I guess I have high standards/good luck in fanfiction because I don't associate it with immaturity/spag errors/poor quality any more than any other art form.
To me it means implies a work can't stand on its own. There is other stuff (media, prequels, the author's imagination and the tv show that inspired it, whatever) without which the story/characters/world are incomplete. I don't think it's really an insult if it's used to refer to something in a larger property (like Star Wars: The Bad Batch is kind of like fanfiction for the Star Wars Prequels/Clone Wars/Rebels) or something that the audience should have some familiarity with (Hamilton won't make much sense if you don't know some early American history) but I doubt any professional reviewer would think to describe those things as "like fanfiction." Meanwhile, if work is supposed to be it's own thing but can't stand on it's own that's a pretty big problem.
So if I think something is "like fanfiction" it could be neutral or even praise (like a side book that takes the continuity into account and fleshes out an underused character or theme that's some 100% A++ fanficiton shit right there). But if I see someone else describe it thusly I'm going to assume they're calling it amateur/poor.
(I could also see it meaning a focus on relationships, but since the material I most enjoy already focuses on relationships that's not what I associate with it.)
Re: Inspired by 5: What does "reads like fanfiction" mean to you?
To me it means implies a work can't stand on its own. There is other stuff (media, prequels, the author's imagination and the tv show that inspired it, whatever) without which the story/characters/world are incomplete. I don't think it's really an insult if it's used to refer to something in a larger property (like Star Wars: The Bad Batch is kind of like fanfiction for the Star Wars Prequels/Clone Wars/Rebels) or something that the audience should have some familiarity with (Hamilton won't make much sense if you don't know some early American history) but I doubt any professional reviewer would think to describe those things as "like fanfiction." Meanwhile, if work is supposed to be it's own thing but can't stand on it's own that's a pretty big problem.
So if I think something is "like fanfiction" it could be neutral or even praise (like a side book that takes the continuity into account and fleshes out an underused character or theme that's some 100% A++ fanficiton shit right there). But if I see someone else describe it thusly I'm going to assume they're calling it amateur/poor.
(I could also see it meaning a focus on relationships, but since the material I most enjoy already focuses on relationships that's not what I associate with it.)