think I should be venturing any advice as to what makes a good editor, because regular fan fiction needs a different sort of editing than pR0n. For example, that little thing called a plot - pR0n can be quite lovely even without one, whereas regular fan fiction tends to suffer when the story doesn't advance the plot or develop the characters (as Kurt Vonnegut described good writing.) And thank you for your very kind, sweet comments, babyeinstein. No worries about me putting down the H/W pR0n, I'm addicted to writing it! Original characters are fine with me as long as they don't descend to the level of Mary-Sues. But I will always be more interested in the canon characters - since I've been given a lot more backstory about them via the show, they seem more 'alive' to me than OCs. I think that's the hard part about writing original characters - they seem shallow in comparison to the ones for which we have well-established backgrounds and clear mental images of their physical appearances.

I can't consider something to be "good writing" if there are too many errors. Dude, I am so right there with you. I'm about to embark on a challenge that I've never really had before: I had a few OCs in Percussion, and now that I'm writing the sequel, they become much more important to the story. I think the most important part of a good OC is that they're just a person, with both good and bad traits, strengths and weaknesses, and understandable opinions. The story shouldn't be about them: that's what original fic is for: but they should be as well developed as possible to play their roles in the story. The challenge for me will be taking the three or four throwaway lines from Percussion where I mentioned these characters' traits, and work those up into real people, now that they're needed.

Original characters are fine with me as long as they don't descend to the level of Mary-Sues. But I will always be more interested in the canon characters - since I've been given a lot more backstory about them via the show, they seem more 'alive' to me than OCs. I think that's the hard part about writing original characters - they seem shallow in comparison to the ones for which we have well-established backgrounds and clear mental images of their physical appearances. See, I love creating a new, conflicted character to tell the story with - because it helps to see the main characters through a new light (unless your own life is similar to the OC's) and it just puts new perspective into the story. Interactions with new people in the House-verse seem to broaden the character's fanon. I did start however with using established characters so I could work with someone who already had the backstory and who would react predictably. I like working with House as a character as even though stories dictate that they have to develop, he seems to be a character that is "stuck" permanantly. He has his set routine, and his set world, and he's totally comfortable with it. That's why House is interesting to me as a character, and I love to throw something "new" at him. Along with just trying to do something different. And, even though I haven't finished a fic in ages, it isn't due to the characterization of OCs - it's more due to characterization problems with the ducklings for me. I want to be accurate, and I want to use them in the stories, and I'm not going to write a plot hole anymore because it's "convenient." Y'all have taught me better than that. ETA - I do have one rule when I'm working with an OC - they have to have new conflicts at the end of the story, and yet have their story "finished" by the end of the fic.