 Fantasy: August 01, 2012 Issue [#5180] |
  Fantasy
This week: Responsibility Edited by: Robert Waltz  
More Newsletters By This Editor 
1. About this Newsletter
2. A Word from our Sponsor
3. Letter from the Editor
4. Editor's Picks
5. A Word from Writing.Com
6. Ask & Answer
7. Removal instructions
The price of greatness is responsibility.
-Winston Churchill
The writer's only responsibility is to his art. He will be completely ruthless if he is a good one. He has a dream. It anguishes him so much he must get rid of it. He has no peace until then.
-William Faulkner
With great power comes great responsibility
-Spider-Man |
| ASIN: 0910355479 |
|
Amazon's Price: $ 13.99
|
|
Responsibility
Recent unfortunate events in Colorado (and, almost, elsewhere) have resulted in a gigantic national wharrgarbl of epic proportions. Gun-control activists are blaming guns, gun enthusiasts are blaming gun control, the non-religious are blaming religion, the religious are blaming lack of religion, and almost everyone who hasn't actually played video games has the vague idea that video games are probably involved in there somewhere. No one seems to blame the guy with the guns, but hey, that's America for you: everything is the fault of anything except the actual perpetrator, and SOMEone needs to get sued.
I'm not here to point fingers, though. But I can't be the only one who noticed that the freakshow with the guns made references to the Joker. And the Joker's a fictional character. Which means someone made him up (credited to Jerry Robinson, Bill Finger and Bob Kane, but lots of people have written him). Which means - well, what does it mean? Is Bob Kane responsible for a few dozen victims in Colorado? Is the late, great Heath Ledger, who arguably channeled the psychotic supervillain better than anyone else, ever? Is Christopher Nolan, for bringing it to the screen?
Well, I'd argue "no." But I'm willing to explore this further.
As writers, we have power. That much, I think, is self-evident - with the amount of power being roughly proportional to the popularity of the writer's output. Everyone has ideas, but writers put the ideas out there, spreading the ideas to a larger or smaller population. The key point here, though is "ideas." While ideas are powerful and hard to kill, they're still only ideas. I don't care how many people might try to put the idea in my head that it's okay to fire a weapon into a crowd, I'll still think it's not a good idea. I imagine most people feel the same way (though maybe not after a long day at work).
As fantasy writers, we have even more power. We're not limited to trying to keep things true to ordinary life. We can portray much, much more than that - so our ideas are even more dangerous than those of the writers of mainstream fiction.
The thing is, though, that in the vast majority of cases, idea precedes action, and everyone has ideas; writers only share their ideas with others more effectively. To blame the creator of an idea for something that someone else does with the idea is a door you can never close again - because almost everything, positive or negative, that has ever been done, has been the result of an idea.
I see three levels of responsibility: thought, word and deed. While some would blame a person for "wrong thoughts," that's a lot of nonsense. We don't have a lot of control over our thoughts, and trying to pretend otherwise is just another way to try to make someone feel guilty for being who they are. Next level is word; communicating our thoughts. Clearly, here, we have some responsibility; legally, to make a threat against someone is a function of communication alone, but is actionable if it's found to be "credible." So there's at least one line in the sand: we as writers have some responsibility not to incite murder or mayhem.
And yet, the true responsibility, and accountability, for any act lies with the perpetrator, and the perpetrator alone. As I pointed out above, no amount of trying to convince me that spree killing is a good idea will make me think that spree killing is a good idea. Anyone who *is* that easily convinced was dangerous to start with.
Therefore, as writers, I think that while we need to not directly threaten anyone, apart from that, I wouldn't let some notion of "responsibility" squelch creativity. Write what you need to write, and put it out there. If you don't, someone else will. In fantasy, at least, the line between good and evil tends to be pretty clear; we have to make credibly evil villains to serve as opposites to our good guys; unfortunately, there are always those who identify with the villains, but most people will respond positively to the triumph of good over evil.
Write what you need to. And don't ever think that anyone else's actions are in any way your fault.
(Okay, I know - I hope, anyway - that some people will disagree with me on this. That's great, and I'd like to hear about it in the comment box below. But I'm not interested in hearing your pet theory about the nobody with the guns in Colorado and why he did what he did. I've already heard it, whatever it is, and I really don't want to give him more power than he already has. I do want to hear your opinions on the general notion of writer responsibility and/or accountability. Of course, after saying "write what you want" this may seem inconsistent, but hey, being full of contradictions just proves I'm human.) |
Just a few things for your weekly enjoyment, mostly of the science fiction flavor because I'm in that kind of mood:
|
Have an opinion on what you've read here today? Then send the Editor feedback! Find an item that you think would be perfect for showcasing here? Submit it for consideration in the newsletter!
https://www.Writing.Com/go/nl_form
Don't forget to support our sponsor!
| ASIN: 1945043032 |
|
Amazon's Price: $ 13.94
|
|
Last time, in "Fantasy Newsletter (July 4, 2012)" , I talked about literary fiction and how fantasy may differ from it.
Charlie Cogwin  : Sorry, I tend to disagree with people on this point since Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire won a Hubert Award.
That puts J.K.Rowling in the same category as Orson Scott Card, Paolo Bacigalupi, and Frank Herbert to name some of the very very few on that list. And to be listed with those names is something every Science Fiction/Fantasy writer should dream about at night. I know I do.
Perhaps you mean Hugo award? I've never heard of the Hubert. In any event, I never meant to say that the Harry Potter books were in any way bad (although the first couple showed all the signs of being an author's early work) - just not very original. Bad guy vs. good guy, when they're mirrors of each other? Standard fantasy fare. But she did it very, very well, which was my point - that you don't have to be "original" to be good or to be widely read.
platinumbwords: What is "original"? Is any one person the true "creator" of something?
The idea that someone has be the "first"? (An idea so American and Westernized-world-centered.) I've taken some of those snobby "elite" type college courses that question the entire American concentration on the "lone writer" shut up being a genius by himself... but if you really study writing, you will see it is multi-faceted, and often more than one person is involved than the writer (or the person who the book states is the writer), and if not, the writer listed still had many influences from life experiences, work of writers s/he read, and other artists.
A writer, in my opinion, should write foremost what s/he likes, regardless of whether it is to appeal to the broad audience/common man/general public or the "elite university snobs"/"high-art" types. Hey, in some writers' opinions, depending on mood, it may be fun to write for different audiences at different points in time.
And eh... just because something is incomprehensible to one person or group of people, doesn't mean it isn't to others.
I might not get references in sci-fi lit than steady fans of the genre do; that doesn't mean a sci-fi writer is "bad" for making those references for more knowledgeable readers. (And it doesn't mean I shouldn't read sci-fi. Hey, gotta start somewhere!)
One of the problems I've noted in today's science fiction and fantasy is that there are very, very few entry points - places for people unfamiliar with the genres to start. It's in grave danger of drowning in its own tropes and allusions, much as snob lit has done, but differently. Partly it is because to do something "basic" now would be seen as unoriginal - unsaleable. It's a tough conundrum.
ember_rain: Shakespeare, Poe... The best of the best in literary fiction. They wrote to make themselves happy and they wrote quite a bit of fantasy. Ever read Poe's "Don't Bet The Devil Your Head: A Tale With A Moral"
It was a swipe at the transcendentalists who I personally blame for Art Deco and Literary Fiction. :) Yet ask any professor and they will tell you that Poe wrote some of the best Literary Fiction.
One Day... Harry Potter will be literary fiction.
Sorry, I'm still chuckling at the image of Poe being... "happy"  But I think you're right.
Soulhaven : Great newsletter! And, yay!
I have read, or at least started reading, stories in teh past that just leave me feeling stupid - I'm having to work so hard to understand the particular combination of words that I forget what was being talked about at the start of the sentence by the time I reach the end.
Simple fact is, if we want more people to read, then we have to have more accessible stories. Yay for accessibility. I'm all for it.
There's room for both, I think. The problem is when it gets entrenched that one is "better" than the other. Like going to see an action movie and expecting high art - or vice-versa. Room out there for everyone's tastes.
shaara: I have to agree. Just got back from MOMA, the Modern Art Museum in San Francisco. Mostly I liked the stories the docents told that accompanied the paintings, but I get little meaning from some of the paint blottings. One tale of interest. I was told experts can tell the Jackson Pollack's paintings from amateuric versions. I wondered if those experts could discern paintings made by elephants and or gorillas from human -- or from Pollack. (No, I didn't dare ask. Sigh.)
Nice writing.
Shaara
Rorschach tests come to mind... as humans, we find meaning everywhere we want to see it.
Plume : Mr. Editor, I so agree with you. I'm married to an Art Historian and our circle of friends consist of other Art Historians and artists. I'm the only layman in the crowd and, oh, how I most times I want to say BS. The emperor has no clothes.
No clothes? But that is post-post-post-modern transcendental surrealist fabric!
glo-stick: I agree-there is definitely no depth without surface. However, I do disagree with what you said about Harry Potter being unoriginal, because the internal/external conflict between Harry and Voldemort is definitely original, although I have a feeling that's not what you were talking about.  Anyway, what I usually do to add depth to my stories and characters is to try to get to know them before I even start writing the story, so that I know what they would do in certain situations without having to guess. That goes for the item I submitted, as well. I'm still in the process of developing, but as you can see, I have the basic concept already fleshed out.  Thanks for sharing.
The conflict between the mirror images of Harry and Voldemort is as old as fiction, and might be the most common kind of narrative. Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader. Kirk and Khan. Batman and Joker. Holmes and Moriarty. Jekyll and Hyde. Hamlet and Hamlet. Moses and Pharaoh. How the conflict is handled, how the hero wins and whether he or she keeps hold of essential humanity - that's what we keep coming back for. I appreciate your submitting something, but I'm reluctant to post a passkeyed item - hit us with it again when you're ready Thanks!
Spawn of Sylvia Plath : I think you hit the nail on the head without actually coming out and saying it: What makes your examples of contemporary "popular" art (Harry Potter, Batman) really great is that the creators took ideas that people are already familiar with, shuffled them up, and recombined them in new and interesting ways. It's true, it's extremely difficult to be "original" in this day and age. However, the everyday goal of the modern writer should be to mix and match, to update, and to re-purpose the ideas that are already part of human culture. Giving birth to a completely new concept is definitely a goal worth having, but if you feel like your work is worthless if it doesn't achieve that (which is how I felt for a long time), then it's more of an obstacle than a goal. Thanks for presenting this thought-provoking topic :)
Yep, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Thanks!
rubai: Hi! Firstly, I must say that I loved your column.
While I do believe that originality is certainly a plus point, you don't have to be original to be great. I have never thought that Harry Potter is a vividly original book but I am certainly one of those millions of Harry Potter fans out there.
And I agree with you that many authors, in an attempt to go for depth lose the surface completely. Point is, we don't always need to understand the hidden meaning or the depth of things to appreciate them.
Wonderful NL! I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.
On another note, I am not a huge Celine Dion fan myself but I find that song from Titanic really beautiful. It wouldn't hurt to give it a shot, would it? :)
Yes. Yes, I believe it would. 
panzersherman: After reading this novel, I think I've noted that what you think writing, and story-telling should be about is a jaw-breaker of meanings. Meaning, if you want to find the deeper meaning, you'll have to suck on (read) the story longer to find the deeper meaning. I'm still a developing artist, like many, and if I limit myself to my own knowledge, instead of seeking out more knowledge, my skill stops developing.
I don't know if I'd say "what it should be about" - but it's certainly what gets me to like something. And every artist is a developing artist. "Write what you know" to me means "go learn more."
And that's it for me for now! See you next time. Until then,
DREAM ON!!! |
| ASIN: B01IEVJVAG |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 9.99
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, click here for your newsletter subscription list. Simply uncheck the box next to any newsletter(s) you wish to cancel and then click to "Submit Changes". You can edit your subscriptions at any time.
|
This printed copy is for your personal use only. Reproduction
of this work in any other form is not allowed and does violate its copyright. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
