Criticizing the Published

[Garren Jacobsen]

Ok, the only thing I could think of watching this (about how cults lure their unassuming, low self esteem victims) is that the MC who does the luring is named 'Christian'. As an agnostic I find this really funny. (Not meaning to be offensive, but maybe the author was getting at something deeper than we thought she was…)

Yeah, I'm gonna be honest, I don't think that's what she was really going after, even subconsciously. I just can't believe someone who refuses to discuss the potential of the relationship between Grey and Ana to be abusive is capable of such intellectual subtlety. In fact, I think that refusal goes to my point that she clearly didn't intend that and that she wrote a kinky book to get people all hot and bothered and buy this written version of porn.

 

[X Equestris]

Ok, the only thing I could think of watching this (about how cults lure their unassuming, low self esteem victims) is that the MC who does the luring is named 'Christian'. As an agnostic I find this really funny. (Not meaning to be offensive, but maybe the author was getting at something deeper than we thought she was…)

It started out with Edward as a protagonist in pretty much the exact same role, so I doubt there's any deeper meaning.

 

[Micheale]

Of course I'm being somewhat facetious. But in many ways, I believe, so long as you can prove your novel means something (and controversial is always better) than it will have popularity. I don't think she meant to create that theme, but anyone (like the film maker who created the documentary) can prove anything if you use the right symbols and examples.

 

[Mindfire]

Ok, the only thing I could think of watching this (about how cults lure their unassuming, low self esteem victims) is that the MC who does the luring is named 'Christian'. As an agnostic I find this really funny. (Not meaning to be offensive, but maybe the author was getting at something deeper than we thought she was…)

Except that's not at all how mainstream Christianity works in the present or historically? Attaching a "totally not being offensive" disclaimer to your offensive statement is a lot like people who say, "I'm not a racist, but..."

 

[Trick]

Geez. I just find it an interesting connection is all. I wan't meaning anything by it. I have a Masters Degree in English Lit. I'm pretty much indoctrinated (lol) to find bizarre connections (usually biblical) in everything I read.

I could probably go on to write an Essay on how 50 Shades is really a social commentary on how organized religion uses scare tactics and psychological warfare in order to groom it's unassuming followers into preforming acts of servitude for the church, and how the fact that most of the readers missed this aspect is an example of how indoctrinated our world has become.

This how my mind has been trained to work.

Somehow a masters in English Lit conditioned you to make a connection between a movie/book about BDSM and organized religion, Christianity specifically? Sounds like you took some weird classes. You might want to go back and take one on statistics; calling over 2 billion people "unassuming, low self esteem victims" sounds a bit uneducated.

 

[Trick]

Of course I'm being somewhat facetious. But in many ways, I believe, so long as you can prove your novel means something (and controversial is always better) than it will have popularity. I don't think she meant to create that theme, but anyone (like the film maker who created the documentary) can prove anything if you use the right symbols and examples.

"anyone ... can prove anything if you use the right symbols and examples."

I'm guessing you don't mean that I can prove unicorns exist and that they often play soccer professionally? I think what you are trying to say is that analogy is the weakest form of argument.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

This debate is emotionally charged, so I'm asking everyone to move forward in this discussion with a level head.

As posted in the site guidelines:

When discussing religion, special care must be taken. Such discussions must be conducted in a spirit of mutual respect and genuine inquiry. For this reason special guidelines have been enacted for threads on religion.

Please see the following:
http://mythicscribes.com/forums/news-and-announcements/2101-guidelines-discussing-religion.html

Please review the site policy on religious discussion if you intend to debate this point further.

 

[Micheale]

Ok. I understand. But I don't understand how, as authors and writers we can't have difficult discussions about finding meaning in literature? I mean, the best literature throughout history has been that that was messy. That asked difficult questions and made the readers question the validity of their answers. That made people stand up and say, hmmmmm, this makes me really uncomfortable and I don't like where you are going with this, but it is an interesting point. I'm not saying that 50 shades is anti-christrian rhetoric, I'm saying that I 'could' be interpreted that way based on the documentary shown. If a forum of writers cannot have difficult discussions about the purpose of their craft then where are they expected to go with their art? If we can't write about anything controversial, asking pointed questions and seeking challenging answers than what else is there?

My degree taught me to be critical and open minded. To not follow the status quo. To ask questions and find meaning in things that otherwise appear empty.

Good luck to all of you, as you entertain without ruffling any feathers.

 

[Trick]

I did get worked up, sorry about that.

Ok. I understand. But I don't understand how, as authors and writers we can't have difficult discussions about finding meaning in literature?

We can and often do.

I mean, the best literature throughout history has been that that was messy. That asked difficult questions and made the readers question the validity of their answers. That made people stand up and say, hmmmmm, this makes me really uncomfortable and I don't like where you are going with this, but it is an interesting point. I'm not saying that 50 shades is anti-christrian rhetoric, I'm saying that I 'could' be interpreted that way based on the documentary shown.

It could be interpreted that way, but in my opinion it is a leap. The issue is not asking the question, it is the insinuation that Christianity is a cult. There are a lot of Christians in the world and that's an easy way to start a fight. I do not begrudge you your opinion however, I simply ask that you don't call my religion a cult, nor imply that I am an unassuming, low self-esteemed victim. I am more than happy to discuss the cultish nature of 50 Shades though.

If a forum of writers cannot have difficult discussions about the purpose of their craft then where are they expected to go with their art? If we can't write about anything controversial, asking pointed questions and seeking challenging answers than what else is there?

As I said above, we can and do have difficult discussions and ask pointed questions; we just attempt to do so without even unintentionally insulting each other and it usually works out pretty well. There is ample room for a more in-depth discussion of controversial themes.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Good luck to all of you, as you entertain without ruffling any feathers.

This is a community of writers. It is not your writing.

You're free to discuss any topics you choose and in whatever manner you deem appropriate in your writing. Ruffle your feathers there.

However, on these forums we must present our assertions or questions in a respectful manner. Without mutual respect, debates turn into arguments where nothing is accomplished besides the creation of disdain & division amongst the membership.

We debate many topics like religious views. We may even ask controversial questions, but we do so with respect & the intention to understand. That's necessary for any community.

And, we are writers, after all. We should be capable of presenting ourselves clearly with the written word. A writer should be capable of clear and tactful expression.

I don't think requiring a respectful discourse is too much to ask. Do you?

 

[Guy]

she wrote a kinky book to get people all hot and bothered and buy this written version of porn.

Bingo. Sex sells. I don't think anything more complicated than that is at work here.

 

[Garren Jacobsen]

Greg,

I truly don't think that most of us have any control whatsoever about any of our books becoming mega bestsellers like the ones discussed in this thread. If we work hard enough, I think it's likely that any of us can attain some measure of success, but I think reaching the stratosphere is akin to hitting the lottery.

A lot of authors (check the Writer's Cafe over at Kboards) talk about books that they wrote doing well because they followed a trend and wrote exactly what their readers wanted.

I don't think that it's too terribly hard to find out exactly what that is: simply study what is selling.

Nothing wrong with writing for yourself, but I tend to think that writing for readers gives you a better chance to sell to readers.

Thanks.

Brian

While I recognize the point I am not sure that is 100% accurate. Harry Potter was something new, and written from the heart, not with readers in mind. And it sold. You can feel the passion flowing from the page. LOTR wasn't written with readers in mind, and that is hugely successful. Twilight also written from the hear, huge success. 50 Shades is the same, who knew BDSM with shades of (ooooooooooohhhhhhh) abuse, according to some, was written as a loving (horny?) fanfic of Twilight, not for an audience and that thing is making a mint.

The problem with the unprofessional writer is that most of them are writing behind the curve since they have day jobs, life, and other issues that get in the way of writing. So, why not write what you love, write a lot, maybe you'll get a sale and make it big through passion and not through cynicism.

 

[Russ]

The interesting thing about this discussion is that it seems to be dedicated to deriving a "rule" from the exceptions.

 

[BWFoster78]

The problem with the unprofessional writer is that most of them are writing behind the curve since they have day jobs, life, and other issues that get in the way of writing. So, why not write what you love, write a lot, maybe you'll get a sale and make it big through passion and not through cynicism.

Brian,

I'm not saying not to do that.

I think that the side question that Greg and I started discussing was essentially: do you have more of a chance of success writing for the reader or writing for yourself?

First, define success. If you're talking about Twilight/Harry Potter level, I have no idea how you reach that statosphere. I think it takes a combination of skill and having the right book at the right time. I don't know how to plan a goal around having the right book at the right time.

So I define success more as making a legitimate side income with the dream being to become a full time writer.

Given that definition, what is more likely to get you there - writing for the reader or writing for yourself?

I believe the former.

Thanks.

Brian

 

[Mindfire]

The interesting thing about this discussion is that it seems to be dedicated to deriving a "rule" from the exceptions.

First, define success. If you're talking about Twilight/Harry Potter level, I have no idea how you reach that statosphere. I think it takes a combination of skill and having the right book at the right time. I don't know how to plan a goal around having the right book at the right time.

So I define success more as making a legitimate side income with the dream being to become a full time writer.

Given that definition, what is more likely to get you there - writing for the reader or writing for yourself?

I believe the former.

If there's any kind of "rule" it seems to be that things written to formula, with a predetermined audience in mind, are reasonably safe bets- likely to get published and sell decently well (e.g. the romance genre). Meanwhile things written as works of passion and imagination are less likely to be picked up immediately because they may not have a built-in marketing niche and are probably less likely to reach even middling success, but are also the pool from which the huge breakout successes are drawn. To use an imperfect analogy, writing to formula is a safe bet, while writing what you love is high stakes gambling. The evidence seems to bear this out. Brian is on to something there. So in a way both BW and Brian are right. If you're writing for sales, with the goal of achieving a nice source of side income or even writing full time, writing with the audience in mind is the smart choice. However, if, like myself, writing as a part or full-time job is not your goal and you're in it for personal enjoyment, escapism, the joy of sharing your imagination with others, etc., then it can't hurt to go for the high stakes gamble. If you don't win, you lose nothing, since you'll still have the enjoyment of the work itself which is what you started out for anyway. And if you do win, you win BIG.

So really it's a tradeoff. Do you play it safe at the cost of your creative freedom? Or do you write for yourself and forego the likelihood of steady income from writing, but with a minute chance of being the next big thing?

 

[Mindfire]

And if you think about it, the fact that this tradeoff exists shouldn't be surprising. Things written to formula sell decently well because of it, but are also held back from greater success because they're more or less just like everything else. New and imaginative works become bestsellers because they're fresh and different and tap into undiscovered markets, but again the same factor that creates their success also restricts them because publishers may not want to take a chance on something that really is different. And if they do take that chance there's still the possibility that the fresh new thing may not be the kind of fresh new thing people are actually looking for. People are tricky that way. They don't always know what they want- or don't want- until you give it to them.

 

[Micheale]

I just wanted to come back to say that I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my post. I do tend to be rather socially awkward, say what I'm thinking (without thinking) and have been told before (often that I can be less than tactful. This is something that I will try to reign in while I participate on these boards. I value the opinions and beliefs of others very much and never intended to offend. I really just thought it was an interesting connection and said it out loud before thinking. Again, I apologize. I am a very nice person Just a bit eccentric at times.

 

[Trick]

I apologize. I am a very nice person Just a bit eccentric at times.

I think we're all a bit eccentric at times why else would we create our own little worlds and then write about them?

 

[Guy]

I think we're all a bit eccentric at times why else would we create our own little worlds and then write about them?

Because we're that much cooler than everyone else