In a country where we're supposed to be free to express ourselves, I find it odd that people still object to what people write. No matter what we write, someone, somewhere finds it objectionable. Maybe they consider it a slur on their nationality, or their religious beliefs, or their sexual orientation, or whatever. Why are they always right and the writer always wrong? Are writers not allowed to express their beliefs, or in the case of historical writers, not allowed to tell the truth about the past?
What brought this subject up? Richard Godwin's short story, "Battle for Laughing City", posted over at Thrillers Killers 'n Chillers yesterday. One poster took the moral "high ground" and slammed the story. Now, I'll admit that it's not the sort of story that I seek out. I read it because I heard about the nasty comments and I was curious. And yes, I read the whole thing.
The story reminded me of the Reavers from the movie "Serenity". About how a government tried to make people better. I also saw the cost of scientific experiments on people, the effects of drugs on a country, and how the lack of morals and common decency can change a society. The story was pure fantasy, nasty stuff, but fantasy that rang with a whole lot of truth about people.
And a thought just crossed my mind. You'll find these same basic story elements in the Bible. Heads being chopped off, sexual deviants, and yes, even monsters. So, do we ban the Bible? What? We've already done that? Yeah, from our schools. You see, not even the Bible is safe from criticism.
So all you writers out there, just write. Write what you feel. Write what you see. Write where your imagination takes you. But write the truth and all its ugly. And yes, there will be people who are offended, but hey, you're in good company.
Oh yes, Richard's story is here http://thrillskillsnchills.blogspot.com/2012/02/battle-for-laughing-city-by-richard.html And you readers out there - you have the right not to read.
18 comments:
If I don't like a story I just ignore it. I find it works best that way.
Yep, I can usually tell in the first paragraph if it's the type of story I want to read. Of course, if it's a good writer they can take me where I don't want to go and I trust them to keep me safe.
Considering that the zine where Richard's story is posted has one of those "warning" notices before entering the site, I found the outraged moralists just a trifle hypocritical. What, with a warning like that they had no idea what might follow? Yeah, right.
True, Naomi. That warning alone should have kept the commentor from reading, if he really believes what he's spouting.
I read it, thanks to your turning my attention to it, Sandra, and while I'm not going to pile on with everyone about its brilliance or anything I didn't find it particularly disturbing. It was like a prose piece that would accompany the magazine Heavy Metal. I wouldn't want to read stuff like this all the time, but I'm glad there are people writing it, and I'm happy to add it to the list of short stories I've read this year. And it certainly won't stop me from reading Godwin's work in the future. The dude can write.
I with you, Chris, I wouldn't want a steady diet of they type of story, but I still want it there for the occassional sip. And yes, I've seen more disturbing scenes on TV than Richard portrayed in his story.
Boy, I really need to proofread my comments better :)
Now I'm gonna have to go read the story. I don't really allow fiction to bother me much in one way or another. If I don't like it I won't read it, but if it presents things to me in a way I haven't seen, generally I'll go with it.
The best fiction always does that for me, Charles. I love when a story maks me think in different directions.
Sandra, when was the Bible "banned from schools"? Trying to make sense of that comment.
I'll be happy if a story of mine ever gets this kind of attention. (And now I want to get a story accepted at that site.)
Pretty good story; certainly vivid. Not great prose; the guy's no Harlan Ellison. (But then, who is? If somebody besides Harlan Ellison had the nerve to be Harlan Ellison, Harlan Ellison would sue him in a heartbeat.)
I'm with David, Sandra. If I don't like it, I just ignore it.
Rants get to be tiresome, but I'm OK with a reasoned argument about why somebody doesn't like something. You can learn something from another point of view... Then again, how often do you find that anywhere these days?
Lord, you make me feel old, Manuel. The Bible was banned from schools in 1966 or '67 if I remember correctly. Before that every school day was started off with a bible reading, a prayer, and the pledge of allegiance. The atheists protested.
That's the best way, Rick. Just because you clicked on a story or picked up a book doesn't mean you have to read it. You do have a choice.
I agree, Ron, if someone can give a reasoned explanation why something doesn't work for them, expecially with my own stories, I'm all for it. It helps me grow as a writer. But to just rant that you hate it with no reason? What good does that do anyone?
I agree with Mr. La Tray here. It's not the most user friendly story, but just the fact that some people have the balls to write this makes me happy. Godwin has always been fearless and his fans (self included in that statement) wouldn't like him any other way.
I abound in David's sense too. Whenever I don't like it, I don't read.
Everybody has a different taste in reading material, Ben, and like Chris, it isn't something I'd normally read. But slamming someone because they wrote a story you didn't care for doesn't make any sense when all you have to do is stop reading.
Naomi,
While I agree with your comment about the warning notice, I've never understood why someone should need a warning notice before they click on a site and start to read any given story.
A Twist Of Noir, Eaten Alive, Alternate Endings, Plots With Guns, Powder Burn Flash and numerous other sites have no such warning (those that are mine never will have any such notice).
And the reason is because, if I've done my job as an editor and a publisher and a writer, people that regularly read anything I've edited or published or written know what to expect.
And if these people are newcomers, they can learn on their own.
Does the first sentence or paragraph offend you? No? Then continue reading. Does the second sentence put you off? No? Then keep going. You're halfway through the story. Have you been offended? No? Then keep going. You've finished the story and you're still alive. Imagine that.
If you don't like something that you're reading, whether you're offended or bored or whatever, Stop Reading Now. And, please, do not come back for seconds.
Write my name down. Spread rumors about what I've written (or edited and published). Shout it from the top of the Empire State Building.
But, please, do not come back for seconds.
I won't miss you. You were never going to be a part of my audience anyway.
No warning, no notice, except what your eyes are seeing and telling your brain. That's the way it should be.
Sandra, I'm probably older than you.
I guess I was confused by the phrase you used. Ending the unconstitutional religious activities that were once common in public schools isn't the same as "banning the Bible". Kids can still take Bibles to school. (And, fortunately, it isn't just atheists who believe in keeping government out of the religion business.)
Richard, I look forward to seeing more of your work. I've never a story of mine earn a rant; but I did once get a rejection notice where they mentioned one of the editors was made physically ill by my story. Can't please everybody.
Sandra I would like to say thank you to you and everyone who has commented here for the support. I would also like to make two firm points about the storm in a teacup. Publicity can draw attention to your name, but I do not want this to result in me being known for one thing. I try to write what I see. The Laughing City stories are tongue in cheek dystopian black satire. The prose style I adopted for them is deliberately heavy and layered, because I want there to be a wall between the events and the reader. It is not realism. I wanted to make the social themes stand out from the prose. It is not a style I use often, but no doubt that is what some people will take away from this, oh he writes like that. Fiction is not the mailbox of the morally outraged puritan. I think the point was firmly made. It is an exploratory field. Manuel I hear what you are saying, and just to encourage people to realise there is more to me than the style of the story that caused all the fuss, I would like to say I also write poetry, and mainstream literary fiction. Would you put this story and the one you read together?
http://www.fullofcrow.com/fiction/archivedstories/lunch-with-bella-godwin/
Or this poem alongside it
http://asphodelmadness.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/trinket/
Apostle Rising, my debut novel, is stylistically really different, as is Mr. Glamour, my second, which is being published next month.
The point I am making is that the moral crusaders are the ultimate stereotypers. One dimensional man intent on moulding the world in his image.
Post a Comment