It's the argument people often use for including things like graphic violence, language, or explicit sexual content in their st...

Should Authors Portray Life As It Is or As It Should Be?

Alexa Mintah

17 Comments

It's the argument people often use for including things like graphic violence, language, or explicit sexual content in their stories, that they have to portray their characters accurately, the way they truly are. After all, who wants to read a book full of sunshine and rainbows and streams of Hershey’s Dark Chocolate as common as water? Obviously, that would be boring. The gritty isn’t excess. It’s necessary, so that the reader can feel understood as they wade through the stinking cesspool that is everyday life (particularly in YA fiction), to make the emotions powerful enough for the readers to feel them as deeply as the author desires.

On the other side, you have those who wish to portray life in a more ideal sense. Not that there's no conflict in these types of stories, but it’s toned down a little for the sake of the audience. There are no Hershey’s Dark chocolate streams (to which I call foul), but there are rainbows and sunshine and fluffiness; only a taste of darkness seeps in with the light, just enough to give the story a well-rounded conflict, but not enough for the reader to feel that their soul has been tainted and their worldview obliterated.

And then of course there are the stories that balance the two: they have a lot of darkness, but light still shines through in the end. The characters are beaten and bruised, but every once in a while, a little fluff dabs their wounds and everything looks okay.

So, which side is right?

I see some truth in both: on the one hand, honesty is vital to a good story. Some part of it must ring true to the reader, something about the characters, the plot, the setting, the theme, something must be true or there is no hook to pull us into a world that is ultimately fictional, to convince us to suspend disbelief for a few hours and pretend that what we read is real. Without truth, there is no way to portray fiction.

On the other hand, I personally prefer not to be bombarded with mental images of things like graphic brutality and sex (language kinda depends, because I have uncommon opinions on that, but still, I don't want it to overwhelm my brain). I understand that those things often have to be part of the story so that the hero/heroine can have the opportunity to RISE UP, but I also have no desire to read about them in explicit or unnecessary detail. I know that these things exist; I don’t need to be assailed by them in every book I read to be aware of that. Plus, my biggest reason for reading is entertainment of some kind; I want things to turn out good in the end, and frankly, there's a limited amount of crap that I'm willing to wade through while trying to lose myself in an otherwise good story. Sometimes, the characters grab me and I find it nearly impossible to stop, but there's a part of me that's still squinting and squeamishing through it all. I'm in it for the characters, but when those other elements go overboard to my senses, they do, to some extent, take away from my enjoyment of the tale.

Then again, where would the story be in a story without conflict, a hero without a villain, a victory without loss? It might be good, even temporarily satisfying, but I think there's an important element that would be missing, that would keep it from being truly memorable. We humans, particularly us hardcore nerds, are often melodramatic, masochistic creatures when it comes to our fiction: we want to feel things, all the things, because the happiness becomes euphoria when the sadness was formerly despair.

When it all comes out, I think this issue ultimately depends on one, the genre, because not all of these things are even accurate for every genre, and two, the person, whether reader or writer. Some writers feel the need to express the deepest depths of the darkness in the darkest way possible; others would rather shine a more hopeful view; others balance somewhere in the middle; and each should write their stories the way they see fit then find readers who agree with their take on life. I guess I'm presenting the idea that perhaps readers shouldn't get so upset with an author when that author doesn't portray their own story the way the reader thinks it should be portrayed; but instead we as readers should acknowledge that that particular portrayal wasn't for us, yet that doesn't make it any less true, any less meaningful, or any less needed by someone else somewhere else.

There's room for it all. Not everyone's going to like it all; using myself as an example, there have been many stories that were absolutely brilliant yet I couldn't stomach because of the horror and brutality (looking at you, Code Name Verity) and there have been many others that were cute and fun and adorable, but they didn't really stick with me (case in point, I know I've read some and enjoyed them at the time, but I can't think of one to name right now). But does that make those stories wrong? Does that make them bad?

It makes them wrong for me. In most cases (there are of course some that don't fall under this post), I don't think that makes the stories wrong in general. Just not what I wanted to read.

However, it was what the writer wanted to write. And (again, except in a few extreme cases), I think that's the author's only actual responsibility. To tell the story that they desire to tell and then hope the readers who desire to read it, find it. They can't worry about every reader in the world, just the ones that they and their unique perspective can touch and make a difference for. They should be aware of the readers and the influence that they as writers have, but there is some element of art and creative license that shouldn't be restricted. And just as the author can creatively write the sunshine or the darkness, I can respectfully reject it if it's not what I'm looking for.

Both are okay.

For my reading, I like stories that balance both perspectives, that both pain and provide joy in a unique and beautiful, accurate yet hopeful way. In my own writing, I want to do that. To write stories that portray life as it is, in all of its lovely, ugly glory, so that we can make a way for it to become what it ought to be.

***

So what about you? Do you prefer stories that portray life even in the dark and ugly parts, or ones that show a more idealistic point of view? Something of a balance in between, leaning one way or the other? Can’t wait to hear from you all, and I will see you in the comment section!

You may also like