# Violent Scenes?



## Monster (Jun 8, 2013)

Has anybody else ever written a particularly violent or graphic scene and then thought to themselves, "I'm a horrible person" after reading it back? That was me just today. The graphic scene in the chapter was relatively necessary, but I felt pretty bad for my character. Does that sound silly? 

After reading my scene to myself I was almost mortified that something like that could come from me. I'm not a violent person by any means, and though I do have a lot of graphic nightmares, my waking life is boring and timid. It just seemed very harsh, but again a necessary part of my story's conflict. 

Do any of you ever have a hard time getting past some of your own work? 
How do you handle justifying it when writing something like that (although it does flex your dramatic skills) makes you feel like a maniac?


----------



## Jeko (Jun 8, 2013)

I enjoy it.


----------



## Sam (Jun 8, 2013)

How do I justify it? It's a story; it's not real. I'd have a harder time justifying it if I were actually doing the things I write about.


----------



## Robert_S (Jun 8, 2013)

When it fits the story, I love it. I just posted a violent scene in my script to the script forum. That entire script will portray an extremely nasty, violent moment in Ro'shaanic history that Dante is trying to come to terms with.


----------



## Grape Juice Vampire (Jun 8, 2013)

I've come to the realization that even though I wrote it, it's not a reflection on me or an indication of what I might do. Instead, I feel it's a sign I know my characters well, and know what they are capable of. It does still bother me on occasion, but that's usually because it bothers my characters. (I know, I know, I'm crazy.) It also helps that such events lead to personal growth for me and my characters, and gives me a surprising amount of insight as to the how and why they do things in other parts of the story.


----------



## Monster (Jun 8, 2013)

@Grape Juice Vampire, God I'm glad I'm not the only one that's bothered because my characters are. Naturally, they come from my brain so I care for them. It's a good approach to look at though, just like having horrible nightmares doesn't mean that I'm secretly an awful person. Life isn't always happy, and stories that are only ever perfect don't have any interest. I know my characters well, and one of them is capable of being a very evil man. 

One of my main characters is abused throughout my story, but this particular violent scene was of a sexual nature so it bothered me more than typical violence.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2013)

I have written a couple of scenes that made my skin crawl, both during and after. And I admit, after I wondered where the heck did those things come from... Yes, they were based on facts, but I embellished them. And yes, I had more than one reader mention those particular scenes because they creeped them out as well. But they were products of my imagination, and they did make the story and scene stronger, so - I got over it.


----------



## Angelicpersona (Jun 8, 2013)

I'm thinking of one scene in particular that I wrote, ohhh, maybe a little under a year ago now? It took me two weeks to put the last paragraph down because every time I went to write it I'd end up rereading the previous paragraph and get upset over it again. I finally pushed myself through it because it's part of my characters struggle between the good and the evil in her, which is something that is not necessarily essential to the main plot but makes it just a bit more interesting.


----------



## Dave Watson (Jun 9, 2013)

As someone writing in the horror genre, horribleness is my bread and butter. The stuff I've written hasn't made me question my own morals or sanity or anything like that, but a few times I've read over some stuff and though, "Jebus, that's a bit strong!" One reviewer remarked on it and said that the OTT violence and scenes of torture were integral to the story and aren't just there for sick titliation, so I guess that makes it okay. 

Now where'd I put my puppy stabbing knife...?


----------



## JosephB (Jun 9, 2013)

I never have understood why people enjoy reading violent stuff, or why anyone would want to write it. I just don't see the allure. To each his own, I suppose.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 9, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I enjoy it.



Well put.  After all, violence is the spice that gives the pulp novel flavor.  

However, much like explicit sex scenes, violence is extremely difficult to write.  It seems easy, but is in fact an enormous challenge.  Very often, even in the hands of good writers, the end result is lame, cartoonish, and the author trying too hard.  Depicting it in both an exciting and visceral manner is a rare skill.


----------



## AtlanshiaSpirit (Jun 9, 2013)

It goes back to the old stance on the news channels, people are interested in the gory stuff! If its horrible and unbelievable people will watch it. That's why horror films are so popular. Personally I love writing graphic violent scenes. My main character is a witch and the book is based around modern day witch hunts. So she has to fight, a lot! Go with what feels right, books are alternate worlds, an escape.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 9, 2013)

One of my short stories includes a rape and the subsequent murder of the rapist. You know exactly what's going on -- but the horror is primary conveyed through the thoughts an emotions of the rape victim and the details are left to the imagination. I handle sex scenes the same way -- I don't fade to black -- but we all know what goes on. There's no need to describe how Tab A goes into Slot B.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 9, 2013)

I would, however, never write anything sexual. I can do any degree of violence with gusto, but I would not write sexual material. Just my own ethics.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 9, 2013)

Not just your own: 'We don't allow sex. Sex is dirty, but there is nothing wrong with some good, clean violence.' - me, on child rearing.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 9, 2013)

I think one can go a bit more detailed in violent scenes however, versus sex scenes. Sex - yeah, everyone knows the steps. Violence? Not so much - and particularly some forms of violence. I've been very turned off by some writing where they leave too much to the imagination; the impact is lost because the reader has no idea what actually occurred. But one can go too far, I think - kinda the difference between a really good horror movie and the slasher types. One pulls you through it; the other shoves your face in it.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 9, 2013)

We can't (or I won't) talk about it here ('scuse me, not that I want to) but it occurs to me there are many variations in, uhm...many 'actions', perhaps unheard of.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Jun 9, 2013)

There's a lot of violence in my current big project. Maybe not so much violence as deliberate cruelty. I do think it's important to ask what purpose such scenes serve, make sure it's important to the story and not just "isn't that awful!" or for the sake of spectacle or indulging one's own sick little mind. We've all got sick minds and violent impulses, really. Good vs. evil is just a rationalization.

The only scene I've written that's really bothered me is a very short flashback to a sexual assault. Bothers me because I'm not entirely sure of its necessity, or why I wrote it in the first place, and I think it's kind of cliché to victimize a female MC in that way. Even so, every time I reread that paragraph I think it's too good to cut, and I've given it a decent enough place in the plot now that I think it works.

I have no ethical problem with writing sex scenes, but I think they're difficult to make interesting, often best left to the reader's imagination.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jun 10, 2013)

lasm said:


> I have no ethical problem with writing sex scenes, but I think they're difficult to make interesting, often best left to the reader's imagination.



I agree. Violence is fine – I can have kittens burrow into someone's stomach and explode, or a man get his leg flattened with a hammer, or pile a gargantuan heap of skeletons to the ceiling . . . but sex just gets _weird_. A penchant for turning half my characters into undead mutants doesn't help the matter much.

Then again, you wouldn't see many shoot-outs or sword-fights in a harleguin romance. Maybe a bit of flogging, but I think that's a bit different.

EDIT: Actually I've never read harlequin romance, are there sword fights? I'd totally read harlequin romance if there are sword fights.


----------



## Angelicpersona (Jun 10, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> EDIT: Actually I've never read harlequin romance, are there sword fights? I'd totally read harlequin romance if there are sword fights.



Depends on the era it's set in  I'm writing a fantasy novel where the main characters are vampires, so there's a little bit of everything, though I do tend to fade to black on the sex scenes, and I've even written a few scenes which are "draw your own conclusion" sort of things. I mean, they could just be bathing off the goop from the dragon egg they fell on, or they could be getting it on, baby!


----------



## Sam (Jun 10, 2013)

My novels are a reflection of the real word; the real world is violent, ergo my novels are at times violent. I'm not in any way condoning violence, but I'm also not going to pretend that it ceases to exist.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jun 10, 2013)

Well, world population is growing.
Which means that the world is statistically more sexy than violent. We live in a sexy world.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 10, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I would, however, never write anything sexual. I can do any degree of violence with gusto, but I would not write sexual material. Just my own ethics.



Just out of curiosity: How do these 'ethics' allow writing a scene where a man plunges an ax through a child's skill , but forbid those portraying one body part entering another, in a spirit of true love and consent?


----------



## JosephB (Jun 10, 2013)

lasm said:


> There's a lot of violence in my current big project. Maybe not so much violence as deliberate cruelty. I do think it's important to ask what purpose such scenes serve, make sure it's important to the story and not just "isn't that awful!" or for the sake of spectacle or indulging one's own sick little mind. We've all got sick minds and violent impulses, really. Good vs. evil is just a rationalization.
> 
> The only scene I've written that's really bothered me is a very short flashback to a sexual assault. Bothers me because I'm not entirely sure of its necessity, or why I wrote it in the first place, and I think it's kind of cliché to victimize a female MC in that way. Even so, every time I reread that paragraph I think it's too good to cut, and I've given it a decent enough place in the plot now that I think it works.
> 
> I have no ethical problem with writing sex scenes, but I think they're difficult to make interesting, often best left to the reader's imagination.



I remember the part with the hand and the needle etc. I could really feel that -- if memory serves, it was more about what your character was feeling -- and it wasn't particularly graphic. And I'm pretty squeamish. As I was saying, it's usually not necessary to describe violence in any great detail if you can successfully depict the horror or the pain by how people react to it. Or through the motivations (or lack of) behind it -- and that was really the most frightening thing about that scene -- and what made it work.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Jun 10, 2013)

JosephB said:


> I remember the part with the hand and the needle etc. I could really feel that -- if memory serves, it was more about what your character was feeling -- and it wasn't particularly graphic. And I'm pretty squeamish. As I was saying, it's usually not necessary to describe violence in any great detail if you can successfully depict the horror or the pain by how people react to it. Or through the motivations (or lack of) behind it -- and that was really the most frightening thing about that scene -- and what made it work.


Hey, thank you, it's nice to hear that bit was memorable and effective.  Totally agree that such scenes don't have to be terribly OMG-gross to work, and often for me it's better if they're not--the emotional resonance is the important thing, the relation between characters.

Also I'm really squeamish, too--anything happens to fingernails or eyeballs, I am out. 



			
				luckyscars said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity: How do these 'ethics' allow writing a scene where  a man plunges an ax through a child's skill , but forbid those  portraying one body part entering another, in a spirit of true love and  consent?


Yeah, I kinda wondered that, too... don't want to start a religious debate, and Cadence clearly isn't alone in his feelings about this, the same ones being reflected in film ratings and TV standards. But I've always found that attitude rather strange and backwards. Sex is much nicer than violence, after all, for the people involved.


----------



## Motley (Jun 10, 2013)

I don't mind writing fight or battle scenes, attacks or injuries. It's fiction and usually the bad guy I'm not supposed to like is the one doing the dirty deed.

I did, however, once write a horrifically brutal rape scene that made me cry for about an hour afterwards. I felt so bad for my female MC.


----------



## Terry D (Jun 10, 2013)

This is an interesting conversation. I've been thinking about it and can't come up with a reason I write violent scenes. I'm not a violent person in real life; in fact, just the opposite, but I've always read books and stories with violent content. From western shoot-em-ups, to books and movies about WWII, and from Poe, to Lovecraft, to King, to Jeffery Deaver. There is drama in violence, or the threat of violence--I can't explain it, but I like it. The aspect of the world which interests me, in writing and reading, is its dark side.

To paraphrase a character in my current book; "[Writing] is about changing who you are, and change hurts like a [son-of-a-gun]"


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 10, 2013)

lasm said:


> Yeah, I kinda wondered that, too... don't want to start a religious debate, and Cadence clearly isn't alone in his feelings about this, the same ones being reflected in film ratings and TV standards. But I've always found that attitude rather strange and backwards. Sex is much nicer than violence, after all, for the people involved.



Yeah, I almost didn't post it because I didn't want to go down that route. But it really does bother me! And like I say, I am merely curious and not looking to change people's views on it since I'm sure they cannot be changed, at least not by me. I am afterall a firm believer in people should write with what they're comfortable with and I appreciate many are not comfortable with sex (even those who are perfectly fine with violence...) but like you say, its incredibly bizarre and does rather illustrate the inherent absurdity of whatever religion or belief system is responsible for producing it.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 10, 2013)

Motley said:


> I did, however, once write a horrifically brutal rape scene that made me cry for about an hour afterwards. I felt so bad for my female MC.



I love it when that happens.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 10, 2013)

> How do these 'ethics' allow writing a scene where a man plunges an ax through a child's skill , but forbid those portraying one body part entering another, in a spirit of true love and consent?



Because, as a Christian, I believe that sexual matters have a lot more to do with spiritual matters than body parts.

A character I write can be corrupt and sinful - hey, most of them are - so he/she can lie, murder, swear... but I myself don't want to even try to write down what goes on during the 'special cuddle', as I have 1) never experienced it and 2) view it as something that words cannot do justice anyway, so my characters won't be doing any of 'that'.


----------



## Monster (Jun 10, 2013)

Dave Watson said:


> Now where'd I put my puppy stabbing knife...?



I laughed so hard at this. 

@Joseph B, that's what this was, a beating/rape scene. I didn't like writing it, but it's part of what breaks the supporting character for the main character to rescue and repair. I wasn't horribly graphic with the rapey bit, but the violent beating was visual and rather sad. 

It's good to see that I'm not nuts, though and other people are also bothered by some of the things in their own minds.


----------



## Angelicpersona (Jun 10, 2013)

It's interesting the debate turn this thread ended up taking. Like I said, most of my intimate scenes are of the "fade to black" variety, but I did fully write out one, near the beginning of the book. The older vampire is showing his young prodigy the way to get the "most out of (her) feed", during her training. I wrote and rewrote that scene so many times, and ended up doing a bare bones description... because of my parents. 
My parents are my biggest supporters. They've been rooting for me since day one, since I was on the phone with my mom and I was telling her "I'm writing this story, and I just can't seem to let it finish!", and they're the ones who gave me the push I needed to start thinking about actually publishing. I always knew that some day they'd want to read it, but because I was raised in a Christian home where sex outside of marriage is a sin, I was quite embarrassed to go into any great details as far as that is concerned, because "what must they think of me?"


----------



## Strangedays410 (Jun 10, 2013)

Well now you've gotten me curious, Monster. Maybe you should give us a taste.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 10, 2013)

lasm said:


> Yeah, I kinda wondered that, too... don't want to start a religious debate, and Cadence clearly isn't alone in his feelings about this, the same ones being reflected in film ratings and TV standards. But I've always found that attitude rather strange and backwards. Sex is much nicer than violence, after all, for the people involved.



Violence is thrilling and exciting.  Reading about it or watching it gives me a visceral sense of satisfaction.  I can watch and enjoy boxing and MMA regardless of my mood.  At any point in the day.  With sex?  Only a few times during a day.  

This is just one of the challenges that makes portraying sex scenes way more difficult than action scenes.  It's much harder to get the audience interested or invested.  Even great writers that incorporate a lot of sex in their work (like Murakami) rarely write about it very explicitly.  And if that's the case with Murakami, that's a hint that us lesser mortals shouldn't attempt it.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Because, as a Christian, I believe that sexual matters have a lot more to do with spiritual matters than body parts.
> 
> A character I write can be corrupt and sinful - hey, most of them are - so he/she can lie, murder, swear... but I myself don't want to even try to write down what goes on during the 'special cuddle', as I have 1) never experienced it and 2) view it as something that words cannot do justice anyway, so my characters won't be doing any of 'that'.



And I suppose there's no spiritual issue with violence? 

Look, I don't mean to be giving you a hard time. You don't have to defend yourself because it really comes down to what you are/are not comfortable with writing about.  I just bring it up for the purposes of reflection. There is something innately contradictory there, I think, and it is by no means just you. As a society we are still very much repressed when it comes to sex and yet portrayals of violence and death barely makes it to PG-13.

I do buy the argument that if you haven't experienced 'the special cuddle' it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to write about it well (it seems hard enough for those who clearly HAVE experienced it). On the other hand, one could argue that most writers havent experienced real violence first hand either and yet most don't find it hard to delve into that world. I think there's a degree of self-censorship here, one that is probably beyond somebody like me to analyze.

Anyhow, to get on point. I personally love it when I get any kind of emotional 'kick' from my writing. It pretty much doesn't matter whether its joy, sadness, fear, etc. I think that's why I find horror themes so attractive. There's nothing quite like writing alone at 2am and creeping yourself out.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

Monster said:


> It's good to see that I'm not nuts, though and other people are also bothered by some of the things in their own minds.



Honestly I have a pretty hard time understanding why you or anybody else would be 'bothered' by any of it.

Listen, any fully aware adult knows what rape/murder is. Those equipped with any sense of imagination probably have thought about it too. So what? It doesn't make you a rapist or a murderer to think about something. I used to be interested in the history of Nazi Germany, yet I detest racism. Sometimes I watch a documentary about serial killers, yet I don't think Ted Bundy was a stellar guy. So what? So what?

Let's simplify it: Sometimes I will go drink at a bar and there'll be a song playing. Let's say its a Taylor Swift song, who I happen to hate and, guess what, I hate the song as well. Yet I may know some of the words. If I drink enough I may even sing along a little bit. And, if I ever set a story in that bar, I may very well mention Taylor Swift because her music forms part of the story. Maybe I'll quote the song. Maybe I'll quote the words. 

All of this has nothing to do with MY personal interests or beliefs as a human being. What this is about is awareness of the world and of reality, of capturing life (and death) in a way that creates something poignant and real. It has nothing to do with being a 'bad' or 'good' person. That is a child's assessment. 

Bottom line: If I only wrote about stuff I liked or that was morally sound I'd be bored. And I guarantee my readers would be too.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jun 11, 2013)

Somehow I doubt Taylor Swift will include "used as an allegory for senseless violence" on her resume, though if she reads this she can definitely check that one off her bucket list.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> Somehow I doubt Taylor Swift will include "used as an allegory for senseless violence" on her resume, though if she reads this she can definitely check that one off her bucket list.



it would be her foremost achievement.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

luckyscars said:


> Honestly I have a pretty hard time understanding why you or anybody else would be 'bothered' by any of it.
> 
> Listen, any fully aware adult knows what rape/murder is. Those equipped with any sense of imagination probably have thought about it too. So what? It doesn't make you a rapist or a murderer to think about something. I used to be interested in the history of Nazi Germany, yet I detest racism. Sometimes I watch a documentary about serial killers, yet I don't think Ted Bundy was a stellar guy. So what? So what?
> 
> ...



If the scene includes a victim, and you write it in any way meant to illicit sympathy, than it seems to me that it’s perfectly natural to be “bothered” by it. You’re thinking about it on a whole different level than if you just come across it in the news or in conversation. It’s not at all like automatically singing along to a song when you’re drunk or including it in the story. Not sure how you can equate the two. I’d say if I wasn’t bothered by any violence in my writing to some degree – then I’m probably not doing something right.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

JosephB said:


> If the scene includes a victim, and you write it in any way meant to illicit sympathy, than it seems to me that it’s perfectly natural to be “bothered” by it. You’re thinking about it on a whole different level than if you just come across it in the news or in conversation. It’s not at all like automatically singing along to a song when you’re drunk or including it in the story. Not sure how you can equate the two. I’d say if I wasn’t bothered by any violence in my writing to some degree – then I’m probably not doing something right.



well there's 'bothered' and then there's 'so bothered i'm going to question my own soul , sanity and sense of moral integrity'. 

I get 'bothered' by stuff in my writing all the time. again, i see this as a good thing. sitting there poker faced while writing cannot be a good thing. what i am talking about, and what the OP indicated (if you go back and read it) is that they are so traumatized by their own writing that they question aspects of themselves that should not be questioned. Here, to make it easy I will requote it:



> Has anybody else ever written a particularly violent or graphic scene and then thought to themselves, "I'm a horrible person" after reading it back? That was me just today. The graphic scene in the chapter was relatively necessary, but I felt pretty bad for my character. Does that sound silly?
> 
> After reading my scene to myself I was almost mortified that something like that could come from me. I'm not a violent person by any means, and though I do have a lot of graphic nightmares, my waking life is boring and timid. It just seemed very harsh, but again a necessary part of my story's conflict.
> 
> ...




^ none of that is, to my mind, a healthy level of 'bothered'. it is understandable and i do totally get that its a problem for some, but i reaffirm it is not a good way for any writer to respond to what they do. what i am talking about with the taylor swift analogy is that in order to write well and remain sane one must retain a degree of separation between themselves and their subject matter. not completely - again, i ENJOY the emotional response i get and one must not be coldhearted - but enough that there's never any question that ultimately this stuff is not real and does not define the writer's moral or spiritual views in any way.

does that make sense?


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> And I suppose there's no spiritual issue with violence?



Kill a man and I sin against the body; rape someone and I sin against the spirit.

Sometimes violence is necessary. If God condoned violence, then we wouldn't have had Jesus die on the cross. The Egyptians would still have Hebrew slaves. Et cetera. I don't condone violence, though I do condone lusting after it or enjoying it in reality. In a fictional world, killing fictional characters is one of my favorite hobbies, because to entertain my audience HE HAS TO DIE.

I mean, I said he'd die at the beginning of the story.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Kill a man and I sin against the body; rape someone and I sin against the spirit.



oh-kay...

now listen, I know you like to sound profound and all, but there isn't a sane human being alive who would ever agree that murder is of lesser importance than rape. you need to be careful, that kind of dogma can really hurt people.



> Sometimes violence is necessary. If God condoned violence, then we wouldn't have had Jesus die on the cross. The Egyptians would still have Hebrew slaves. Et cetera. I don't condone violence, though I do condone lusting after it or enjoying it in reality. In a fictional world, killing fictional characters is one of my favorite hobbies, because to entertain my audience HE HAS TO DIE.
> 
> I mean, I said he'd die at the beginning of the story.



You just contradicted yourself there. On the one hand you defend violence in your writing because 'sometimes its necessary like Jesus' and then you immediately say you did it for entertainment purposes. Which is it? Because I guarantee you don't want to suggest the 'biblical deaths' were written for entertainment purposes (though an atheist like myself may actually agree with that). 

point is, there's no rational argument to say violence in books is more morally correct than sex in books. you can't have it both ways. there is no moral way to justify the inclusion of one and the exclusion of the other. there is only your personal choices and personal biases. which are fine, but it is simply disingenuous to try and use religion for that purpose.

and by the way, there's plenty of sex in the bible.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

luckyscars said:


> does that make sense?



Yes -- I didn't go back and read the OP. And considering "bothered" in that context, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it's more about melodramatics and hyperbole than what's actually going on. Kind of hard to take that seriously.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Jun 11, 2013)

Let's get our terms straight here:


SteelPalm said:


> Violence is thrilling and exciting.  Reading about it or watching it gives me a visceral sense of satisfaction.  I can watch and enjoy boxing and MMA regardless of my mood.


I think we need to distinguish between sports and real acts of violence. An MMA match is not the same as a bar fight, a mugging, a murder; there are rules, there are referees, there are precautions, the fighters are trained. One could say that in sports the fight is consensual. In real violence, often it is not. And for the victim/loser, at least, there is nothing satisfying about it.



			
				Cadence said:
			
		

> Kill a man and I sin against the body; rape someone and I sin against the spirit.


Rape is not _sex_. Rape is an act of violence.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 11, 2013)

I think one has to consider the vicarious nature of fiction here. No matter what we are writing about, no matter what the visceral response of what we write (either for ourselves or our readers), the idea is that fiction is the safe way to explore those actions and emotions. If our (writer/reader) responses get too intense, we can step back. We can think about what's on that page; we can reflect on our response to it. And then we can choose to go back, fortified with that reflection and the recognition that it isn't real. And as a reader, I've often finished reading something 'disturbing' and felt guilty about my reactions - until I realize that what makes me okay as a person is the knowledge that I could never do or condone those actions in real life. People want to experience things; they want to feel those animalistic or cruel emotions - but they don't want to _be _animalistic or cruel. Fiction allows that experience in a safe environment, gives people a taste of it, and at the same time, reminds them of their humanity.

Hmm... got a bit philosophical there myself... :cower:


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> now listen, I know you like to sound profound and all, but there isn't a sane human being alive who would ever agree that murder is of lesser importance than rape. you need to be careful, that kind of dogma can really hurt people.



I'm talking from a devout Christian viewpoint, not a universal applies-to-everyone viewpoint.

And there are sane people who would. I've met them. I live with a few of them.



> You just contradicted yourself there. On the one hand you defend violence in your writing because 'sometimes its necessary like Jesus' and then you immediately say you did it for entertainment purposes. Which is it? Because I guarantee you don't want to suggest the 'biblical deaths' were written for entertainment purposes (though an atheist like myself may actually agree with that).



You misunderstood me. I stated that violence was essential in my work because it forms part of the package of the story that entertains people. It's the genre I'm writing. Granted, I chose that genre, but that's because I believe there is a market for it and I believe I can write about violence very well. Denying my research or strength because 'violence is bad' would be foolish. My enjoyment of the violence I add is a product, and not the purpose, of what I write.


On the subject of violence and sex, I'm not trying to make any general statements about which is more morally correct in books. I am only saying that I write about one and not the other. For me writing about sex would corrupt the person I am. Not writing about violence would deny the person I am.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> Rape is not _sex. __Rape is an act of violence._



I said it was _sexual_.


----------



## Monster (Jun 11, 2013)

JosephB said:


> If the scene includes a victim, and you write it in any way meant to illicit sympathy, than it seems to me that it’s perfectly natural to be “bothered” by it. You’re thinking about it on a whole different level than if you just come across it in the news or in conversation. It’s not at all like automatically singing along to a song when you’re drunk or including it in the story. Not sure how you can equate the two. I’d say if I wasn’t bothered by any violence in my writing to some degree – then I’m probably not doing something right.



This is my point. I think you got my post figured out pretty well. I'm not losing sleep, but at the end of that section I really did think to myself, "Hell, that guy has a pretty dumpy life." Because he does. 

Part of my issue is mental illness. I can't control the emotional/mental symptoms I have sometimes. Example: I will have nightmares that bother me for days. I know inside that I'm not a bad person for what happens in my head while I'm asleep, but the visuals and sensations terrify me at times. Same with what I'm writing, but to a lesser degree. A lot of the things I write stem from my nightmares. It's where I get many of my ideas. What I'm writing is paired with what I have seen in dreams, and sometimes, given the vivid nature of my dreams, it's almost like I'm remembering and writing about something horrible I've actually witnessed (I know not really, because dreams are not real, but the scary element is very real). It could be why I'm bothered. Some of the violent things said in this scene I have heard directed at me at some point in my life. Maybe it's the memories that make me feel strange and sympathetic for my character, because although that person is not real, writers give their characters a spirit in a sense. 

BTW Your first quote in your signature is super!


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I'm talking from a devout Christian viewpoint, not a universal applies-to-everyone viewpoint..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Monster (Jun 11, 2013)

What have I done?ale:


----------



## Novel (Jun 11, 2013)

You, Monster, created a thought-provoking thread. Good job.

It takes an inexperienced reader to assume something a character does is a reflection of the author's intentions. If you're confident in your mental health, you have nothing to worry about writing violent scenes.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> Please cite exactly where that 'viewpoint' comes from



_Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body._
1 Corinthians 6:18

I consider it worse not because of what happens to them, but because of what happens to me.

Please don't pretend that Christianity is a side-show for me. I think on a completely different basis to you. I don't apply my faith to things. Things are applied to my faith.

Yes, rape has a lesser impact on the person than murder. But _writing _(stay on topic) about sex, for me, corrupts me, while writing about violence does not. I know that spiritually. It forms part of my relationship and fellowship with the Lord. You know _nothing _about that.

And this thread is about violence, not murder. They are entirely different.

I echo shadowwalker's earlier comments.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> And this thread is about violence, not murder. They are entirely different



I was okay until this. That's kind of a big WHAAAAA? for me.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 11, 2013)

Yes, murder sucks. All my violence is of the Tom and Gerry variety. I really like the sound effects. None of my super-heroes have bulges of any sort, except muscles. They can use tnt but no guns. I myself prefer them to wield a frying pan; it makes a great noise and I like the shape of it.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> I was okay until this. That's kind of a big WHAAAAA? for me.


They are. I can murder someone without any violence, and I can commit violence without it escalating to murder. So they're different.


----------



## Dave Watson (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> And this thread is about violence, not murder. They are entirely different.



Sorry dude, you're going to have to explain how that one works! How can you murder someone in a non violent way?!

EDIT - Just saw your post above. Nope, sorry. Violence is the causnig of harm to someone. Killing them is usually pretty harmful.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

> How can you murder someone in a non violent way?!



Psi-waves.

Or some more widely available and practical chemical.


----------



## Dave Watson (Jun 11, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Psi-waves.
> 
> Or some more widely available and practical chemical.



So you're talking about ways to kill someone without physically touching them? Doesn't wash with me. Violence to me is the causing of harm to another person. It doesn't need to be "hands on" to be violent.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 11, 2013)

We're talking about graphic content in this thread; I don't find the psychic destruction of someone's mind to be graphic.

Perhaps you could define a lot of things as violence, but for this thread I'm linking it to the 'graphic content' theme.


----------



## Monster (Jun 11, 2013)

Very true, Dave.
You can be incredibly violent without putting your  hands (or feet) on another person. Imagine, for example, a maniac that  has you cornered, using their body as a barrier so that you cannot  escape (not touching, but there is still physical intimidation). That  person could scream at you, threaten you, and do all kinds of things to  scare you (which is also in my story). That in itself is a frightening  sort of violence, especially if you've never been hit before. Not  knowing when that person is going to snap and actually physically hurt  you, or just listening to the things they're yelling at you about. 

There isn't really a "non-violent" way to kill somebody. Even without touching them, it's harmful to die against your will. There's some kind of force in it. 

About  the previous comments, though. Murder vs. Rape is a hard one to judge.  One person is dead. A murder victim no longer has any stance in the  argument, as they are dead. The consequences of murder tend to fall on  those the victim knew and loved. While a rape is a personal crime that  can have many physical and emotional side effects. Both are pretty  horrible. But nobody ever says, "I was murdered once. I went to a doctor  to talk about it and I'm starting to make peace with it." I'm hoping my  point is understood here.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

Monster said:


> This is my point. I think you got my post figured out pretty well.



Well, that's how I feel about it anyway -- so glad you can relate. As far as mental illness goes -- maybe those feelings account for what to me seemed like hyperbole in the OP. Because I think for most folks, "bothered" is as about as far as it goes -- if you have other issues or experiences that make it harder to deal with, that's understandable.



Monster said:


> What have I done?



Nothing. It’s all good -- sometimes folks get a little too wound up over these things.



Monster said:


> BTW Your first quote in your signature is super!



Good -- because I have no idea what the second one means


----------



## Monster (Jun 11, 2013)

Maybe it's a creative way for Flannery O'Connor to say that miracles don't really exist, hence fiction?


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

Heh. I don't think that's it. She was a devout Catholic -- so I'm pretty sure she believed in miracles.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 11, 2013)

lasm said:


> I think we need to distinguish between sports and real acts of violence. An MMA match is not the same as a bar fight, a mugging, a murder; there are rules, there are referees, there are precautions, the fighters are trained. One could say that in sports the fight is consensual. In real violence, often it is not. And for the victim/loser, at least, there is nothing satisfying about it.



Of course.  Any sane person finds criminal/random violence abhorrent.  I felt that practically went without saying, since I assume most people aren't psychopaths.


----------



## Monster (Jun 11, 2013)

Indeed, nobody in their right state of mind says "Let's all go down and watch that guy get beat up and mugged." Because that would be wrong. There is something violent about that, in the idea that one person does NOT want to be there (the victim). In an MMA fight, both guys/girls are fighting because they want to do it and are being paid to do it. There are refs, and at no time is either of the fighters forced to go on when they want to stop. They can say at any time, "I give up" and that's it.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

Not sure what MMA has to do with anything. Seems like apples and oranges to me.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 11, 2013)

JosephB said:


> Not sure what MMA has to do with anything. Seems like apples and oranges to me.



It's a form of widely enjoyable violence, no different than violence in movies or books.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

They seem very different to me -- but then again -- I can’t relate because I don’t enjoy violence. In books or in movies, I can accept it if it’s not gratuitous -- but that’s about it. And although I realize there’s skill involved, watching two people beat each other up seems kind of dumb to me. But to each his own. I guess I'm more of a make love, not war kind of guy.


----------



## Leyline (Jun 11, 2013)

JosephB said:


> Heh. I don't think that's it. She was a devout Catholic -- so I'm pretty sure she believed in miracles.



I think she meant that all of her stories were about the influence of the divine on the human and ordinary. Being a traditional Catholic, she accepted that bad, often horrible, things came from God as well as the good. She simply felt that the 'extraordinary' aspect of the miracle would look ordinary to almost everyone other than the individuals they happened to.

And her, of course.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 11, 2013)

JosephB said:


> They seem very different to me -- but then again -- I can’t relate because I don’t enjoy violence. In books or in movies, I can accept it if it’s not gratuitous -- but that’s about it. And although I realize there’s skill involved, watching two people beat each other up seems kind of dumb to me. But to each his own. I guess I'm more of a make love, not war kind of guy.



Well, there you go; you dislike the portrayal of violence in any of those forms.  I could understand your confusion more if you enjoyed violence in movies and books, but not in boxing or MMA.  As for it being "dumb", I love the technical aspects of the sports too, but deriving satisfaction from one man beating up another is no more or less "dumb" than deriving sexual satisfaction from seeing an attractive woman undress.   

Both are manly instincts bred from thousands of years of evolution, and part of my identity.  I have no problems with males who shy away from violence or prefer sexual satisfaction from men instead of women, but calling my particular natural tastes "dumb" is, well, dumb.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

Look -- it's a matter of opinion and preference. I think MMA is dumb. I tried to watching it, but after a while, I thought to myself -- hey, this is really dumb! And boring. If you think me thinking it's dumb is dumb -- whatever. It doesn't hurt my feelings.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

Leyline said:


> I think she meant that all of her stories were about the influence of the divine on the human and ordinary. Being a traditional Catholic, she accepted that bad, often horrible, things came from God as well as the good. She simply felt that the 'extraordinary' aspect of the miracle would look ordinary to almost everyone other than the individuals they happened to.
> 
> And her, of course.



Sounds good to me!


----------



## Kevin (Jun 11, 2013)

I know it's been done over and over, but there's something satisfying about having the bad guy finally get his in a violent way.


----------



## Lewdog (Jun 11, 2013)

Violence is about a fruitless discussion as religion and government.  If someone wants to be a pacifist, that's a choice, but ask the Incas how that worked out for them in the long run.  What I find ironic is how many pacifist in this world are quick to agitate others then hide behind their so-called beliefs.  My grandmother used to have a saying, "Don't poke a beehive if you don't want to get stung."


----------



## JosephB (Jun 11, 2013)

What does pacifism have to do with depicting violence in fiction or watching a violent sport? Just because someone doesn't enjoy those things doesn't automatically make him a pacifist.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 12, 2013)

JosephB said:


> Look -- it's a matter of opinion and preference. I think MMA is dumb. I tried to watching it, but after a while, I thought to myself -- hey, this is really dumb! And boring. If you think me thinking it's dumb is dumb -- whatever. It doesn't hurt my feelings.



It's really narrow-minded to call something you don't _personally_ find appealing "dumb".  It's also no different than saying tennis or basketball is "dumb", although MMA is much closer to man's evolutionary instincts.  When I see girls having fun shopping for clothes, I don't chortle down my nose at them, and declare their hobby "dumb".

Of course, there are legitimately dumb pursuits, but MMA, which is descended from ancient traditions like Greek wrestling and boxing thousands of years ago to Japanese jujitsu hundreds of years ago, is not one of them.  In fact, there is not a single country at any point in history that did not have its own martial art of some kind.  Are they all "dumb", too?


----------



## Lewdog (Jun 12, 2013)

SteelPalm said:


> It's really narrow-minded to call something you don't _personally_ find appealing "dumb".  It's also no different than saying tennis or basketball is "dumb", although MMA is much closer to man's evolutionary instincts.  When I see girls having fun shopping for clothes, I don't chortle down my nose at them, and declare their hobby "dumb".
> 
> Of course, there are legitimately dumb pursuits, but MMA, which is descended from ancient traditions like Greek wrestling and boxing thousands of years ago to Japanese jujitsu hundreds of years ago, is not one of them.  In fact, there is not a single country at any point in history that did not have its own martial art of some kind.  Are they all "dumb", too?




](*,)

Come on, don't fan the flames.  This will only lead down a road that you don't want to go...FYI when you reply with a quote it shows that person's quote to people that have that person on ignore.  Save yourself and many others the trouble and just move on.  It's not worth the headache.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jun 12, 2013)

*Personal attacks will not be tolerated, especially when it comes at the expense of legitimate discussion. Let's keep it friendly and get back on track. No provoking each other.*


----------



## JosephB (Jun 12, 2013)

SteelPalm said:


> It's really narrow-minded to call something you don't _personally_ find appealing "dumb".  It's also no different than saying tennis or basketball is "dumb", although MMA is much closer to man's evolutionary instincts.  When I see girls having fun shopping for clothes, I don't chortle down my nose at them, and declare their hobby "dumb".
> 
> Of course, there are legitimately dumb pursuits, but MMA, which is descended from ancient traditions like Greek wrestling and boxing thousands of years ago to Japanese jujitsu hundreds of years ago, is not one of them.  In fact, there is not a single country at any point in history that did not have its own martial art of some kind.  Are they all "dumb", too?



I’m sure it does sound narrow-minded to you. And I generally make every effort reserve judgment and stay open minded when it comes to things that are important and actually have an impact on people’s lives. But this is not one of those things. It’s just a sport and entertainment -- but one that I find particularly and unnecessarily violent. 

You can couch things with stuff about history and tradition if you want to and go on about strategy etc. -- but no one wants to win by decision -- the primary goal is to incapacitate the other guy as quickly as possible so that he can’t fight back and you win.  In other sports, like basketball and even football, putting the other guy out of the game is usually an unfortunate side-effect -- and it’s not something the average fan enjoys. 

And you can proudly point to evolution if you want to -- like that somehow automatically gives it legitimacy -- but I’d say it appeals to our most base instincts -- and in that respect, I think it’s dumb. Sorry if you don’t approve of my word choice. Bottom line -- it’s an opinion about a form of entertainment -- and nothing more. Like I said -- to each his own -- but I don’t have to appreciate it or give it any kind of approval.


----------



## luckyscars (Jun 12, 2013)

SteelPalm said:


> It's really narrow-minded to call something you don't personally find appealing "dumb".  It's also no different than saying tennis or basketball is "dumb", although MMA is much closer to man's evolutionary instincts.  When I see girls having fun shopping for clothes, I don't chortle down my nose at them, and declare their hobby "dumb".
> 
> Of course, there are legitimately dumb pursuits, but MMA, which is descended from ancient traditions like Greek wrestling and boxing thousands of years ago to Japanese jujitsu hundreds of years ago, is not one of them.  In fact, there is not a single country at any point in history that did not have its own martial art of some kind.  Are they all "dumb", too?



I read it as an opinion. There's nothing wrong with describing something as dumb if you think it is dumb and can give coherent reasons for your view.



Cadence said:


> _Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.
> 1 Corinthians 6:18_


Sorry, but even with a very liberal interpretation that does not translate into 'kill a person and you kill their body, rape a person and you kill their spirit'. Also, as has been explained to you and will be supported by every rape victim out there, rape is an act of violence and not of sex. Comparing rape to sex is like comparing fireworks to dynamite - the only similarity is in the most basic of chemistry.





Cadence said:


> writing (stay on topic) about sex, for me, corrupts me, while writing about violence does not. I know that spiritually. It forms part of my relationship and fellowship with the Lord. You know nothing about that.



You don't seem to understand the basic problem. Again, how does writing about something that is innately harmless (lets leave the rape thing out a minute shall we?) and mostly positive for all  become corrupting? Even if you find a way to answer this on the basis of faith, you'll undoubtedly find whatever rationale you find to be true to be even more true when it comes to violence because violence is, believe it or not, considered by most sane people (which includes at least a few Christians) worse than sex. So how is writing about violence not corrupting if writing about sex is? How are you not a hypocrite?

Let's look at it from a Christian perspective. The ten commandments says 'thou shalt not kill'. But where is the commandment about sex? There isn't one. There is adultery, but that isn't sex. There is nothing in the Bible that is anti-sex. In fact, there is plenty of allusions to it in the Bible, which is merely anti what it considers to be 'bad sex' (adultery, incest...oh and homosexuality apparently). 

So in summary: There is no evidence to say you'll go to hell for writing about sex. Actually there's no evidence to say you'll go to hell for writing about ANYTHING. If we do, however, accept as a premise that a writer is morally liable for their choice in subject matter (a premise I don't agree with, by the way), then the fact is there is way more evidence to suggest God would prefer you'd write about hot trysts at the bunny ranch all day long than anything involving violence.


----------



## Monster (Jun 12, 2013)

Kevin said:


> I know it's been done over and over, but there's something satisfying about having the bad guy finally get his in a violent way.


My bad guy is likely attending prison, if you catch my meaning.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 12, 2013)

Gosh, luckyscars. I know I've been a bit unclear of late, but you seem to completely ignore what I was saying.

Please stop probing my views in this thread before this turns into any more of an ethical debate. If you wish to discuss this further, PM me. Then I can be more frank about some personal things I do not want to post publicly on this thread.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Jun 12, 2013)

Monster said:


> Do any of you ever have a hard time getting past some of your own work?



It doesn't sound silly to me at all. I got a big painful lump in my throat when I wrote the scene where my MC gets his heart broken, and I get the impression that's child's play compared to what you're writing. I think it's a good sign that the scene was uncomfortable for you to re-read. It shows you're not faking it and that you might be writing something that will affect people.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Jun 12, 2013)

JosephB said:


> One of my short stories includes a rape and the subsequent murder of the rapist. You know exactly what's going on -- but the horror is primary conveyed through the thoughts an emotions of the rape victim and the details are left to the imagination. I handle sex scenes the same way -- I don't fade to black -- but we all know what goes on. There's no need to describe how Tab A goes into Slot B.



That's actually how I try to write sex-scenes as well. Not because I don't like sex-scenes to be detailed and well described, but because it was a fantasy novel and I just felt it would fit better to keep it all a bit vague. I feel like sex is such a huge focus in today's society too. Heck, most reviewers say Fifty Shades is a best seller for the sole reason that it includes sex-scenes (NOT a critique from me personally, I haven't read it). Detailed scenes of sex or violence can sometimes be very fitting (American Psycho comes to mind), but they shouldn't be included where they don't belong just for the sake of it.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Jun 12, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I think one can go a bit more detailed in violent scenes however, versus sex scenes. Sex - yeah, everyone knows the steps. Violence? Not so much - and particularly some forms of violence. I've been very turned off by some writing where they leave too much to the imagination; the impact is lost because the reader has no idea what actually occurred. But one can go too far, I think - kinda the difference between a really good horror movie and the slasher types. One pulls you through it; the other shoves your face in it.



Saw 1 - Great movie in my opinion. 
Saw 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, (etc, I have no idea how long they kept it going) - gore, gore, gore and nothing but gore. Utterly boring.


----------



## SteelPalm (Jun 12, 2013)

JosephB said:


> but one that I find particularly and unnecessarily violent.



Do you find casual sex particularly and unnecessarily lewd, too?   



			
				JosephB said:
			
		

> but I’d say it appeals to our most base instincts


 
Yeah, kind of like sex, right?  And much like sex, if men didn't have a certain inborn appreciation for violence, the human race would have died out a long time ago.  With your particular mindset, we would all be extinct.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Jun 12, 2013)

About the whole sex-violence debate.. is it possible that some people are more comfortable with writing violent scenes because violence is everywhere while sex-scenes are rarer? I am *not* saying this is what I personally think is the basis of some people's uncomfortableness with sex-scenes, I don't have an answer to the question myself. I'm just thinking of the last time I watched a movie with a family member. There was lots of violence and blood and none of us flinched, but then when the sex-scene entered I felt the awkwardness. I don't know, maybe we've just been desensitized to violence but not to sex. Or maybe violence is something we're accustomed to seeing in public (like boxing), while sex is something that for most of us is always between two people and private. My understanding of religious beliefs is very shallow though, so I'm not going to form any opinions about this. I'm an atheist and I don't think I'll ever be able to fully understand the viewpoint of a christian, and I think that goes both ways. That's what makes the world interesting, isn't it?


----------



## Strangedays410 (Jun 12, 2013)

TheYellowMustang said:


> It doesn't sound silly to me at all. I got a big painful lump in my throat when I wrote the scene where my MC gets his heart broken, and I get the impression that's child's play compared to what you're writing. I think it's a good sign that the scene was uncomfortable for you to re-read. It shows you're not faking it and that you might be writing something that will affect people.



I'd stopped following this thread when all the bickering had started, but thought I'd weigh in anyhow. I agree with TheYellowMustang's sentiment--not just because I drive Mustangs, but because I get all manners of worked up, shocked and horrified by scenes I've written. I've never even written of dismemberment, or graphically of rape, yet still can walk away feeling like a monster sometimes. I've written graphic sex scenes mentioning no key body parts (at least I _think _I've pulled that off) and walked away feeling every bit like a snarling pervert. I think writing these scenes is _supposed _to get at you that way, if you're human...and the writing is good. Getting worked up over yourself may just be all part of the crazy of the craft.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Jun 12, 2013)

The strange thing is, the scenes that usually get to me the most isn't the graphic ones or the sex-scenes -- it's the ones where my main character disappoints me (he does that a lot). Like when he's on the road to become a better person and then he pulls the rug out from under me... I just want to crawl into my laptop and slap him.


----------



## Strangedays410 (Jun 12, 2013)

I can understand that (to Mustang's comment). It's always the strangest scenes that mess me up the most--writing _and _reading them. It's nothing even in the text sometimes, just the circumstance...the implications. I can be more disturbed by someone losing a job, than getting brutally butchered, depending on what all is behind it. Strange.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 12, 2013)

SteelPalm said:


> Do you find casual sex particularly and unnecessarily lewd, too?



I might -- if it was in a cage in front of 10,000 people.



SteelPalm said:


> Yeah, kind of like sex, right?  And much like sex, if men didn't have a certain inborn appreciation for violence, the human race would have died out a long time ago.  With your particular mindset, we would all be extinct.



I'd fight if I had to, but I have no desire to beat anyone up or watch anyone else do it. However, I do have two children. See how that works?


----------



## Leyline (Jun 12, 2013)

Here's the thing about art: by its very nature it is _transgressive_. Those first cave-people painting figures on stone walls didn't opt for dull realism or calm reality -- they depicted terrifying mastadon headed god men slaughtering whole tribes with impossibly huge phallic symbols and lightning storms.

Also, porn.

Art is how humans have always dealt with the things that terrified and disturbed them. They turned catastrophic weather and savage nature into human-like embodiments that, while frightening, were corporeal. That could be _fought_. Maybe not defeated all the time or even often. But they could fight them.

This is where myth and legend come from. This is where stories began. Transforming terror and fear into something that could be controlled and contained. That could be learned from and understood.

Take violence and transform it into something meaningful, something that expresses an aspect of the human experience. Using words, take that primal fear and make it exciting, profound, exhilarating. Teach a lesson. Denounce an evil. Win a psychic war.

You're an artist. A writer.

Write.


----------



## ppsage (Jun 13, 2013)

> Those first cave-people painting figures on stone walls didn't opt for dull realism or calm reality -- they depicted terrifying mastodon headed god men slaughtering whole tribes with impossibly huge phallic symbols and lightning storms.


I like this, but a lot of the cave clan families did outlines of their own hands: maybe more than anything else. I'd say the phallic slaughterers are more from when they settled down some in bigger bunches and got a bit civilized.


----------



## Leyline (Jun 13, 2013)

ppsage said:


> I like this, but *a lot of the cave clan families did outlines of their own hands: maybe more than anything else.* I'd say the phallic slaughterers are more from when they settled down some in bigger bunches and got a bit civilized.



Well, yeah. Even pre-history had its Jackie Collinses and Dan Brownses, bro.


----------



## ppsage (Jun 13, 2013)

> _Those first cave-people painting figures on stone walls didn't opt for dull realism or calm reality -- they depicted terrifying mastodon headed god men slaughtering whole tribes with impossibly huge phallic symbols and lightning storms._


Not meaning to belabor this overly, but considering that an understanding of actual prehistory might be somehow important, I have to report that a quick and admittedly shallow search turns up no instance of discovered paleolithic art of this nature. The paintings which depict recognizable figures are of quite naturalistic animals and almost never of humans. Otherwise they are of hands or dots or patterns. I'm taking 'first cave-people' to mean paleolithic, ie prior to about 10,000 bce; this varies somewhat by continent. Paintings exist dated to perhaps 40,000 bce. Tribes are generally not thought to much exist in this period and, incidentally, it's also not thought that at any period did a majority of humans ever live in caves. It also looks to me like most of the paintings from this period are found in caves where there is not evidence of habitation. They seem to be in caves which are used for worship ceremony. This is also true of later depictions, from tribal times, as in North America and Australia, which do sometimes depict phallic elements, and animal/human gods(?) and of course many depictions exist from early civilizations of conquering and slaughter (ie Egyptian) dating from as early as 5 or 6,000 bce.


----------



## Leyline (Jun 13, 2013)

dp


----------



## Leyline (Jun 13, 2013)

ppsage said:


> Not meaning to belabor this overly, but considering that an understanding of actual prehistory might be somehow important, I have to report that a quick and admittedly shallow search turns up no instance of discovered paleolithic art of this nature. The paintings which depict recognizable figures are of quite naturalistic animals and almost never of humans. Otherwise they are of hands or dots or patterns. I'm taking 'first cave-people' to mean paleolithic, ie prior to about 10,000 bce; this varies somewhat by continent. Paintings exist dated to perhaps 40,000 bce. Tribes are generally not thought to much exist in this period and, incidentally, it's also not thought that at any period did a majority of humans ever live in caves. It also looks to me like most of the paintings from this period are found in caves where there is not evidence of habitation. They seem to be in caves which are used for worship ceremony. This is also true of later depictions, from tribal times, as in North America and Australia, which do sometimes depict phallic elements, and animal/human gods(?) and of course many depictions exist from early civilizations of conquering and slaughter (ie Egyptian) dating from as early as 5 or 6,000 bce.



Well, OK. I didn't know I was going to be graded on a metaphor, to be honest.


----------



## ppsage (Jun 13, 2013)

> Well, OK. I didn't know I was going to be graded on a metaphor, to be honest.


Hey Ley... sorry to have become suddenly so cranky and pedantic. Something pushed my button, I guess.


----------



## Dave Watson (Jun 13, 2013)




----------



## Kevin (Jun 13, 2013)

TheYellowMustang said:


> Saw 1 - Great movie in my opinion.
> Saw 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, (etc, I have no idea how long they kept it going) - gore, gore, gore and nothing but gore. Utterly boring.


 Your post had me curious, so I asked a fan about that. Once we got past his questions about my senility, I was able to convince him that there were indeed, other Saw movies prior to 9, 8, & 7.  By the end of our conversation he actually conceded that perhaps, yes, he might enjoy some of the earlier ones and possibly other movies that were made more than 5 years ago, but that he doubted it. He found the idea of 'gothic horror' ridiculous, and would never have any interest. I'm pretty sure he thought I was making up most of the movies (including their plot lines) that I asked if he'd ever seen. He also wanted to know if wrinkles hurt.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 13, 2013)

Dw- (I love K. Perry, thx.)  "Girls in bikinis with machine guns" - Real title. Excellent video. It delivers.


----------



## Monster (Jun 13, 2013)

SteelPalm said:


> Yeah, kind of like sex, right?  And much like  sex, if men didn't have a certain inborn appreciation for violence, the  human race would have died out a long time ago.  With your particular  mindset, we would all be extinct.



Like Panda bears who would rather eat?

Thanks for the input Strangedays410. As per your request earlier, I will  at some time put an piece of one of my chapters up. Not the  particularly violent scene, heavens no, but I will put something up.


Leyline, thanks! Way to boost my ego.


----------



## Leyline (Jun 13, 2013)

ppsage said:


> Hey Ley... sorry to have become suddenly so cranky and pedantic. Something pushed my button, I guess.



No worries at all, my friend. It happens to us all.


----------



## WolfRose (Jun 18, 2013)

I had just finished writing a certain scene for my book that was quite graphic and the whole time I kept telling my main character that I was sorry, but it had to happen. I think sometimes an author has to be a little cruel to their characters to make them grow and become more real, to become more than just a character in their readers eyes. Scenes like that can add that depth to them that makes the reader want to sympathize with them because they just experienced it with them.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jun 18, 2013)

I hope that's not anything like that whole media fiasco with the new tomb raider game, how they used an attempted rape to "grow" the character, as if it was a necessary event to become a better person. Kind of sickening, actually. I didn't buy the game.


----------



## Novel (Jun 18, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> I hope that's not anything like that  whole media fiasco with the new tomb raider game, how they used an  attempted rape to "grow" the character, as if it was a necessary event  to become a better person. Kind of sickening, actually. I didn't buy the  game.


Having played the game in question, I'd like to clear that up.

The attempted rape in _Tomb Raider_ _was_ just a media fiasco. Lara changed (growth is questionable) _not_ from an attempted rape, but from having to take a human life for the first time. The "growth from attempted rape" idea came from the Internet, not the writers.


----------



## Monster (Jun 19, 2013)

I actually liked the new Tomb Raider game. I'm playing it now. If you're talking about the scene where Lara has to kill the guy that gets a little too "strokey" with her toward the beginning of the game, it wasn't really that graphic. If you don't press the correct buttons in sequence, the guy actually kills Lara instead of raping her. I never really noted that bit of the game to be super important. I noticed her change due to killing the guy, taking human life.


----------

