Muddled Morals

Most of us seem to like stories with defined morals.  Daily life is all too riddled with muddled morality, so we tend to be drawn to stories that make clear distinctions.  Unfortunately, sometimes good stories require muddled morals.

I noticed this while writing Schism.  While there are clearly some folks who have an inverted sense of morality in the book, there are more than a few who are a mix of both good and bad(like most people are in real life).  During the restructuring of America in a way most of us would gag at, there are still instances many of us would cheer.  For example, there’s an element in all of us that wants criminals to pay and not be pampered, even while recognizing that due process is a good thing.  Most of us hate the divisions within our country and would like to see less divisive speech out there, even while we revere the free speech that sometimes leads us to that.  These instances where we want to simultaneously cheer and boo lend themselves towards a book that is more a cautionary tale than one we might be drawn towards.

Is that what readers want?  I don’t know.  My own tastes tend towards more complex stories where not everything is black and white, but perhaps I’m the one outside of the mainstream.  I admit I certainly have quirkier tastes, but that’s because stories, to me, have to have some elements of realism.  I have difficulty believing a story that strays too far.  What do you think – black and white, or shades or grey?