Maybe they're both dumb ideas. And I'm sure both have been done a hundred times over. Anyways, interested in writing some humorous stories either about a medieval king with arthritis, or a superhero spider guy with Parkinson's. Maybe something like Peter shooting his web and missing due to his shaking hands. I like dark humor, if that bothers you. Anyways, thoughts on the premises? Too lazy and already done?
Yeah, I'm always concerned about that, which is why I'm kinda leaning towards King Arthuritis. But, I could just do both, and change some things around if there are issues. I believe that as long as it's a parody, it's considered a derivative work, and it's protected under fair use.
What if your Peter Parkinson is a bit different in every possible way. A bit older. Not orphan but trailer park nerd who raised his drunk parents when he was very small kid. Not muscular but long and thin... Never got enough sleep or money. Had to work as a lab rat for money and got this spiderism there. "You can clean the spider terrario while waiting that drug to show it's effects and side effects. We give you ten bucks later." Romanticly interested about...? Some kind of real life Miss Piggy? Can sometimes cling to surfaces but more often drop from the top. Can shoot spider web 30-70 cm. Spider senses? Or hallucinating? Likes to knit - and is very good and fast in it. Not Spider Man but Cobweb Man or Knit Man or Gossamer Guy or Papa Long Legs. You can write it if you want to. Only publishing has legal issues. But if not one trait is similar, then... ?
Of course you can write whatever you like, but be aware that people who suffer from Parkinson's (a disease that cripples and eventually kills the sufferer if nothing else kills them first) or arthritis (which painfully blights so many lives) may not be amused. Not sure about the wisdom of making these conditions targets of fun—which, if you're not careful, they could seem to be. However, go ahead with the idea and see how it turns out. It might work. I'd just urge caution and a bit of sensitivity. A lot will depend on how things turn out for your characters.
Yeah, you can probably make something of it. It's just that the initial idea hit me as being a bit ...not so funny? Parkinson's is a terrifying disease. I know two people,who had/have it. One has subsequently died (after fourteen years of increasing misery to him and to his wife who was his carer, as he lost function after function and was left a near vegetable.) And one of my best friends has just been diagnosed with it ...and she's terrified. She lives alone, has nobody to look after her, and is absolutely devastated. She feels her life is over, and in some ways it is. You could have your character get shaky hands for some other, less devastating reason. Too much caffeine will do it. I think you would find it easier to get away with Arthuritis, tbh. It's a miserable affliction, but it's not life-threatening. You probably wouldn't poke fun at somebody with terminal cancer, would you? I'd say Parkinson's is a bit like that.
With Parkinson you would think the typing would be the hardest, but for me it's the mouse. Every time I'm on a roll I get the shakes so bad I can't click the mouse and have to switch to my left hand. Lucky for me it hasn't progressed in the last four years. Maybe you could use Rita Rotten and Victor Manure in The Big Stink.
Honestly, I would. I feel like people in those situations want to be treated just like everyone else. One of those "if you don't laugh, you'll cry" things. But I certainly agree it'd be much easier to get away with Arthuritis.
Again, it's all in the execution, I suppose. I think Billy Connolly makes (some) fun of his Parkinson's ...but that's Billy. His great comedian friend Robin Williams committed suicide after finding out HE had Parkinson's. There may well have been other factors in play at the same time, but the fact is he was diagnosed, and killed himself shortly afterwards without letting it be generally known he had the disease. It's a devastating diagnosis. The idea itself didn't strike me as funny, but it's all what you do with it that matters. If, for example, you chose Arthuritis, and made Arthur the POV character, you could probably pull this off. The fact that you have arthritis yourself will give you some insight into it. It would also mean you wouldn't need to worry about copyright, as King Arthur is a legendary figure and fair game for writers. I do believe it's possible, and maybe even healthy, to laugh at your own misfortunes. It's just not quite so funny to laugh at other people's?—unless the misfortunes are deserved. And even then....there but for fortune, eh?
be aware that 'protected under fair use' is a bit misleading - fair use is a defence to a copyright violation suit, and parody is named as a fair use characteristic so you'd probably be okay - but the key point is that it's a defence in court not a protection that stops you being sued, and DC Comics can afford much better lawyers than you. king arthur would be safer since its a myth to which no one person owns the copyright - although various treatments will be copyright to their creators paging @Steerpike for a more expert confirmation
Yeah, there's nothing to stop you being sued and having to defend the lawsuit in court, which is expensive. You could raise a fair use defense, of course. One clarification on the terminology used above--when something is a "derivative work" that doesn't put you in the clear. Quite the opposite. The U.S. Copyright Act gives the copyright owner the explicit and exclusive right to prepare "derivative works." If you prepare a derivative work based on the copyright-protected work of another, you're infringing that copyright (barring applicable defenses).
I'm sure King Authur trained with a 5 pound sword daily his whole life and rode horseback without modern equipment had terrible arthritis. That's not even a stretch.
