Okay, this may be one of my more controversial posts in today's climate, but I cannot stay silent any longer. I rarely stray into these kinds of divisive issues, but the harpy-like screeching I am seeing in the writing and publishing world is threatening to destroy good story-telling in favor of bland stories that do little but try to shout, "LOOK AT ME - I'M A GOOD PERSON!"
Stories today are straying from telling stories and into being vehicles to preach at people. Characters are being shoved into stories where they don't necessarily fit, and villains are turning into caricatures, all for the sake of today's politically correct environment. It seems like a lot of writers are either obsessed with cramming every bit of wokeness down our throats that they can, or they're so scared by the shrill, even if small, minority of folks that somehow feel like it's their duty to patrol the ranks of books to satisfy the latest laws of groupthink.
Now, before anyone crashes down on me - and some will no matter what I say - I'm not saying to go out and write stories to intentionally offend people. I'm not even saying to exclude characters from your story if they fit. However, that's a key point - the characters should fit. If a character's sexuality, or ethnicity, or disability, is germane to the story, then by all means, please include it. Depending on the role it plays in the story, it may even need to be played up. That said, if it adds nothing to the story, why are you adding it? I have never included any information about a character's personal identity that was unnecessary to the story, if for no other reason than to allow a multitude of diverse readers to picture it however they so desire.
I've come across multiple stories recently that felt the need to tell me all about a character's sexual awakening, or his or her struggle with Scoliosis, or how (insert race here) meant that he or she had to be looked at differently. Again, if it's relevant to the story - like talking about Tom Robinson being black in the pre-civil rights south in To Kill A Mockingbird - then it should absolutely be part of the story, because the story is near incomprehensible and without context without it. Unfortunately, so many writers seem to include long detail about such stuff not to enhance the story, but rather to shout into people's faces about how they're good people that include everybody. Are we supposed to assume that otherwise they're bad people looking to exclude everybody?
(Speaking of To Kill A Mockingbird, given the scolds of today, does anyone think it could be published in modern times? After all, although being a story about the blight of racism, it borders that around a false accusation of rape, which might make people today say we're trivializing such things by making that a story vehicle)
What's worse isn't the shoving in of certain things just to signal about how woke people are. Instead, it's what I've come to call the "woke-scolds" who patrol books and stories to find any glimmer of not being sufficiently woke. Such puritans aren't seeking so much to point out problematic work, but rather to scold folks that, in their opinion, the work is worthy of scolding simply because it didn't include enough of whatever righteous cause they were looking for, regardless of if it fit into the story.
Yes, perhaps the pitchforks have been lit, and perhaps angry mobs will soon descend upon my house for not being woke enough. That I'm not looking to exclude anybody, but rather saying that it's the story instead of your virtue-signaling, that matters, will be lost on the mob.
Stories today are straying from telling stories and into being vehicles to preach at people. Characters are being shoved into stories where they don't necessarily fit, and villains are turning into caricatures, all for the sake of today's politically correct environment. It seems like a lot of writers are either obsessed with cramming every bit of wokeness down our throats that they can, or they're so scared by the shrill, even if small, minority of folks that somehow feel like it's their duty to patrol the ranks of books to satisfy the latest laws of groupthink.
Now, before anyone crashes down on me - and some will no matter what I say - I'm not saying to go out and write stories to intentionally offend people. I'm not even saying to exclude characters from your story if they fit. However, that's a key point - the characters should fit. If a character's sexuality, or ethnicity, or disability, is germane to the story, then by all means, please include it. Depending on the role it plays in the story, it may even need to be played up. That said, if it adds nothing to the story, why are you adding it? I have never included any information about a character's personal identity that was unnecessary to the story, if for no other reason than to allow a multitude of diverse readers to picture it however they so desire.
I've come across multiple stories recently that felt the need to tell me all about a character's sexual awakening, or his or her struggle with Scoliosis, or how (insert race here) meant that he or she had to be looked at differently. Again, if it's relevant to the story - like talking about Tom Robinson being black in the pre-civil rights south in To Kill A Mockingbird - then it should absolutely be part of the story, because the story is near incomprehensible and without context without it. Unfortunately, so many writers seem to include long detail about such stuff not to enhance the story, but rather to shout into people's faces about how they're good people that include everybody. Are we supposed to assume that otherwise they're bad people looking to exclude everybody?
(Speaking of To Kill A Mockingbird, given the scolds of today, does anyone think it could be published in modern times? After all, although being a story about the blight of racism, it borders that around a false accusation of rape, which might make people today say we're trivializing such things by making that a story vehicle)
What's worse isn't the shoving in of certain things just to signal about how woke people are. Instead, it's what I've come to call the "woke-scolds" who patrol books and stories to find any glimmer of not being sufficiently woke. Such puritans aren't seeking so much to point out problematic work, but rather to scold folks that, in their opinion, the work is worthy of scolding simply because it didn't include enough of whatever righteous cause they were looking for, regardless of if it fit into the story.
Yes, perhaps the pitchforks have been lit, and perhaps angry mobs will soon descend upon my house for not being woke enough. That I'm not looking to exclude anybody, but rather saying that it's the story instead of your virtue-signaling, that matters, will be lost on the mob.
No comments:
Post a Comment