On 'Getting It' Part II
One blog reader, Isme, left the following comment on my post on the importance of understanding social issues before one attempts to portray them in fiction.
There are several layers to this question; it also makes several assumptions about both writers and the ability to understand the human condition. To answer the surface question: No one is forced to write message fiction, or tackle Big Social Issues in their work. If you’re squeamish about an issue, or don’t want to do the research—that means really listening to people, educating yourself, etc,-- then don’t write about it. If you have a simple answer to the Issue—Racism is people being mean to folks who look different! Poverty happens to people who don’t work hard enough!-- you haven’t ‘gotten’ it. Social problems are hard to tackle because they are so multifaceted. Poorly researched, poorly executed message fiction does a lot of damage, because people learn from storytelling. I’ve discussed this at length in several other posts, but suffice to say that it’s better the clueless, cringe-making story be replaced with another forgettable mangst novel, or not exist at all, than be out there causing trouble. To address the larger implications: First, clueless fiction is not the exclusive territory of straight, white, educated men, nor is it what they would produce by default. That demographic has given us some excellent works of fiction. There’s also plenty of clueless message stories from people who should (in theory) know better—a prime example being clueless ‘feminist’ fiction written by women, who should have a firsthand understanding of these issues. No one is off the hook for increasing their understanding before writing, even about their own experiences. Second, the question presents a false dichotomy, which assumes that the ‘write what you know’ doctrine locks us into writing about our own lived experiences. If you are so lacking in imagination that you cannot write a character who is not a clone of yourself, or has experiences outside of your daily life, you should write a diary or memoir, or get a new hobby. The purpose of fiction is to give us an experience outside of our own. It may not always be easy to step outside of our ingrained ways of looking at the world and write from the perspective of someone totally unlike ourselves, but it is possible. And highly recommended. With research and empathy, I am convinced that anyone can write any character realistically, and explore any social issue in a sensitive and accurate way. Finally, you are under no obligation to write message fiction. No one will take your socially conscious cred away because you wrote a comedic sci-fi romance rather than an Important Novel About Poverty. It’s certainly much better to put a piece of enjoyable, entertaining literature into the world than a message story which gets its message utterly off course.
Should authors avoid dealing with serious issues such as racism if they aren't sure they will do justice to them?
On the one hand, it'd prevent lots of truly horrible stories (though not this one), on the other, the industry is already dominated by straight white males writing about worlds inhabited almost exclusively by straight white male.
There are several layers to this question; it also makes several assumptions about both writers and the ability to understand the human condition. To answer the surface question: No one is forced to write message fiction, or tackle Big Social Issues in their work. If you’re squeamish about an issue, or don’t want to do the research—that means really listening to people, educating yourself, etc,-- then don’t write about it. If you have a simple answer to the Issue—Racism is people being mean to folks who look different! Poverty happens to people who don’t work hard enough!-- you haven’t ‘gotten’ it. Social problems are hard to tackle because they are so multifaceted. Poorly researched, poorly executed message fiction does a lot of damage, because people learn from storytelling. I’ve discussed this at length in several other posts, but suffice to say that it’s better the clueless, cringe-making story be replaced with another forgettable mangst novel, or not exist at all, than be out there causing trouble. To address the larger implications: First, clueless fiction is not the exclusive territory of straight, white, educated men, nor is it what they would produce by default. That demographic has given us some excellent works of fiction. There’s also plenty of clueless message stories from people who should (in theory) know better—a prime example being clueless ‘feminist’ fiction written by women, who should have a firsthand understanding of these issues. No one is off the hook for increasing their understanding before writing, even about their own experiences. Second, the question presents a false dichotomy, which assumes that the ‘write what you know’ doctrine locks us into writing about our own lived experiences. If you are so lacking in imagination that you cannot write a character who is not a clone of yourself, or has experiences outside of your daily life, you should write a diary or memoir, or get a new hobby. The purpose of fiction is to give us an experience outside of our own. It may not always be easy to step outside of our ingrained ways of looking at the world and write from the perspective of someone totally unlike ourselves, but it is possible. And highly recommended. With research and empathy, I am convinced that anyone can write any character realistically, and explore any social issue in a sensitive and accurate way. Finally, you are under no obligation to write message fiction. No one will take your socially conscious cred away because you wrote a comedic sci-fi romance rather than an Important Novel About Poverty. It’s certainly much better to put a piece of enjoyable, entertaining literature into the world than a message story which gets its message utterly off course.
No comments have been added yet.
