?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Someone Is Angry On the Internet

My position on so-called "fan fiction" is pretty well known. I'm against it, for a variety of reasons that I've stated previously more than once. I won't repeat 'em here.

My position is not unique. It is not universal either, I realize. Some writers actually encourage fan fiction (I know some of them, have heard their arguments), others don't seem to care one way or another (I know many of those). Many writers have no idea that it exists, no concept of what it is (in part because of the confusing term "fan fiction," which subject I will return to later), and have given the subject no thought. So there's a wide range of opinion on this matter, even among writers.

There are lots of us who oppose fan fiction, though. One such is my friend Diana Gabaldon, author of the mega-bestselling OUTLANDER series... and the occasional terrific short story and novella, some of which Gardner Dozois and I have been privileged to publish in our anthologies. Diana recently outlined her own feelings about fan fiction -- especially fan fiction involving her own world and characters -- in a series of posts on her blog:

http://voyagesoftheartemis.blogspot.com/

Subsequent to Diana's first post, all hell broke loose. (As it seems to do more and more often on this "interweb" thingie). A thousand comments on her first two blog posts on the subject. It's all there, for those who want to check out the "debate." Which soon, alas, became heated, as hundreds of... what's the correct term here? fanficcers? fan fictioneers? fans of fanfic? defenders of fanfic?... arrived from all over the internet to take issue with Diana. A good number of them seemed to open their posts with variations on 'I don't know who you are and I've never read your books and I've never visited this blog before, but I've come by specially to lambast you.'

Sigh.

I have a colorful metaphor in mind to describe what this reminds me of, but I won't use it. Metaphors seemed to spark much of the outrage here. Writers have a natural prediliction for the colorful phrase, the striking comparison, but in political discussions -- and this is, at base, a political discussion -- that can lead to hyperbole, which can lead to anger.

So let me try to eschew all that and remain calm.

I am not going to rehash the arguments for and against "fan fiction." If you want to read those, go to Diana's blog. In between the shouting and the abuse and the endless restatement of the same three or four points by several hundred different posters, there's actually some fairly cogent posts on both sides, arguing the pros and cons of the issue.

I would like to say a couple of things that I don't think anyone else covered, however (and yes, I read all thousand-plus comments, though admittedly I skimmed some that just seemed to be more of the same).

As I said, my reasons for opposing fan fiction have been stated in the past. They are more-or-less the same reasons as those cited by Diana Gabaldon, and pretty much the same reasons that would given by any writer who shares our viewpoint on the matter. So I won't repeat them here. But I'll add a few thoughts.

One of the things I mislike about fan fiction is its NAME. Truth is, I wrote fan fiction myself. That was how I began, when I was a kid in high school writing for the dittoed comic fanzines of the early 1960s. In those days, however, the term did not mean "fiction set in someone else's universe using someone else's characters." It simply meant "stories written by fans for fans, amateur fiction published in fanzines." Comic fandom was in its infancy then, and most of us who started it were kids... some of whom did make the mistake of publishing amateur fan-written stories about Batman or the Fantastic Four in their 'zines. National (what we called DC back then) and Marvel shut those down pretty quickly.

The rest of us knew better. Including me. I was a fan, an amateur, writing stories out of love just like today's fan fictioneers... but it never dawned on me to write about the JLA or the Fantastic Four or Spider-Man, much as I loved them. I invented my own characters, and wrote about those. Garizan, the Mechanical Warrior. Manta Ray. The White Raider. When Howard Keltner, one of the editors and publishers of STAR-STUDDED COMICS, the leading fanzine of its day, invited me to write about two of his creations, Powerman and Dr. Weird, I leapt at the chance... but only with Howard's express invitation and permission.

So that's the sort of fan fiction I wrote. How and when the term began to be used for what is called fan fiction today, I don't know. I wish there was another term for that, though I confess I cannot think of one that isn't either cumbersome, vague, or prejorative. But it does bother me that people hear I wrote fan fiction, and take that to mean I wrote stories about characters taken from the work of other writers without their consent.

Consent, for me, is the heart of this issue. If a writer wants to allow or even encourage others to use their worlds and characters, that's fine. Their call. If a writer would prefer not to allow that... well, I think their wishes should be respected.

Myself, I think the writers who allow fan fiction are making a mistake. I am not saying here that the people who write fan fiction are evil or immoral or untrustworthy. The vast majority of them are honest and sincere and passionate about whatever work they chose to base their fictions on, and have only the best of intentions for the original author. But (1) there are always a few, in any group, who are perhaps less wonderful, and (2) this door, once opened, can be very difficult to close again.

Most of us laboring in the genres of science fiction and fantasy (but perhaps not Diana Gabaldon, who comes from outside SF and thus may not be familiar with the case I am about to cite) had a lesson in the dangers of permitting fan fiction a couple of decades back, courtesy of Marion Zimmer Bradley. MZB had been an author who not only allowed fan fiction based on her Darkover series, but actively encouraged it... even read and critiqued the stories of her fans. All was happiness and joy, until one day she encountered in one such fan story an idea similar to one she was using in her current Darkover novel-in-progress. MZB wrote to the fan, explained the situation, even offered a token payment and an acknowledgement in the book. The fan replied that she wanted full co-authorship of said book, and half the money, or she would sue. MZB scrapped the novel instead, rather than risk a lawsuit. She also stopped encouraging and reading fan fiction, and wrote an account of this incident for the SFWA FORUM to warn other writers of the potential pitfalls of same.

That was twenty years ago or thereabouts, but that episode had a profound effect on me and, I suspect, on many other SF and fantasy writers of my generation.

Okay, it was one incident a long time ago, you may say. Fair enough. Let me bring up a couple other writers, then. Contemporaries of an earlier age, each of whom was known by a set of initials: ERB and HPL. ERB created Tarzan and John Carter of Mars. HPL created Cthulhu and his Mythos. ERB, and later his estate, was extremely protective of his creations. Try to use Tarzan, or even an ape man who was suspiciously similar to Tarzan, without his/ their permission, and their lawyers would famously descend on you like a ton of bricks. HPL was the complete opposite. The Cthulhu Mythos soon turned into one of our genres first shared worlds. HPL encouraged writer friends like Robert Bloch and Clark Ashton Smith to borrow elements from his Cuthulhu Mythos, and to add elements as well, which HPL himself would borrow in turn. And in time, other writers who were NOT friends of HPL also began to write Cthulhu Mythos stories, which continues to this day.

Fair enough. Two writers, two different decisions.

Thing is, ERB died a millionaire many times over, living on a gigantic ranch in a town that was named Tarzana after his creation. HPL lived and died in genteel poverty, and some biographers have suggested that poor diet brought on by poverty may have hastened his death. HPL was a far more beloved figure amongst other writers, but love will only get you so far. Sometimes it's nice to be able to have a steak too. The Burroughs estate was paid handsomely for every Tarzan movie ever made, and collected plenty on the PRINCESS OF MARS movie I worked on during my Hollywood years, and no doubt is still collecting on the one currently in development... though the book is in the public domain by now. Did the Lovecraft estate make a penny off THE DUNWICH HORROR movie, the HERBERT WEST, REANIMATOR movie, the recent DAGON movie, the internet version of CALL OF CTHULHU? I don't know. I rather doubt it. If they did, I'll betcha it was just chump change. Meanwhile, new writers go right on mining the Cthulhu mythos, writing new stories and novels.

Cthulhu, like John Carter, is in the public domain by now, I know. But it wouldn't matter. Because HPL let so many others play in his sandbox, he essentially lost control of his own creations. That's what I mean by (2), above. The fan fiction door, once opened, is hard to close again.

A writer's creations are his livelihood. Those copyrights are ultimately all that separates an ERB from a HPL. Is it any wonder that most writers are so protective of them?

Those of us, like Diana Galabdon and myself, who prefer not to allow fan fictioners to use our worlds and characters are not doing it just to be mean. We are doing it to protect ourselves and our creations.

Furthermore, we HAVE to do it. That's something no one addressed, in those thousand comments about Diana's blog. There was a lot of talk about copyright, and whether or not fan fiction was illegal, whether it was fair use (it is NOT fair use, by the way, not as I understand the term, and I have a certain familiarity with what is and isn't fair use thanks to my own experiences with THE ARMAGEDDON RAG), but no one mentioned one crucial aspect of copyright law -- a copyright MUST BE DEFENDED. If someone infringes on your copyright, and you are aware of the infringement, and you do not defend your copyright, the law assumes that you have abandoned it. Once you have done that, anyone can do whatever the hell they want with your stuff. If I let Peter and Paul and Nancy publish their Ice & Fire fanfics, and say nothing, then I have no ground to stand on when Bill B. Hack and Ripoff Publishing decide they will publish an Ice & Fire novel and make some bucks. Peter and Paul and Nancy may be the nicest people in the world, motivated only by sincere love of my world and characters, but Bill B. Hack and Ripoff don't give a damn. They just want the bucks.

Once you open that door, you can't control who might come in.

No one would ever do that, I hear someone muttering in the back. Hoo hah. The history of publishing is full of such cases. Even the famously and fiercely litigious ERB estate was famously victimized back in the 60s, when someone forget to timely renew the copyright on a Tarzan book, and a bottom rung comic company noticed and promptly started up a completely unauthorized (and unpaid for) Tarzan comic.

Those are some of the reasons writers like me will not permit fanfic, but before I close, let me put aside the legal and financial aspects of all this for a moment, and talk about more personal ones. Here, I think, Diana Gabaldon absolutely hit the nail on the head in the latest of her blog posts on the subject. And here, she and I agree completely. Many years ago, I won a Nebula for a story called "Portraits of His Children," which was all about a writer's relationship with the characters he creates. I don't have any actual children, myself (Diana does). My characters are my children, I have been heard to say. I don't want people making off with them, thank you. Even people who say they love my children. I'm sure that's true, I don't doubt the sincerity of the affection, but still...

I have sometimes allowed other writers to play with my children. In Wild Cards, for instance, which is a shared world. Lohengrin, Hoodoo Mama, Popinjay, the Turtle, and all my other WC creations have been written by other writers, and I have written their characters. But I submit, this is NOT at all the same thing. A shared world is a tightly controlled environment. In the case of Wild Cards, it's controlled by me. I decide who gets to borrow my creations, and I review their stories, and approve or disapproval what is done with them. "No, Popinjay would say it this way," I say, or "Sorry, the Turtle would never do that," or, more importantly (this has never come up in Wild Cards, but it did in some other shared worlds), "No, absolutely not, your character may not rape my character, I don't give a fuck how powerful you think it would be."

And that's Wild Cards. A world and characters created to be shared. It's not at all the same with Ice & Fire. No one gets to abuse the people of Westeros but me.

Anyway...

I have gone on longer than I intended, but I think this is important stuff. "Fan fiction" -- or whatever you want to call it -- has been around for a long time, but never like now. The internet has changed everything. Whereas before the fanfic might be published in obscure fanzines with a circulation of a hundred, now tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, can read these... well, let's just call them "unauthorized derivative works." (Except in cases where the writer has authorized 'em, which I suppose would be "authorized derivative works.") More than ever, we need some boundaries here.

I salute Diana Gabaldon for opening the debate.

And now I step back, and await the onslaught.

(But a word of warning. I'm not nearly as nice a person as Diana is, and this Not A Blog is screened and monitored by my assistant Ty. Diana was willing to let everything go in her comments section. I'm not. So -- my roof, my rules. Disagree, if you want. Disagree vigorously. Argue your points. But no name-calling, no abuse, no threats. And you can spare me the "I have never read any of your books, but now I'm not going to, and I'm going to tell all my friends not to read your books either" posts as well. Fine, you just want to read books by authors who support fan fiction, go ahead, do that, there are a number of very fine writers in that group, we don't need to hear about it here. No derailing the discussion, please. Let's talk about the issue, not tone. I'd love to see some rational discourse here, thanks).

(And yes, the title of this post is a reference to the classic xkcd cartoon that can be seen here: http://xkcd.com/386/)

Tags:

Comments

( 412 comments )
Page 4 of 16
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] >>
pinikir
May. 8th, 2010 02:52 am (UTC)
*thoughtfully* I will admit that I started off with fanfction, I read it and I wrote it. But I found that I enjoyed my orginal characters more and then even my own settings. I don't like the idea of someone else using them now so I see the point of view.

I had never realised the Copyright was so strict. Does it apply the same way the world over so it would cover the full internet?
grrm
May. 8th, 2010 07:30 am (UTC)
There are certain international copyright protocols and agreements, but generally copyright law varies in every country.
(no subject) - cuddlycthulhu - May. 8th, 2010 04:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
materpenitentia
May. 8th, 2010 02:52 am (UTC)
I never really thought about it - I don't read fanfic for the reason that it just seems weird - the character's may have the same names or the same place but it isn't because they are usually doing things or saying things or in situations that they wouldn't be in. I like consistency in any media, tv series, book series, etc. And it's always strange when someone tampers with that
pandarus
May. 8th, 2010 05:47 pm (UTC)
So you don't like fanfiction because it's all out of character, basically? I mean, in fairness I'm very fond of crossovers, which from the sounds of it wouldn't be your cup of tea (Alan Moore's Cthulu/Jeeves'n'Wooster story springs to mind...well, and the rest of 'The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen'). Still - lots of fanfiction is in-character, and set in the 'verse of the canon.

...okay, this is willfully perverse of me, but colour me curious: how about this? (Sorry - not trying to force you to read fanfic if you're actively repelled by the idea - I got the impression that you're saying it's simply not your cup of tea because you think it doesn't ring true, and I wondered whether that would cover the vignette I'm linking to. But if you're uncomfortable with clicking, I apologise.)
(Deleted comment)
grrm
May. 8th, 2010 07:34 am (UTC)
Burroughs was certainly a much better seller than Lovecraft during their respective lifetimes, in part because he wrote books while HPL wrote short fiction... but it's not correct to say that HPL only became popular after death. He was considered one of the "Three Musketeers" of WEIRD TALES, the most popular fantasy/ horror magazine of its era, and his new stories were always eagerly embraced by readers and fans.
(no subject) - lord_varys - May. 8th, 2010 03:39 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - grrm - May. 8th, 2010 06:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
palesius
May. 8th, 2010 02:54 am (UTC)
Recent Fanfic Issue of escapist Magazine
Just thought I'd point out that about a month ago, the Escapist Magazine did an entire issue about fanfic about a month ago. This is a link to the editor's note for the issue:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/editors_note/7412-Editors-Note-The-Fanfiction-Issue
hippoiathanatoi
May. 8th, 2010 08:20 am (UTC)
Re: Recent Fanfic Issue of escapist Magazine
Thanks for that link. Escapist Magazine</a> is often a pretty thoughtful publication.
claym00re
May. 8th, 2010 02:56 am (UTC)
Ugh. Why is there no established world of fanfic (a freakin vile word, by the way) in modern literature and only a token amount (Dickens, Austen) in classic lit? I'll tell you why? Nerds don't read them. Nerds read fantasy, horror, and science fiction for the most part and become infatuated and obsessed with the 'worlds' they read about. Their obsession will often carry them into intense fantasizing. Ergo fanfic. It is a crime that the few writers in these genres whose style and depth reaches the high art of the best of modern literature (GRRM being an obvious example, as well as Donaldson, Vance, and Wolfe) must suffer, regardless of the rarity of their abilities and the brilliance of their stories, the possibility of nerds writing fanfic of their creations. Most writers in said genres - that I read throughout my uncritical teen years - are weak stylists and mediocre storytellers, so their work is easier to mimick.

Fanfic impugns its creator by its very existence. Write something of your own, nerd. Quit perving over other writer's stuff.
alixtii
May. 8th, 2010 11:28 am (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what an "established world of fanfic" would look like to know what you're looking for, but there are thriving fanfiction communities which gleefully respond to and transform pretty much all narrative artistry from Greek mythology to modern television, and everything in between, both in terms of era and in terms of medium. There's Milton fanfic and there's Lewis fanfic, Shakespeare fanfic and Stoppard fanfic. Everything doesn't get written in equal amounts, but if people like it, they'll fic.

This is what sometimes gets called "Rule 34."

People might not always like the same things you do or think they should like, but that doesn't make them wrong. That just means they have different tastes. After all, an aesthetic argument will only convince those who agree with its premises. Most fanfiction, like most genre fiction, isn't trying to express the modernist lit ideal of High Art; it's going for something else. You may feel it should be trying to be High Art, but that's your right and your loss. I'll be over here positively celebrating the high-minded egoism (and egotism) of the modernist ideal. (I mean, I love Eliot's poetry, but the man could be full of it sometimes.)

Edited at 2010-05-08 11:29 am (UTC)
(no subject) - pandarus - May. 8th, 2010 06:05 pm (UTC) - Expand
dallyk
May. 8th, 2010 02:58 am (UTC)
Very insightful post. I have never been a "fan of fanfic" for other reasons, but I hadn't been aware of the big problems it could cause.
bnc929
May. 8th, 2010 03:01 am (UTC)
bah
I hate people who write fanfiction, because yesterday you said you were going to work on Kong, and then instead you work on this book of a blog post, and read 1000 comments.

So because all these people complained about their rights to your property Kong lives another day... this is the travesty.

Also, I believe you have trademarks and copyrights confused. It is trademarks that must be defended, or you lose them, they are also perpetual, so long as they are defended. Copyrights need not be defended, just renewed, and are not perpetual, or rather, will not be perpetual as soon as Disney runs out of money to give to congressmen.
unavoidedcrisis
May. 8th, 2010 03:01 am (UTC)
If they're your books, it's your call. I don't think anyone is allowed to argue that. And you raise very sensible points.

Which soon, alas, became heated, as hundreds of... what's the correct term here? fanficcers? fan fictioneers? fans of fanfic? defenders of fanfic?

This? This comes off as condescending. People who write fanfiction are still writers.
dscotton
May. 8th, 2010 03:01 am (UTC)
Well, from my perspective it looks like you're trying to fight human nature, which isn't a fight you're likely to win. For as long as people have been telling stories, other people have been retelling their own versions of those stories. Now we have the internet, which lets people communicate more widely, and makes it extremely hard to shut them up.

I absolutely agree that other people shouldn't be able to profit off your characters while you're alive. That's pretty clear cut and actually enforceable, because when money changes hands it can be followed. But beyond that... I think people have the right to converse and tell stories however the hell they want, and to try to stop that is just not practical or worthwhile. When you write a popular series, that's now a part of our culture and not something you can maintain absolute control of.

I'm a little surprised to learn your opinion on this, since you wrote a few stories for the Suvudu contest that I would classify as fanfiction, and the people running the contest were unquestionably writing fanfiction in their descriptions of each fight.
bruisedgarden
May. 8th, 2010 03:01 am (UTC)
I think I'm most interested in that you read XKCD.

On the fanfiction front, I think the biggest issue out there is the internet. People post without thinking of the issues it could cause.

As a librarian, I have to respect all copyright issues and such. But as a librarian... if children are inspired by someone's story and it gets them writing and reading, I would support it. As long as it's not in the public domain, I think I'd let it slide. I'd also encourage them to come up with their own world - that way it's their rules, too.

Adults, on the other hand, are another issue.
shara
May. 8th, 2010 03:02 am (UTC)
Fascinating post, Mr. Martin! I am not over-familiar with fanfic - I don't write it, read it, or know anyone who does. I'm more familiar with 18th/19th century literary communities than contemporary ones, so I find myself combing my brain for pre-internet presidents from which to draw examples for either side of this issue.

It strikes me that this issue is complicated by the nebulous state of "publishing" on the internet - in nearly any previous era, copyright covered anything which went to press, and what you wrote your your (and your friends') enjoyment in the privacy of your home was fine and allowable. Now the lines are blurrier; people think that what they've posted on a forum or a webpage isn't "real publishing" and is therefore exempt from copyright issues, and so many make this mistake that trying to enforce copyright is like swatting mosquitoes on a late July afternoon. Participants seem to draw the line at profit. They feel content published for free out of devotion can't be "wrong". At least in the earlier examples I can think up - my dear Alexandre Dumas was much counterfeited - any attempts to borrow the characters and publish further adventures was done with a profit motive if not on the part of the writer, then at least on the part of the printer or publisher.

But then I guess the rejoinder to the fan-fictioneer is that even if they aren't seeking profit, by providing for free a product they are diverting attention from the original author and possibly depriving them of sales, just as the maker of counterfeit Disney t-shirts would do. Yah, most people want the "real thing", but enough will accept a substitute that the originator should be concerned. And there's that "door" you speak of.

And as for the cultural aspect? Really, if culture benefits from riffing on, adapting, borrowing and shaping popular stories, it will benefit just as much after the originating author (and her heirs) have died and they are no longer being deprived of their due. There's lots of stuff out of copyright to riff on. Shakespeare is popular; start there.

There, there's my two cents worth of thinking out loud. :/
scottgoblue314
May. 8th, 2010 03:02 am (UTC)
I am not by any stretch of the imagination a writer, but I do like to think that I have morals, and naturally I have an internet to vent my opinions through.

I can totally agree with every point you made, Mr. Martin, and I think I have a few to add as well. First, another historical argument - in the late 1800s, "Fiction Factories" were an entire industry - authors' names, stories, and entire bodies of work would be hijacked and rewritten dozens of time over just to make a quick buck. In some cases, an author's stories would be published years after his or her death, and naturally the estate never saw a penny of it. A lot of living authors had careers ruined by it. Charles Dickens, for one, grew to hate America because the papers and magazines would serialize and distribute all of his work without asking or paying, but that's another story.

Second, if some of these die-hard "fan fiction" writers think they're so entitled as to attempt to get money out of the deal, why don't they just write their own bloody stories? Maybe throw in an "inspired by such-and-such," and then everybody wins.

Also, my heart leapt for joy when I saw the xkcd link. Mr. Monroe is clearly King of the Interwebs.
megmca
May. 8th, 2010 03:05 am (UTC)
As always, you state your position clearly and well.

I think modern fan fiction is more about admiration and entertainment than profit. Fanfic writers often seem to want to explore the worlds and characters beyond the published works.

I wrote fanfic once, years ago (actually about the time my user pic was taken). Gave it to a friend to read and then threw it away. It was fun and let me be creative but I have better ideas now. My own ideas. And those are _much_ more fun to play with.

I think I would be flattered to find out there was fanfic based on anything I might ever produce, but knowing the quality (or lack thereof) of my own attempt at fanfic I would never read it. My worlds are as much my children as my characters are. I wouldn't want to watch someone screw them up.

Hopefully everyone who writes modern fanfic will get their own ideas and won't have to borrow/steal from someone else.
kuni_bob
May. 8th, 2010 03:06 am (UTC)
I used to be an avid fanfiction writer. My fanfiction for one videogame reached 300,000 words when I finally stopped it. At some point, I woke up and realized that, aside from the moral implications of ripping off public IP for my own glory, it was a disservice to me.

1) It wasn't helping me become a better writer. People would latch onto my story because of the characters, which weren't even mine. Because my readers began to beg me for chapters, I would crank them out, post them unedited and never learn anything.

2) All that time and effort is wasted on something that will never be "mine." I can't take that book and publish it anywhere, nor can I use it in a portfolio of any kind. It also means that any original ideas or intriguing plot points that I included in there can't be used in future writing. They're public, in all their sloppily-executed brilliance. (I use that term loosely.)

I don't really understand why there's debate about this, anyway. Whoever owns the IP should be allowed to determine whether or not they allow fanworks. If people truly respect the original work, they need to respect the creator(s) behind it.
mratfink
May. 8th, 2010 03:09 am (UTC)
copyright
Hey George,
I'm in law school and took copyright law and the subject of Fanfic legality came up repeatedly. As you mention it has never been tested but there are a few things that weigh heavily against it being fair use and a few that weigh heavily in favor of it being fair use. The main argument is what is more important use of characters or the fact that it isn't intended to make money. In the end though I think it is not fair use because a judge will likely place more emphasis on the totality of the use (i.e. using whole characters).
Oh one last point, MZB didn't know a good copyright lawyer, because she probably would've been able to write that and the fanfic writer got squat. Something similar happened with Rocky 4, a random guy wrote it and it was the same idea Stallone was writing and Stallone won because even though the other guy was first and Stallone saw it, the character belonged to Stallone.
Page 4 of 16
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] >>
( 412 comments )

Profile

Spain
grrm
George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

October 2017
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner