How much violence is too much?

[Finchbearer]

We’re looking at it from two completely different lens’ - RoP is by no means literally medieval, but that battle felt to me what I would describe as volatile in a medieval sense. I thought it was great honestly. They didn’t mess about. From my perspective, It felt more realistic than other cinematic interpretations of what would happen in a such a situation. Heads would roll, innocents would be slayed. Needless violence is a hallmark of earlier times in our own world history, and I think they did a good job of reflecting that with that particular episode.

On the lore side of things I can see why some would become annoyed at RoP straying from the original Tolkien path. I feel that way about things like Brigerton straying too far from the historical accuracy of the regency time period…but don’t get me started on that!

 

[Aldarion]

We’re looking at it from two completely different lens’ - RoP is by no means literally medieval, but that battle felt to me what I would describe as volatile in a medieval sense. I thought it was great honestly. They didn’t mess about. From my perspective, It felt more realistic than other cinematic interpretations of what would happen in a such a situation. Heads would roll, innocents would be slayed. Needless violence is a hallmark of earlier times in our own world history, and I think they did a good job of reflecting that with that particular episode.

Hardly. Extensive violence maybe the hallmark of earlier times, but it was never needless.

Also, violence in Middle Ages was hardly more excessive than that in modern warfare. Peasants would be killed if one pursued the scorched-earth strategy - but that wasn't "needless violence", it was literally the equivalent of strategic bombardment campaigns of modern wars. And scorched-earth approach was hardly the rule, seeing how peasants very often were the exact resource nobles were fighting over. Many of the medieval wars - with the exception of religious wars such as the Jihad, Crusades and the Ottoman expansion - happened well over the heads of the common men. It was really the Antiquity and Early Modernity (e.g. 30 Years War) that were marked by brutality in warfare, especially towards civilians.

Of course, considering this is the orcs we are talking about, it very much is the equivalent of the religious warfare. So in that respect, it was realistic. But when you look at anything beyond this shallowest of shallow surface views, it was completely unrealistic. Destroying a well-fortified position in favor of not even fortifying a hamlet? And those stunts Galadriel pulled off?

What was the point of all that? As far as I see, Galadriel killing the Yeti Troll had no point beyond showing how "awesome and badass" (read: ridiculous) Galadriel is. Village scene was moronic in its setup, moronic in tactics, and also completely pointless to the story. Though assuming RoP have a story in the first place is a rather optimistic view of the series...

On the lore side of things I can see why some would become annoyed at RoP straying from the original Tolkien path. I feel that way about things like Brigerton straying too far from the historical accuracy of the regency time period…but don’t get me started on that!

Thing is, Rings of Power would be a bad TV show even if they had nothing to do with Tolkien. Them using Tolkien's name merely moves the show from "bad" to a "deliberate insult".

 

[Finchbearer]

Then we’re getting into talking about the violence paradox. Are we more or less violent now than we have been historically - the answer to that is relative. There has always been needless violence, now and then. But anyway, I respectfully disagree.

 

[LittleOwlbear]

I want to address the bolded for a moment before I share my example. As a woman with a history of violence, I'm going to encourage you to step back a little and really dig into female representation in Fantasy (I'm assuming genre here. She's a cat.). And I think you'll find that not only are women often treated as the "heart" or "virtue" of the cast, the one who does the emotional heavy lifting, the one who is "an awesome fighter but she hates it" because women who enjoy violence are unlikable and unrelatable, right?

I will tell you, from experience spanning twenty years of a mixed bag of physical abuse, martial arts, and a fierce nature, one thing and please think about letting your character feel this, too - violence is fun. Maybe not sex fun, but it's the other side of the erotic coin. Similar emotional depth and complexity, similar physicality. Just something to consider.

Now to the fun stuff. We don't believe in giving the reader many breaks. We'd rather be described as "grabbing the reader and dragging them from beginning to end." See? Fun! But sometimes it does get to be too much, and we draw the narrative camera back. We're still showing violence, and this is one of the most violent scenes we've written so far. It's also one of my favorites. Chonky, but still fun.

It doesn't matter what gender someone is, if they find fun in violence, they are automatically unrelatable and I put the book away asap.

The "simulation" of violence might be fun in martial arts and fiction, but from the main character's view it's soulcrushing to be forced to kill or to be violent towards someone.
I did some martial arts too, but as someone, female assigned, who experienced sexual violence and to some degree physical, especially from bulliies in school: hell no. Sometimes it can't be helped to use violence as a mean for defense, and it can be empowering to know you are able to do so, but fun is the last word I would call it.

The context matters and how much it is described just for the sake of gore and violence. What kind of message should a story deliver, if the protagonist is onto "violence is fun" or "war is fun".

I also think giving the reader many breaks is great for the right series. I too love some iyashikei and episodic anime like Natsume or Mushishi etc. There is no plot progressing in every episode, they are both very episodic in nature.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

It doesn't matter what gender someone is, if they find fun in violence, they are automatically unrelatable and I put the book away asap.

The "simulation" of violence might be fun in martial arts and fiction, but from the main character's view it's soulcrushing to be forced to kill or to be violent towards someone.
I did some martial arts too, but as someone, female assigned, who experienced sexual violence and to some degree physical, especially from bulliies in school: hell no. Sometimes it can't be helped to use violence as a mean for defense, and it can be empowering to know you are able to do so, but fun is the last word I would call it.

The context matters and how much it is described just for the sake of gore and violence. What kind of message should a story deliver, if the protagonist is onto "violence is fun" or "war is fun".

I also think giving the reader many breaks is great for the right series. I too love some iyashikei and episodic anime like Natsume or Mushishi etc. There is no plot progressing in every episode, they are both very episodic in nature.

I think that's a valuable question, and the answer is going to vary greatly and will be informed by the themes, tone, and intended audience of the story. In other words, the genre.

For Team Lowan, we will never tell anyone that the Books of Binding is intended for a younger audience, no matter that we have a lot of younger characters. We work with a wide variety of characters with diverse backgrounds, histories, and paradigms. This is going to have a huge influence on how they experience and process violence. And if I had to pick a series theme, message if you will, or a handful of them, a biggie is that people are complicated.

And as for story types lacking plot progression, I get it, I've watched enough DragonballZ to know I hate it, but I do get it. It's just not something my team does. It's not violence that keeps our readers turning pages.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Jane's Addiction lyric "Sex is violent" is reportedly based on Ted Bundy associating violence with sex. However, if you think of the words often associated with sex, violence is not far off the mark in the same way that football terminology references war on a regular basis. Thrust, bang, F*, etc etc all ring with a certain aggression associated with it.

On the one hand, I get some people putting a book down. A Clockwork Orange and Fight Club aren't for everybody, but they are missing out on an element of life. I've met people like those in Fight Club, actual street fighters, and though I was never tempted to be part of it, I get the thrill of violence and the attraction. Live steel fighting is another adrenalin sport I'm not gonna touch, but I get it.

 

[Naruzeldamaster]

I think that's a valuable question, and the answer is going to vary greatly and will be informed by the themes, tone, and intended audience of the story. In other words, the genre.

For Team Lowan, we will never tell anyone that the Books of Binding is intended for a younger audience, no matter that we have a lot of younger characters. We work with a wide variety of characters with diverse backgrounds, histories, and paradigms. This is going to have a huge influence on how they experience and process violence. And if I had to pick a series theme, message if you will, or a handful of them, a biggie is that people are complicated.

And as for story types lacking plot progression, I get it, I've watched enough DragonballZ to know I hate it, but I do get it. It's just not something my team does. It's not violence that keeps our readers turning pages.

I can agree character who craves violence (as in explicitly that) without restraint or without realizing that it isn't normal absolutely has a few screws loose.
But what about the battle hungry martial artist who simply wants to test their skill against strong opponents, like goku?

I won't deny that DBZ gets absurd at points, but Goku himself is a pretty solid depiction of the 'battle hungry' martial artist. He's also a pretty good sport when he loses if he loses at all. (It's rare but he DOES lose)

He also typically doesn't seek violence out (quite often he only resorts to violence if he has to to stop a threat, at least in DB) but if he sees a strong opponent, you bet he's gonna challenge them.

Now, Goku isn't a perfectly executed version of this character type. But that's largely because of A: anime, and B: anime being plot driven by sometimes stupid things. I feel like in the hands of a non-anime writer who knew what they were doing you'd hardly recognize goku. It bugs me that such a solid character is stuck in a shonen anime driven by 'bad guy idiot of the week' plot. A proper martial arts anime with a character like goku would be great I feel!

I'm writing a couple of characters who don't particularly like the actual act of violence in combat. One of them does it because it 'comes with the territory' and the other one is the classic 'I want to become stronger' martial artist.

The first character is incredibly strong, he trains every day in secret to maintain that strength, but most people don't think he's able to fight at all since it's been hundreds of years since his last one. He enjoys fighting a powerful opponent, but he's so stoic and impersonal that you'd never tell how strong he was just talking to him.

The other character is a female bunny girl, she's a southern belle who runs a (carrot) cake and sweets shop, and by all means you'd never expect her to be as powerful as she is. But that's her secret. Her tribe is focused on making their strength readily apparent, the rest of her tribe are the classic amazonian warrior race. She knows exactly how strong she is, to the point where she'd really rather not fight at all if she could avoid it. but if you push the wrong buttons you bet your bottom dollar you're getting dusted. (Provided you aren't her arch nemeses she meets later in the story who can heal almost instantly from most wounds) For her, becoming stronger isn't about the physical punching, but being a better person.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I can agree character who craves violence (as in explicitly that) without restraint or without realizing that it isn't normal absolutely has a few screws loose.
But what about the battle hungry martial artist who simply wants to test their skill against strong opponents, like goku?

I won't deny that DBZ gets absurd at points, but Goku himself is a pretty solid depiction of the 'battle hungry' martial artist. He's also a pretty good sport when he loses if he loses at all. (It's rare but he DOES lose)

He also typically doesn't seek violence out (quite often he only resorts to violence if he has to to stop a threat, at least in DB) but if he sees a strong opponent, you bet he's gonna challenge them.

Now, Goku isn't a perfectly executed version of this character type. But that's largely because of A: anime, and B: anime being plot driven by sometimes stupid things. I feel like in the hands of a non-anime writer who knew what they were doing you'd hardly recognize goku. It bugs me that such a solid character is stuck in a shonen anime driven by 'bad guy idiot of the week' plot. A proper martial arts anime with a character like goku would be great I feel!

I'm writing a couple of characters who don't particularly like the actual act of violence in combat. One of them does it because it 'comes with the territory' and the other one is the classic 'I want to become stronger' martial artist.

The first character is incredibly strong, he trains every day in secret to maintain that strength, but most people don't think he's able to fight at all since it's been hundreds of years since his last one. He enjoys fighting a powerful opponent, but he's so stoic and impersonal that you'd never tell how strong he was just talking to him.

The other character is a female bunny girl, she's a southern belle who runs a (carrot) cake and sweets shop, and by all means you'd never expect her to be as powerful as she is. But that's her secret. Her tribe is focused on making their strength readily apparent, the rest of her tribe are the classic amazonian warrior race. She knows exactly how strong she is, to the point where she'd really rather not fight at all if she could avoid it. but if you push the wrong buttons you bet your bottom dollar you're getting dusted. (Provided you aren't her arch nemeses she meets later in the story who can heal almost instantly from most wounds) For her, becoming stronger isn't about the physical punching, but being a better person.

Whoops! Sorry, saw DBZ and that was that.

 

[Naruzeldamaster]

Whoops! Sorry, saw DBZ and that was that.

Why did you bother quoting the entire post then...
Also no joke, the OG Dragon Ball (not Z) is much better written, even on the Goku front. He's still a bit of an idiot but at least back then he had the excuse of being a country bumpkin kid with lots of airspace in his skull. Adult Goku doesn't really have that luxury. (It still cracks me up that 'adult' goku is more of a kid/idiot than kid goku is.) In fact him being an adult in Z makes his idiocy even worse. Trust me when even the fans meme on the writing, we know why people who don't like it don't like it.

Disregarding the part of my post you checked out on, my point still stands. You can write a martial artist who craves battle, but not violence explicitly. Heck, you can even do that and not have them be a moustache twirling villain (Like the evil crane guy in kung fu panda). Hell, you can have them not be overly fond of the trading physical blows aspect (just don't have them consider it barbaric, I could buy a Ferrari with every dime I had for every time that trope cropped up) but have them enjoy the tactics and preparation.

 

[LittleOwlbear]

Jane's Addiction lyric "Sex is violent" is reportedly based on Ted Bundy associating violence with sex. However, if you think of the words often associated with sex, violence is not far off the mark in the same way that football terminology references war on a regular basis. Thrust, bang, F*, etc etc all ring with a certain aggression associated with it.

On the one hand, I get some people putting a book down. A Clockwork Orange and Fight Club aren't for everybody, but they are missing out on an element of life. I've met people like those in Fight Club, actual street fighters, and though I was never tempted to be part of it, I get the thrill of violence and the attraction. Live steel fighting is another adrenalin sport I'm not gonna touch, but I get it.

I mean, I understand the thrill of fictional or sports "violence" (or maybe bdsm too in some ways), but these are more some sort of positive aggression.

For the character in a story tho, their own world is not fictional, so in-world violence will do some damage to most people's psyche. Some people and stories tend to paint this negative picture of humanity, but most (not all) people are not violent by nature and without a need other than getting pleasure out of it.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Why did you bother quoting the entire post then...
Also no joke, the OG Dragon Ball (not Z) is much better written, even on the Goku front. He's still a bit of an idiot but at least back then he had the excuse of being a country bumpkin kid with lots of airspace in his skull. Adult Goku doesn't really have that luxury. (It still cracks me up that 'adult' goku is more of a kid/idiot than kid goku is.) In fact him being an adult in Z makes his idiocy even worse. Trust me when even the fans meme on the writing, we know why people who don't like it don't like it.

Disregarding the part of my post you checked out on, my point still stands. You can write a martial artist who craves battle, but not violence explicitly. Heck, you can even do that and not have them be a moustache twirling villain (Like the evil crane guy in kung fu panda). Hell, you can have them not be overly fond of the trading physical blows aspect (just don't have them consider it barbaric, I could buy a Ferrari with every dime I had for every time that trope cropped up) but have them enjoy the tactics and preparation.

Oh, my sweet summer child...

There are a few reasons why I don't tend to nip away at quotes, but I think that the relevant answer in this case is that the world won't tailor itself to your expectations. I've studied English lang and lit across such an expanse of time that grammar and spelling are fine, I just don't care what we think of as right or wrong, because most of what I've read predates both and still merrily trots along, scattering random spellings, punctuations, and entire letters that are no longer in use, hither thither and yon, all while still being understood. Grats! They just won English.

So, you see the bolded section, you know what I'm talking about since you replied showing understanding, and therefore I have successfully communicated. I win English. And so did you. See how it works?

The point is, it's a better use of your time and energy to pay more attention to the message than to the delivery methods. It'll serve you better, give you time and energy to compose well-thought answers as well as writing the way you want to write. And in the meantime, you get to avoid being labeled pedantic and one step away from your next star for the Grammar Police just because someone doesn't do it like you do.

 

[skip.knox]

> You can write a martial artist who craves battle, but not violence explicitly.
The old TV series Kung Fu comes to mind. There are numerous other examples as well. I particularly like Caedfel, who almost never engaged in violence, once he retired to the monastery.

 

[pmmg]

What does a dislike of dragon ball have to do with old grammar rules?

I feel i missed something.

I dont know. People can like what they want. There are plenty of things i avoid. But even the most wretched sometimes reaches up and has something to say and discuss. I loved the saw movies. They are pretty violent. But i thought they asked neat questions. Sometimes the gore is important. I think my threshold varies with my expectations. If it important, and has something to say, ill probably let it in. Sometimes stuff is just homework.