My rambling contribution to the recent discussions about "responsible" fiction

[sistermagpie]

There are a lot of discussions/comments on this topic recently, but it comes periodically in fandom. It's the one about writing "responsibly" or "with compassion" about real life issues like (as recently listed): rape, abortion, grief, alcoholism and miscarriage.

It's funny that I think a lot about writing, but this is one subject that I

To me these kinds of topics just aren't that different from any other topic. They occur in real life to real people, and can be used in fiction in as many ways as there are authors. Some authors are going to have a gift for making them seem real in their fiction whether or not they really know anything about them, just because for whatever reason they imagine them well. Some people are going to write them dreadfully with the best research and intentions. Some people are going to write these things with no interest in the above.

I guess the thing with me is, while I understand the importance of labeling these kinds of things because we know there are people who want to avoid them and I see no reason not to do that for them, I don't think I make that much of a distinction between them and any other human experience. For me, for instance, badfic is badfic. If a newbie author on ff.net reveals how little she knows about what it's like to have a job when she attempts to write about child characters she's aged up, it's just a newbie author who can't convincingly write about holding a job. It doesn't become more offensive to me when that same author decides to write about rape or eating disorders or grief or a miscarriage and shows the same level of cluelessness. In fact, one of the few times I sampled RPS I was thrown out of the story and back-clicked not because of any moral issues about it but because I just didn't believe this was what it was like on a movie set at all and it embarassed me!

Is it wrong to write about a subject just to play on the readers' emotions? I can't say I think so, since that's pretty much the goal of most fiction. Besides which, I understand how those fantasy stories work. As much as I can laugh at the concept of the healing!cock cliché I can understand where it comes from even if I don't like to read rape!fic. Frankly, I think part of the trouble is that a lot of writers simply aren't skilled enough to play on readers' emotions so always wind up reaching for hyperbole because they only know the character has to hurt *really really bad* and the only way they can put that across is through reaching for abuse and taboo. The fics that really work often don't have to reach that far--they use the small and humiliating to greater effect, and those are the kinds of things that everybody knows about and probably doesn't need to research. You can understand, almost, why some authors prefer grand tragedy, though. They can imagine a pain that demands respect in itself because that’s what they associate with the word "miscarriage" or "rape" (though the real things carry their own piles of mundane awfulness) that is less scary to try to describe that something like: "I don't find happiness anywhere" or "I'm lonely" or "I think if I disappeared tomorrow nobody would care or notice" or "I wish I were special but I'm not." I don’t think the advice to this person should necessarily be to learn more about the commonly seen emotional responses to rape or miscarriage. They would probably do better to focus on what it is they really want to write about.

It's funny, in a way, that you rarely hear anyone giving advice on how everyone should write mundane feelings more responsibly (better, please, but not responsibly). In HP-fic, for instance, you probably won't hear too many people demanding more realism and sensitivity in portraying the bully character or the bigot, although that's as much a part of the human experience as alcoholism. On the contrary, sometimes there almost seems to be the suggestion that this sort of thing must be done sparingly to avoid being offensive to the victims of these things. And victims they must be--even if the victim of the bully is by and large in a happier, stronger place than his/her tormentor they must be the one we sympathize with, according to many people, even if the other way around might be a more interesting story, and more in line with what the author wants to say. Are people offended by HP for its unrealistic portrayal of child abuse? Aren't the Dursleys a form of exactly the kind of hurt/comfort fic we see in fanfic, only in this case it's more the suffering/reward fantasy? Is it just that HP is obviously tongue in cheek? Even if it is, aren't kids invited to identify with suffering!Harry because it's fun and not just pity him?

Also, just as these topics, like any other, are going to be handled badly, so are they probably going to be reduced to plot points if the author needs it. It seems like a very recent thing to feel that some special subjects must always be handled sensitively--often according to a specific formula. It seems like in the past it wasn't considered strange to throw rape, child murder, miscarriage, madness and anything else under the sun in there because it was dramatic, without stopping to think about how this would effect the victim on a personal level.

I remember reading an article a while ago, in fact, that talked about this kind of trauma, and how there’s this instinct to overstate it. This article was talking about sexual abuse in childhood, specifically. It wasn't brushing the subject off as not being painful, obviously, just saying that the idea that a person could not ever recover from it, and that it must become the defining experience of his/her life, was not necessarily accurate. You just have to wonder about things like that, really, not because there aren't people who aren't seriously traumatized by this in the long-term (and that doesn't make them worse or weaker than people who aren't), but because what is the fear surrounding those people who aren't? What is the big thing that divides some painful experiences from other experiences, so that writing ignorantly about the life of a doctor is different than writing ignorantly about the life of a victim of abuse--is it just that the latter is more tasteless?

The possibly troubling fact is that being sensitive about trauma does not necessarily mean you're acting the best way you could be. For instance, there was this whole idea about how trauma should be handled after 9/11 that required making people tell their stories about what happened to them as a group within a set amount of hours after it happened. There were some companies near the towers who hired therapists to come in and do this with their staff. In fact, this is one of the worst things you can do, because it keeps people from forgetting all they might and, even worse, listening to other stories gives people false memories of more trauma. It seemed people had more of the right idea about handling trauma back in WWII where bombing raid victims were given tea and rolls and a place to sit comfortably. (Is it me, or do people seem to be portrayed as far more fragile than they once were?)

Anyway, in thinking about why this "tell the story within X hours to a therapist" was so popular the article writer suggested it was because it played to the vanity of the rest of us. There was something attractive in the idea that you could, by being the sensitive, understanding listener, take credit for healing another person in one big dramatically cathartic scene. We all know that scenario from h/c fics--how many times has Rosie Gamgee kept Frodo from needing to go over the sea with a well-timed cup of tea, a few hugs, and the gift to "feel" and understand everything Frodo went through as he tells it?

I guess all these angles just seem like such an unavoidable phase for many younger people especially, though plenty of adults still get a lot out of it too, that it doesn't seem as insensitive as all that. People are encouraged to learn to "feel it" but the thing is they do "feel it." Or at least, they feel something, only they're not very good at describing it. So in their fics maybe they're just wallowing in the feeling of being mistreated, and that comes out as gratuitous abuse!fic. Or, of course, otoh, they know exactly what they're doing and they're just writing to a kink. In that case telling them to be more realistic is really just not understanding the genre or the style. You might as well tell the person to be more realistic as you might tell a fantasy writer magic doesn't exist or tell a romance writer to write her male characters more like the guys in Tom Clancy. For better or worse, excessive abuse, trauma and suffering are a big part of the fanfic genre, and the genre has developed many of its own formulas, even if many of them can be cringeworthy. Maybe my problem is I just find all of it so weird and wonderful, just for existing.

Comments

[slytherincesss.livejournal.com]

Another thing to consider is that there is no allowance to explore sensitive topics in a non-PC way. In our fandom, I would say that means in a non-liberal way. I think one of the things that makes sensitive topics (rape, abortion, trauma, death, violence) intriguing to read about is the opportunity to try and gain understanding into a given situation or topic without having to actually experience for one's self. However, that said, sometimes people get their hackles up when a topic is addressed, and characters have reactions to, in ways that are not uber groovy, uber liberal, uber anything/everything goes. I think that can contribute to why there seems to be such patterned, cookie-cutter cliched writing about certain topics; I think sometimes people write what they think other people want to read, rather than how a traumatic experience really feels, and the emotions and complete rattling and dismantling of one's personal belief system actually experiencing a trauma can bring about. There are certain ways we are expected to address certain topics; any deviation from that standard results in an immediate and rather ferocious uprising.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Another thing to consider is that there is no allowance to explore sensitive topics in a non-PC way.

Oh, absolutely. Just look at alula_auburn's post below, referring to people whose honest reactions to situations were not only criticized but got them threatened. It's bad enough when people think they know how everyone reacts in these situations, but you see how easy that becomes the idea that you have the right to judge another person and draw conclusions from the most superficial things.

I hadn't thought of it this way before, but I think I like the fact that fanfic explores all these ideas in different ways, and that there are people who defend others rights to do so. During chan discussions a lot of people often express surprise that "saying they're against kiddie porn makes them the bad guy!" but the point is supporting kiddie porn isn't the issue.

[ginzai.livejournal.com]

(Is it me, or do people seem to be portrayed as far more fragile than they once were?)

Ooh, that's very true. People on a whole have this need to protect each other from each other. The dichotomy of it is quite interesting to me; we live in an age where children are protected from the grimmer aspects of reality and where the motto isn't "be strong," but instead to "emote" and let it all out. Things which a hundred years ago would have been laughed off are now seen as major offenses - which is almost ironic considering the now lax view on violence and het sex.

I do agree with your main point. Writers, particularly amateur, young writers, tend to want an immediate, splashy problem that is solved through an immediate, splashy solution.

"Oh noes!!1 Raped/Abused/Laughed at in front of the entire school/tortured/broken up with again!!"
*five minutes and a healing conversation/quick romp in the bed later*
"No, wait, I'm better now."

Interesting that you should mention miscarriage though; I've only seen that issue be handled once in an online story, and it wasn't the main point of it. In that case, it was handled delicately, done as a complete surprise, and healing sex neither featured nor would have at all helped - and the story made that clear. All in all, it was a well done description of an attack that traumatized, but did not break, the woman in question. Weirdly, unlike rape and abuse, miscarriage tends to be avoided. Abuse and rape are easy to grasp, grotesque enough to horrify, but it happens enough so that they can understand the concept of it. Miscarriage and murder, on the other hand, seem to be more reserved. Murder tends only to happen to characters who are loathed (in which case, the author's hatred can be expressed in the other characters contempt and indifference) or who rise again as vampires.

I think to an extent this scenario is wishful thinking. Some writers do use such themes for therapeutic reasons, but (I would hope!) most who writer about these matters haven't actually experienced them. It's almost as though they're putting out problems to be resolved that are far bigger and worse than anything they've known, and then following up with a reassuring result. Nothing in their own lives could be as terrible as this, and if these characters' problems are that easily solved, why wouldn't it be even easier for the writers themselves? Because the authors are naive, they don't think the recoveries through; someone raped is healed through a positive sexual experience, someone abused is immediately helped by removal or reform of the abuser, someone depressed is automatically made happy by talking things out with a friend/potential romantic interest.

It's possible just to write it for the drama, and I'll admit to having used the "talking it out" scenario before. Not quite to the extent you mention here, in my case it was wanting to explore certain view points and not even really resolve anything, but I can understand why people would write such things. It's very satisfying to write, if less so to read, and it's very easy to write. None of those pesky long-term issues, just immediate entertainment.

I'll admit too to enjoying well done aspects of what you've mentioned. Placing in abuse or trauma or suffering makes a story darker and grittier, provided that whatever the problem is isn't immediately resolved and shoved under the rug. Fluff is fun, but who really wants to read about the adventures of Mr. and Mrs. Smith as they brush their teeth, walk the dog, eat breakfast, and head to work? It's much more exciting and enjoyable a read to see them in acting out scenes of adventure and excitement, where danger comes to a head and where lives are at stake.

It all comes together. Writers, particularly new ones who haven't considered all of these details, want an interesting, dynamic story that isn't that difficult to actually write. They write of these big, huge problems that must be overcome, and then return things to normalcy through Magic Sex and/or Conversations. Characters become less individual, and far more ever-changing aspects that can express whatever emotion the writer feels the need to have explored.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Things which a hundred years ago would have been laughed off are now seen as major offenses - which is almost ironic considering the now lax view on violence and het sex.

Isn't it? And I don't want this to sound like I think trauma is all in a person's head because it isn't, but I do think that how people are conditioned to think about trauma probably has an effect on how they deal with it.

Interesting that you should mention miscarriage though; I've only seen that issue be handled once in an online story, and it wasn't the main point of it.

It is odd I used that example--I think I just saw it listed with other things in passing, but I've really never seen it in fanfic, perhaps because I don't read a lot of pairings where that comes up (I suddenly wonder if there's Mpreg miscarriage-fic...). Really where that subject gets treated lightly all the time is in soaps--from watching daytime TV you get the impression you almost never carry a pregnancy to turn (especially if you ever try to lift anything). It's basically just there so they can have a pregnancy and don't have to deal with the baby, and just wring out angst instead.

It's possible just to write it for the drama, and I'll admit to having used the "talking it out" scenario before. Not quite to the extent you mention here, in my case it was wanting to explore certain view points and not even really resolve anything, but I can understand why people would write such things. It's very satisfying to write, if less so to read, and it's very easy to write. None of those pesky long-term issues, just immediate entertainment.

Oh yes, I think those scenes can be very cool to read--but then that's more looking at different angles of things and how people really felt instead of just using it as a shorthand for emotional release. And honestly, emotional release can be done well too, and be satisfying. Like most fanfic cliches, it's not always bad. I've enjoyed plenty of fics with lots of torture and angst--even sometimes when it's just done for cheap thrills.

It all comes together. Writers, particularly new ones who haven't considered all of these details, want an interesting, dynamic story that isn't that difficult to actually write. They write of these big, huge problems that must be overcome, and then return things to normalcy through Magic Sex and/or Conversations. Characters become less individual, and far more ever-changing aspects that can express whatever emotion the writer feels the need to have explored.

Well said. There's a lot of biting off more than you can chew there...

[lexin.livejournal.com]

I suddenly wonder if there's Mpreg miscarriage-fic...).

I've read one, and actually it was fairly well done. Don't remember the title of it right now, though.

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

I remember when I was a miserable teen, and would wallow in fantasies of being raped, horribly abused, tortured and humiliated in the worst ways imaginable, suffering from Anorexia and being a victim of all the most horrible things I could think of. I loved those fantasies, because in them, I was justified in feeling as depressed as I did in my real life, I had real reasons to. Later on, the fantasies would change slightly, I would still be the victim of the worst cruelties of mankind, but the point of the fantasies was the righteous anger I would feel afterwards, leading to a terrific revenge. ;D And yeah, there's is no doubt in my mind that many of the fanfics you're describing here stems from the exact same impulse. The writers deal with their own pain in their fics, but they want the characters they're writing about to feel justified in their misery, something they may not think they are in their own. Fanfic is, afterall, often a way of daydreaming/wishfulfillment and I imagine that many people -writers too- go through a phase of feeling that their own issues, anxieties, lives, heck themselves, are simply not interesting, or otherwise qualified, enough to get anyone else to care about them, to validify and justify them.

However, it's not only badfic that deals with for instance rape in an "irresponsible" way. Otherwise good fics can portray a rapist as being "justified" in raping, and have the rape victim fall in love with the rapist etc, and I personally find that much more disturbing then when a badfic does the same thing. I guess I do because badfic in general sort of strikes me as uncencored, printed fantasies, rather than something the writer has consciously thought through, but when I come across a well-written story with a essage I have a hard time to swallow (which, of course happens in published literature, movies, TV shows all the time, for instance I remember a Spanish movie where the protagonist raped his love interest in the middle of the film, and she forgave him and married him at the end of the movie), I find that disturbing, because I have to wonder "what is the author trying to say here?"

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

but when I come across a well-written story with a essage I have a hard time to swallow

that was supposed to be "message" and not "essage". ;-)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I remember when I was a miserable teen, and would wallow in fantasies of being raped, horribly abused, tortured and humiliated in the worst ways imaginable, suffering from Anorexia and being a victim of all the most horrible things I could think of. I loved those fantasies, because in them, I was justified in feeling as depressed as I did in my real life, I had real reasons to. Later on, the fantasies would change slightly, I would still be the victim of the worst cruelties of mankind, but the point of the fantasies was the righteous anger I would feel afterwards, leading to a terrific revenge. ;D

Honestly I think this is probably so so common, especially for teenagers. And really, if you'd been obsessed with finding out about real victims of these things I don't know if that would make it so much more respectful. I mean, if you didn't know the difference between your fantasies and the real thing, that would be one thing. But it seems more just like a private pity party.

Of course, in fanfic these things are written down so maybe people automatically assume you're then saying something about the real subject, but I don't think you really are.

For some reason this reminds me of an Oprah I once saw where she was saying how she really hates horror movies and she always says, "Why would you want to create horror when there's so much in the world?" or something like that. Needless to say I just don't think she gets horror movies at all and that's a dumb thing to say, but I thought what was especially weird is doesn't she like all that Lifetime Women's movie type stuff? Why is it somehow different to want to watch Jacklyn Smith get raped and then fall in love? That's standard Woman's programming.

Otherwise good fics can portray a rapist as being "justified" in raping, and have the rape victim fall in love with the rapist etc, and I personally find that much more disturbing then when a badfic does the same thing.

Absolutely. I find that much more disturbing.

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

Of course, in fanfic these things are written down so maybe people automatically assume you're then saying something about the real subject, but I don't think you really are.

Yeah, and just as we all have different reasons for writing fanfic, we all have different reasons for reading it, too. The people who like to read this type of fic, may very well do it for the same reason as I fantasised about those things. Personally, I don't want to read anyone else's fantasies when I read fanfic, I read because I want to read about the characters I know and love (and thus it's essential to me that they don't act in a way I would find extremely unlikely for them to act in), or sometimes to read a good story. Like instead of reading a novel, I'll read a story on the Internet in a setting and with characters I'm already familiar with. Basically, fanfic is a substitute for me, whilst awaiting new Canon. But for other people it may be about completely different things.

[alula-auburn.livejournal.com]

The badfic examples remind me of a post you linked to awhile back--the guy who was talking about exagerating characters? It's like that--you get a very young (in a writing sense) person trying to develop a story with conflict and emotion, and they grab the topics with the most inherent drama.

There are times in which "irresponsible" writing bothers me, though. I have a masochistic need to watch "7th Heaven" (my brother and I, since we have no family values, used to bond by MST3K-ing it), and their "very special episodes" drive me crazy. I think it's in part though because it [i]pretends[/i] to be a socially responsible vehicle of commentary--the creators pride themselves on it being a "family show" and tackling "tough issues"--their handling of which I almost always find offensive. Of course, I'm also a nit-picky person--the girl who grumbles when movies and tv set off the inplausibility meter. I certainly didn't have [i]high[/i] expectations for [i]Mona Lisa Smile[/i], but as soon as the story took the tact that professors at Wellsley would think Picasso was so OMG!kerrazy and non-art in 1950-whatever, I was done.

I do think there is a vanity angle, too. I hate to be all "blame the media! Rawr rawr rawr!" but I think we have a lot of weird issues about pain and suffering in American culture--a very odd mixture of Puritan/pioneer stoicism and also being totally confessional. My mom used to watch Dr. Phil and gave it up when she felt all he was doing was setting up really exploitive situations. What kind of "therapist" encourages people to bring their [i]children[/i] on national television to discuss their most intimate family problems? Why did anyone think this was a sensible thing to do, ever? And he always winds up by thanking the families for being willing to "share" their stories with the nation, which has always seemed like a weird concept to me.

Then again, I think a lot of "therapy culture" privileges processing emotions in a certain way. I don't mean to knock therapists, but I think there's a sense via psychology-in-the-media that everyone should roughly follow such an such pattern. And some people get angry when the "victims" don't seem victimized enough, or refuse to articulate it. A friend of mine in college once wrote in her blog something that referenced her having been sexually molested as a child, and amazingly people wrote back and called her a liar--based solely on the fact that in other parts of the blog she'd referred to her boyfriend, and "if she had [i]really[/i] been molested, she wouldn't trust men and would never want to have sex." People assume that someone who's quiet is being aloof rather than shy, or unfeeling rather than reserved. I've done some volunteer work in death-penalty abolition, and met victims' family members who didn't ask for the death penalty for their loved ones' murderers, and lots of them have gotten hate mail or media coverage suggesting they didn't really love the people they had lost. People can be really threatened when our psychological mythology is bucked.

I do find it worse when something well-written comes up with a situation I have difficulty contenancing. I've been on a bit of a Josephine Tey binge recently and I just read [i]The Franchise Affair[/i] for the first time, and liked it much less--not because of the story itself, but because the narrator was so aggressive in pushing the story's conclusions. It always struck me as sort of quaint and charming when both Inspector Alan Grant and Lucy Pym believed that faces were clues to characters--but less so when the narrator affirmed that everyone with slate-blue eyes was sex-crazed, and various "good" characters expressed their desire to beat up a sixteen-year-old girl (or their approval of it having happened). I live in a world where the beating of even very nasty sisteen-year-old girls isn't something I can heartily embrace, and having it so aggressively pushed on me was rather unpleasant. But in order for me to care, I have to either care a certain amount about the author or some element of the story, otherwise I can just write it off as "it takes all types." (It's so dreadful when you have the feeling an author you admire would scorn you or despise you personally, or vice versa).

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

There are times in which "irresponsible" writing bothers me, though. I have a masochistic need to watch "7th Heaven"

Oh, I know just what you mean! And really, I would never say people are wrong for criticizing a story for handling a topic in a way that seems fake or trite because that's part of good writing. TV has given us such a formula for this stuff and the "very special episode" is just such a nightmare--although for some people that's probably being responsible because they come up with the right conclusions. One of the things that drives me really crazy on TV is the way they handle drugs or alcohol--you know, if somebody looks at a joint one week by sweeps he'll be doing heroin and his friends will be worrying over him and arranging an intervention with guest star Mackenzie Phillips. If the idea is to educate kids about drugs, this seems completely useless and dishonest--not to mention just plain lame.

A friend of mine in college once wrote in her blog something that referenced her having been sexually molested as a child, and amazingly people wrote back and called her a liar--based solely on the fact that in other parts of the blog she'd referred to her boyfriend, and "if she had [i]really[/i] been molested, she wouldn't trust men and would never want to have sex."

I've done some volunteer work in death-penalty abolition, and met victims' family members who didn't ask for the death penalty for their loved ones' murderers, and lots of them have gotten hate mail or media coverage suggesting they didn't really love the people they had lost. People can be really threatened when our psychological mythology is bucked.

These examples are so frightening and I believe both of them completely. I remember feeling that came up a bit on some of the other threads, too, where there was this one way people were supposed to act and one right thing people were supposed to respond to and it's just such a lie! We can't agree on anything trivial in this fandom--why would we all have exactly the same reactions to big things that happened? And the fact that people then attack the person in question really does show how screwed up it is. I know that's happened to me sometimes in fandom discussions where people just refuse to believe that you honestly feel differently about something than they do, when you'd think this wouldn't be a controversial idea. But when people start judging it it really drives me crazy--like if you've been raped or have lost a loved one you have the duty to perform correctly for other people if you want any sympathy!

[lexin.livejournal.com]

And some people get angry when the "victims" don't seem victimized enough, or refuse to articulate it.

I well remember the complete stunned amazement on the part of journalists when a man who'd lost his son in the IRA bombing of Warrington town centre said he forgave them and called on everyone to pray for the perpetrators. He pointed out (rightly, I thought) that to do ought else would give the perpetrators power over him which they did not deserve, but you could see the idea didn't compute in the minds of some of the commentators.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

This is something that seems so logical to me but it's true that people sometimes don't really get it. It's really not about backing down or not caring, it's just not giving the person more than they've already taken from you.

[hedda62.livejournal.com]

Great essay (as so many of yours are; I really ought to comment to that effect more often) and many good points. I like your 9/11 example particularly and will just contribute this (http://www.comics.com/comics/forbetter/) as a small parallel (May 25 issue, if you read this later). Treating trauma seriously is a good thing; treating it very, very seriously does have the potential for making things worse.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

LOL! Oh, man, you see that happening so often. I even remember that as a kid, times when I'd get hurt and not even think of crying until somebody seemed to give me a reason to. You see it with babies a lot too, I think. If they fall down and mom acts like it's a terrible thing they pick up on that. If she just says, "Oops, get up again!" they do that.

Treating trauma seriously is a good thing; treating it very, very seriously does have the potential for making things worse.

Well put. (And thanks for the compliment:-D)

[anamirza.livejournal.com]

Frankly, I think part of the trouble is that a lot of writers simply aren't skilled enough to play on readers' emotions so always wind up reaching for hyperbole because they only know the character has to hurt *really really bad*

This reminds me of an utterly awful (published) science fiction work I read - it ends with the utter destruction of the world and pretty much everyone in it. I could just see the draft of this novel being discussed in a writer's group and people saying, "Yeah, well, there's a lot of action and the plot is pretty well-paced, but I just don't *care*", and the author then upping the stakes - not just destruction of the city, but the country! No, the world! They must care now!

(My only concern was that the more irritating of the main characters survived, leaving open the potential for a sequel.)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Oh god, I know just what you mean. People have a good point when they note that plenty of professional writers get away with stuff we hate in fanfic--daytime soaps, for instance, probably hit just about every badfic button!

[alula-auburn.livejournal.com]

I didn't think of it before, but this discussion also reminds me a little of one of Barbara Kingsolver's essays--"Jabberwocky," from High Tide in Tucson,--which is in a lot of ways her statement on the purpose and meaning of literature. (I swear, I've worked this essay into a dozen papers over the years). Anyway, at one point she talks about some letters she got in response to Animal Dreams, where the main character's sister is murdered while volunteering in Guatemala (and the novel is dedicated to a young man who actually did die under similar circumstances). As I recall without the book in front of me, she got one letter from a nun who had also been volunteering there, and who knew other nuns who had been murdered or tortured, thanking her for bringing the issue to light via the novel. But she also got a letter from a reader who said she stopped reading the novel when she realized Halle was going to die, because she said that she had come to believe that violent scenes in fiction, even when intended for noble or aesthetic purposes, essentially boiled down to using violence as entertainment.

It's not a position I can embrace, and the parts of the letter Kingsolver quotes are obviously written emotionally rather than critically. (Which isn't to say it's not a thoughtful response, it's just personal rather than detached, which is how I think we're trained to respond to Questions about Literature). But I still like that Kingsolver admits that it got to her, and that although it didn't mean she was ready to start censoring herself and the stories she felt were important, it helped her articulate a sort of perpetual uneasiness which made her thoughtful.

Of course, Kingsolver is doing this as a very, very polished writer--and in her essays, when she writes about her own divorce or miscarriage or rape she tends to be quite terse--so it's not quite the same instinct as angstfic, but I think it's related.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes I see what you mean. And this really illustrates, I think, what a lot of people were saying about the subject which is that you should know what you're writing and why. There's nothing wrong with an author thinking about what she's writing is something she's realy comfortable with. That just also means that she might come up with a conclusion that people don't like or don't agree with.