# The Dark Side



## Phil Istine (Jun 7, 2017)

I attend a couple of creative writing groups each month (sometimes three or four).  I recently said that I keep being drawn to writing fairly dark stuff, partly based on my own early life.  Whenever I change to writing bright and breezy, a hand reaches from the bog, grabs me by the ankle, and pulls me back in.
Sometimes others can see it better.  A woman at the group just said: "Well keep writing the darker side then."  Somehow, I got it into my head that so much dark stuff was bad or negative - but I think she was dead right.  I write of devils, demons, apocalyptic cults, hatred, anger, emotional abuse, addictions, mental health issues, and I slag off a few politicians along the way - and much of it comes out in my poetry.  At one group I attend, one or two of the Christians get a bit upset - but I do make it clear that I'm not having a go about _their_ beliefs - rather about the authoritarian brand of religion under which I was raised.

Writing poetry about the tangled mess of beliefs from my childhood, and the screw-ups after I extricated myself from it, has been a great liberator.  And some people actually find it a bit entertaining.  I can write some pretty humorous stuff too when the mood takes me.

It has taken two or three years of writing bits and pieces to feel that it's only just beginning to come together.

One day, I may find the middle somewhere 
So, on with the dark side.


----------



## Sam (Jun 7, 2017)

Why do you feel compelled to write dark stuff? I've had a lot of crap happen to me in my life, but I don't feel the need to write dark material. 

Is it because you think it's somehow cooler or more real? 

I get conflict, and I get violence, and I get writing dark material when it's required. What I don't get is writing it because, well, that's the world we live in. For me, there has to be a reason beyond that. 

Don't write it because it's real; write it because it's necessary.


----------



## Firemajic (Jun 7, 2017)

I write about my abuse, my addiction and other dark stuff because that is what I know, that has been my experience, and because that has been my experience, I feel that I can write with authenticity, and honesty... I have, and can write about almost anything, I think most writers can. But I am, and always will be drawn to the dark side of life ... that is where I feel my strength is...

Kudos to you Phil for taking classes and working on your craft, that is a fabulous thing...  I think one should write about things that they feel strongly about, things that one is passionate about, I think all those things will be reflected in your work...


----------



## Terry D (Jun 7, 2017)

Great topic, Phil. Thanks for starting this thread. 

A number of years ago I read something in a forward to one of Stephen King's short story collections in which he talked about this very thing -- sort of. He talked about being asked why he writes such dark stories, and his opinion -- and I believe it has merit -- was that every writer, for whatever reason, has a filter in their imagination which filters all the input which comes in to them. Each writer, he claims, has a filter with a different sort of texture, and each texture grabs and holds onto different ideas. He went on to say that if he and Louis La'more were sitting on a hill overlooking a pond in the western U.S., each would come up with a different story idea based on the 'stuff' that got caught in their filter. Louis, King said, would probably come up with a story about a fight over water rights, while King's own filter would catch the stuff to build a story about something cold and wet slithering up from the bottom of that same pond.

Our stories are the product of all that we are. We have some control over that, of course, but for the most part our filters determine the slant and tone of our work. For myself, I had about as normal a childhood as a kid can have in the American Midwest. Pretty much as close to Leave It to Beaver, or Happy Days as real life can come. But my stories still tend toward the dark side -- perhaps precisely because my life was so 'normal'. The stuff I was interested in, and which is reflected in my writing to this day, was just the opposite of what I saw and experienced. The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, and all those great old Hammer Studios horror films were my influences.

Today my short stories tend to be very dark. I can't seem to help it. For my short story collection, Reflections in a Black Mirror I wanted to write an homage to Ray Bradbury (another of my big influences). I wanted to capture his sense of whimsy and wonder, so I set out to write that way. Even going so far as to mimic Ray's style in my own inept manner. But I couldn't maintain his wonderful optimism. I really like the story I ended up with, but where Ray's filter gave him a robot story called I sing the Body Electric about a sweet android grandmother, mine gave me O'Goody, a story about a lonely boy who builds a robot friend who ends up killing him.

My novels, however, while they go through some very dark territory, have always ended on an upbeat.


----------



## JustRob (Jun 7, 2017)

In my perpetual reference work on writing, _The No Rules Handbook for Writers _by Lisa Goldman, (only because it's the only book on writing that I've ever actually _bought,_) rule number one that she tackles is "Write what you know." One of the questions that she asks about this is "Who needs what you know?" She counters the rule with "Write to discover what you don't know yet." In other words she means that you should choose to write about a new experience because you will bring a fresh perspective to it that those already too familiar with it can't. Your perspective on the lighter side of life may actually be more interesting to read than the hackneyed words from those who know it too well. Of course, that means doing appropriate research, but that's just an essential part of the writing task.

I of course completely misinterpreted her words and took them literally, but that's my story, not yours. I also had a darker side once, but decided to take a walk on the other side and now I can wander from one to the other without any qualms. However, I don't think that humanity wants to read what's in the dark side of my mind, so I don't write that down. I do after all seem to write about the future, not the past, and humanity would prefer the darkness to be behind it, I suspect.


----------



## Sam (Jun 7, 2017)

I think some people might misunderstand what I'm saying: I write stories with all kinds of violence and conflict. I don't shy away from that because that's the world in which I base my stories. 

What am I saying, or trying to, is that, for instance, I wouldn't include a rape scene because rape happens; or a school shooting because school shootings happen; or a suicide bomber because suicide bombers exist. If the story requires any of those things, fine, but from what I've experienced, so often the story _doesn't. _

So I don't understand making it dark for dark's sake because that's how you write. My question would be: why do you write that way? Very rarely do my stories have a happily ever after, but even in the most abjectly pessimistic ones, there's always the capacity for hope. 

I write conflict-laden, often violent, stories where everything including the kitchen sink is thrown at my protagonist. But they aren't 'dark' unless there is some reason for them to be and not because I write that way.


----------



## ppsage (Jun 7, 2017)

I worry that the whole dark thing is an overly simple generalization which masks the exact textures and nuances which the art strives to express. I have for long contended here that writing is the art of capturing inspiration in words. If you are a practiced and disciplined writer, as probably Sam is, or Terry, then you are probably especially good at capturing the small but ultimately most important inspirations of wording and expression. For me, it is the knack of holding steady the larger inspirations of story while these fill in the picture that defines a writer. For me, a piece cannot be wholly dark if the character of its creator comes across in this way. Many pieces which are offered for reading, that are self-avowedly dark, seem to often lack this character and come across as phony or put-on. Dark indeed! I feel like writing, in important ways, has to be looked at beyond dark or light.


----------



## RHPeat (Jun 7, 2017)

There is a poetic contrast between light and dark. It's not negative if you allow the voice within the poem to see a way out of the dark-side. It is not negative to to allow the poem to offer the reader something beyond self demise of any sort. 

The dark-side is only negative if you tend to lock the reader into the darkness within the poem with no real escape from it. For then the poem remains abusive to the reader as well as the self. You yourself have overcome the abuse to some extent, so you should be able to show how that darkness is overcome by moving toward a light at the end of the tunnel of darkness. That's what the poetry needs to be about. That turn in the poem/climax should happen about 3/4th the way through the poem. So there is a lot of darkness in the poem.  They the readers of the poem itself become positive and one simple step toward the distant light also creates a climax in the poem to overcome such an obstacle, whatever it might be. 

This is how writing about the abusive experience can be healing. But if the poem stays in complete darkness, there is no healing process in the writer or in the message being offered to others/readers that have similar experiences or live in such situations. Just confessing the abuse doesn't end its internal agony. But by showing recognition of the abuse begins a road out of its torment. That's the point that needs to be made in regards to the abusive experience. So by all means possible be there for others caught in the same trap, show them the stepping stones toward overcoming that darkness in abuse. Otherwise it can steal a complete life away as you know full well. 

Personally I can't write a poem withouy a bit of darkness within it. Life itself sometimes is quite painful and full of bitterness, hardships and real physical pain. It is known that reality itself has a dark-side to it all the time. It is our ability to overcome the obstacles in our path that makes us more human. Hiding from the obstacles in our path does not make much of our personal experiences. So by all means include the dark-side within a poem. It allows for a greater climax to happen within the literary presentation of the poem as that obstacle is overcome. At age 75, I can say I've definitely felt a lot of darkness in my lifetime. But I'm be damned if I'll let it diminish my joy at that same time. Now that's seeing a positive outcome through a positive viewpoint. And viewpoint itself is what makes great art and great poems. 

a poet friend
RH Peat


----------



## RHPeat (Jun 7, 2017)

Phil

One thing to remember: Victim poetry only creates another victim out of the reader. Don't become the abuser through your poetry creating other victims. This is why it is so important to show that speck of light amid all the darkness, gleaming from the pinhole in all that darkness. That brings a positive closure to the poem, and it liberates the other from their own bondage. It would be my guess that your reader would read the poem again and again to get such relief. 

a poet friend
RH Peat


----------



## Phil Istine (Jun 7, 2017)

I'm genuinely surprised to see so much response to my post.  I thought it would pass with barely a nod of acknowledgement.



Sam said:


> Why do you feel compelled to write dark stuff? I've had a lot of crap happen to me in my life, but I don't feel the need to write dark material.
> 
> Is it because you think it's somehow cooler or more real?



Why indeed, Sam?  Cooler? No, it's not that.  
I can't answer the question "why" with total certainty but I'm inclined to the idea of writing what I know (or rather, knew) - at least until I develop some skills to explore other areas.  Also, I have a sense of using writing to help purge the past to some extent; I don't want to reach the end of my days with the same old song playing.  But most of all, it just feels more natural for me to write things that are a bit dark and/or quirky.  Something about it just feels right for me - at the moment anyway.  Honestly, trying to write some Mills & Boon-style love story would totally bore the arse off me  .



Firemajic said:


> I write about my abuse, my addiction and other dark stuff because that is what I know, that has been my experience, and because that has been my experience, I feel that I can write with authenticity, and honesty... I have, and can write about almost anything, I think most writers can. But I am, and always will be drawn to the dark side of life ... that is where I feel my strength is...
> 
> Kudos to you Phil for taking classes and working on your craft, that is a fabulous thing...  I think one should write about things that they feel strongly about, things that one is passionate about, I think all those things will be reflected in your work...



I think you may have nailed it there, Julia.  I can feel things very strongly, even though many years have passed.  I find it very helpful to feel what I'm writing and I reckon the feelings are stronger if I have personally experienced something.  It needn't be autobiographical in nature as I can embellish and fictionalise.



Terry D said:


> Great topic, Phil. Thanks for starting this thread.
> 
> A number of years ago I read something in a forward to one of Stephen King's short story collections in which he talked about this very thing -- sort of. He talked about being asked why he writes such dark stories, and his opinion -- and I believe it has merit -- was that every writer, for whatever reason, has a filter in their imagination which filters all the input which comes in to them. Each writer, he claims, has a filter with a different sort of texture, and each texture grabs and holds onto different ideas. He went on to say that if he and Louis La'more were sitting on a hill overlooking a pond in the western U.S., each would come up with a different story idea based on the 'stuff' that got caught in their filter. Louis, King said, would probably come up with a story about a fight over water rights, while King's own filter would catch the stuff to build a story about something cold and wet slithering up from the bottom of that same pond.
> 
> ...



Yes, that filter comment makes some kind of sense to me.
I guess it's about writing the type of thing I would enjoy reading.  I remember 35 years ago I read a load of Dennis Wheatley's novels.  Although the Satanic works were of interest, I also enjoyed his WW2 stories with the regular conflicts between Gregory Sallust and the German, Grauber(?).  He's not an author that I hear much about these days, but I did find some of his stories quite compelling.


----------



## Phil Istine (Jun 7, 2017)

RHPeat said:


> Phil
> 
> One thing to remember: Victim poetry only creates another victim out of the reader. Don't become the abuser through your poetry creating other victims. This is why it is so important to show that speck of light amid all the darkness, gleaming from the pinhole in all that darkness. That brings a positive closure to the poem, and it liberates the other from their own bondage. It would be my guess that your reader would read the poem again and again to get such relief.
> 
> ...



Thank you for that tip Ron.  I have a sense that it's an important one to remember, so I will hold onto that.


----------



## Firemajic (Jun 7, 2017)

RHPeat said:


> Phil
> 
> One thing to remember: Victim poetry only creates another victim out of the reader. Don't become the abuser through your poetry creating other victims. This is why it is so important to show that speck of light amid all the darkness, gleaming from the pinhole in all that darkness. That brings a positive closure to the poem, and it liberates the other from their own bondage. It would be my guess that your reader would read the poem again and again to get such relief.
> 
> ...




With ALL due respect, I completely, absolutely disagree .... RL is not like that... abuse is ugly, damaging, destructive, life altering... you cannot slap a warm fuzzy feeling on a poem 3/4 of the way through... there is NOT an up side to abuse... ever, no way to put a positive spin on it... and I refuse to believe that I create another victim out of my reader, if I can't end the poem on a positive note...  however, if writing about drug abuse, well hopefully one can find something positive to say if they have gained sobriety ...
and like I said, this is jmo, and I say this with all respect to your pov...


----------



## Smith (Jun 7, 2017)

Regardless of whether or not one thinks they can put a positive spin on their negative life experiences, the fact remains that instructing somebody to end their poem on a positive note isn't constructive, because it isn't facilitating what the author is wishing to express. As critiquers for lack of a better word, we're also responsible for trying to discern what the author's vision is, and keep it in mind so we can help them achieve it.

Closure doesn't have to be positive concept. It can very well be neutral or even negative. It's true that *some* readers might appreciate a "light at the end of the tunnel", but I'm sure there are just as many readers who will simply be glad to know that they're not alone in their struggle even if there's no end in sight.

Besides, I enjoy reading through somebody's work or following them for an extended period of time and seeing them grow. Their first pieces might be them sorting something out and it seems like everything's lost or nothing's worth it, but then a year later they find hope.

To say that doing otherwise is somehow burdening all readers and making them victims is pretty disingenuous, and completely disregards the cathartic aspect of writing on the whole, as well as the fact that what's more important is writing something that somebody can relate to. The writer doesn't have a responsibility to make readers feel good or feel safe.

I think trying to find something positive, or find solace / closure, would be an interesting challenge. So kudos for bringing it up in that respect. But in terms of critiquing a piece it seems well-meant but ultimately unhelpful by my estimation.

*Respectfully,*

-Kyle


----------



## aj47 (Jun 7, 2017)

My tuppence.  I don't think Ron is saying you need to put a positive or optimistic spin on anything--however, if there is no movement then what is the point of the piece?  One of the judging criteria in the Purple Pip is movement and if your piece goes from Point A to Point A, that's stagnation.  

I keep hearing people say they write about their abuse as a way of working through it...how can you work through something without movement? 

As far as truth-value is concerned, sometimes you want to tell a story.  Narrative is valid.  And the truth *can* be told because it's true. It doesn't need any more reason than that. http://www.writingforums.com/threads/126565-In-Memory-of-James-Bulger-(villanelle) was a piece I wrote for a challenge.  The prompt was "wicked children" and my piece didn't win, but not because it was based in truth.  It didn't win because it wasn't the best entry.   

This also touches on something.  I wrote a few pieces that I posted on A Nother Forum where I received a scathing PM from a fellow forumite who said if I hadn't experienced that specific trauma I had no business writing with the voice of someone who had.  The word they used was "appropriating" ... I was somehow "appropriating" their ... pain/voice/something I didn't quite understand.  That forum has since found the big bit bucket (in the sky?) and so I can't retrieve the PM.  I asked on this forum about second accounts for pen names and/or posting anonymously because of it.  I didn't want to be subjected to that kind of treatment here.  When I posted the pieces here, I didn't get that reaction, but dayum, it's a touchy subject for some people.   I really, really, am hesitant about some of my work because of how strongly this person reacted.


----------



## Smith (Jun 7, 2017)

astroannie said:


> My tuppence. I don't think Ron is saying you need to put a positive or optimistic spin on anything--however, if there is no movement then what is the point of the piece? One of the judging criteria in the Purple Pip is movement and if your piece goes from Point A to Point A, that's stagnation.
> 
> I keep hearing people say they write about their abuse as a way of working through it...how can you work through something without movement?
> 
> ...



I didn't appropriate that from the post, P) but regardless you're correct that a piece needs movement. It just doesn't need to be moving towards 'positive closure' is what I was saying, to clarify.

And forget whoever said that to you. Don't censor yourself.


----------



## aj47 (Jun 7, 2017)

Firemajic said:


> With ALL due respect, I completely, absolutely disagree .... RL is not like that... abuse is ugly, damaging, destructive, life altering... you cannot slap a warm fuzzy feeling on a poem 3/4 of the way through... there is NOT an up side to abuse... ever, no way to put a positive spin on it... and I refuse to believe that I create another victim out of my reader, if I can't end the poem on a positive note...  however, if writing about drug abuse, well hopefully one can find something positive to say if they have gained sobriety ...
> and like I said, this is jmo, and I say this with all respect to your pov...




The question is, what are you writing about and why?  In my earlier post I talked about movement.  I don't think a poet needs to go from zero to sixty in seventeen syllables, but if you're at the bottom, and you're moving, then where are you going, if not up? 

For Ron ... does the absence of darkness equate to light?  

Do you see this as a "victim poem"? 





> I know the secret ...
> how to hide from a blind drunk
> ... weep without sobbing


I can't frame these questions with other people's words because they're my questions.  To me, this is hope.  This is an I-can-cope poem, not an I-am-helpless poem.  And I'm wondering where your demarcation is and whether it aligns with mine.


----------



## Smith (Jun 7, 2017)

You can always move along the floor of the ocean trench. And dig to China. Or arrive at a question / choice.

Most of the ocean is largely unexplored.

Also, the "midnight" zone exists in depths below 1000 meters. Not any light down there unless you take one with you.

In other less inadvertently-pretentious words, there's a lot of different directions to move in.


----------



## RHPeat (Jun 8, 2017)

Annie

You make my point clear, thank you Annie. You make some great points yourself. It would be nice if folks would stick to the topic and not try to be over protective. Personally I thought Phil was very straight forward about what he was talking about in his opening statement on this thread. All of my comments were made toward his directive concerning this thread. Anyone has the right to agree or disagree if they stick to his original statement as I see it. 

I might say more here as well. All forms of literature have a turning within their form/content. Which is said to be one thing by Robert Creeley; this is the poem itself **(form is content and content is form)*. So climax in any literary form is not negotiable. It is what makes the poem real literature. The climax evokes the reader into a culminating emotion. It doesn't matter what form writing takes — Songs, poems, novels, short stories, flash fictions, Dramas (both comedy and tragedy), and it even happens in the oral traditions of the most primitive cultures. To form a story line you need a turn. Of course you can bore people to the point where they toss the "hiccup" (the thing without a climax) into a trash can. I've done it more than once. 

But if you want the reader to experience what you're writing, to get something from the writing, or even share something with another because of who you are as an individual human being, you best have a turn as a climax within the writing. This generally happens about 3/4th the way through the literary story line. This is just basic literary form obtained in high school.  And it is the shift in the story line that brings the compliance of the reader to the writer at that point. They have been evoked by the writer through his or her craft and skill as a writer into the intent within the writing. That means your personal craft and talent as an artist/poet/playwright/novelist/etc. are capable of bringing readers into its own sphere where the actual art piece stands on its own *merit*. Not someone's *ego*. Art stands on its own ability to evoke another through its own *merit*. It needs no one to reinforce it at all. Real art doesn't use crutches, and it spits in the face of obstacles if it needs too, to evoke what needs to be evoked. It's putting your head on the block and smiling at the headsman, for you have released your creation to be itself. 

Then the readers have their ahh-ha moment. It leaves them something to digest and the possibility that the work will be read and reread because of their ahh-ha moment that is contained within the work of art. Call it what you want, Epiphany, revelation or disclosure that happens *within the reader and* *not in the work* of art at all. For it is only shown through the experience of the work's ability to *evoke that feeling* in another without telling it. And that's the difference between real art that evokes another into real feelings and absolute crap that bores everyone to death. All art is created to evoke feelings in others. That's what makes it art. And it cuts right across all media with that understanding — music, theater, literature, dance and the visual arts (painting, sculpture, etc.) 

So what is it the writers do to evoke feelings in others. Well they definitely don't slobber in the pitcher of beer that everyone is drinking from. They leave everyone to fill their own glass. That is the difference between mud and insight; insight being that thing that is evoked in another. Leave the insight for the readers to discern for themselves. It they can't that's their tough luck; that is if you know your craft well enough to actually evoke them into feelings. If you miss the boat because you haven't done the homework on your own brain, guess whose problem that is in final moment of the poem standing on it's own merit? 

a poet friend
RH Peat


----------



## Sam (Jun 8, 2017)

Firemajic said:


> With ALL due respect, I completely, absolutely disagree .... RL is not like that... abuse is ugly, damaging, destructive, life altering... you cannot slap a warm fuzzy feeling on a poem 3/4 of the way through... there is NOT an up side to abuse... ever, no way to put a positive spin on it... and I refuse to believe that I create another victim out of my reader, if I can't end the poem on a positive note...  however, if writing about drug abuse, well hopefully one can find something positive to say if they have gained sobriety ...
> and like I said, this is jmo, and I say this with all respect to your pov...



If you are someone suffering from that kind of abuse, why would you want to read something that reminded you of the hell you experience daily? Why wouldn't you want to read something that gave you the merest hint of there being hope beyond all the turmoil? 

A single mother of five struggling to make ends meet would not, I imagine, want to come home and read a book about a single mother of five struggling to make ends meet. Why would you relive that hell, or why would you want someone else in that position to relive that hell? 

In my opinion, a story full of the horribleness of the world, with not a sliver of the possibility or hope for something better, is almost as bad as a story where everyone gets exactly what they want and there's no conflict. It's two ends of the same extremity. There has to be some conflict and some setbacks for a story to work, and conversely there has to be a modicum of hope for it to work as well. 

Even McCarthy's _The Road, _one of the bleakest novels ever written, has still the extraordinary capacity for hope amidst all of the chaos and hell.


----------



## Firemajic (Jun 8, 2017)

Sam, I understand your POV... I do... I write what I write because there is a secrecy surrounding abuse, silence is the main weapon of an abuser, like cockroaches that hide in the dark, abusers hide in the secrets and the silence they force upon the abused, I write because for years I was forbidden to speak... it was not until I went to school, that I spoke, until that time, I was silent, and everyone thought I had a speech problem... and I did, my problem was that I had been trained by fear to keep my mouth shut. Being abused is isolating, lonely, I did not know others suffered the same atrocities that I did.. I thought I was the only one... so, when I write of my experiences, it is in hopes that someone reading, and going through what I did, will feel less alone... the idea that there needs to be an AH Ha moment, a movement to a resolution is new to me, I didn't know that was even a possibility... or indeed that that should be my goal in my poetry, because that has not been my experience.

In life bad things happen, children and adults get murdered, terrorist attack innocent bystanders, there are shootings in schools, people die of starvation, all without resolution... no happy ending for them, but their story still should be told..

These thoughts are just my personal opinion, and are not meant to offend...


----------



## aj47 (Jun 8, 2017)

Told to whom? Who chooses to read these stories?  

I'm not suggesting people hide.  What I am suggesting is that how you frame what you say is every bit as important as the act of saying it.  

Julia, are you saying we should write about these issues so as to perpetuate them?  Because if you're not trying to ease or end it, then that's how you're coming across. *Oh, this is soooo horrible ... but let's keep it up. * 

You don't need to sell anyone on the horrors of abuse except abusers and *they're not buying*..  

If you're message isn't of ending or easing these horrible things, then, honestly, *why the in the name of whatever you hold sacred are you even bothering?*  What is the point?  

I don't need your answer--you do.  Or Phil does.  Or whoever is questioning why they write what they write.  (This reminds me of the discussion of plot.  if nothing happens, there is no story -- and if you ever wonder about the interconnectedness of everything ... ).


----------



## Firemajic (Jun 8, 2017)

I am not questioning why I write what I write... I know why I write it. I will continue to write what I write, I do not need to justify it. If it is offensive, do not read it. I find poetry about romance and kittens and butterflies sooooooooooo f%$#&^$% boring, I don't relate, so I don't read it. Freedom of choice... use it.


----------



## SilverMoon (Jun 8, 2017)

Phil, great thanks to you for starting this thread. It's right up my dark alley.

How can one write not write darkly when their first memory is being in a crib looking at the slight wavering of a cobweb on the corner of a ceiling thinking it is alive due to the child being neglected, knowing only silence. Such a child will befriend anything that moves, no matter how disturbing.

 I was this child who now at age 62 writes, unapologetically, about what I know that followed the memory of a cobweb. Physical, emotional and sexual abuse. All years passed I write to hone craft in order to teach, always putting craft before catharsis. Upchucking on paper is only acceptable if a toilet is not nearby. I write in Confessional genre as well as about the state of The Human Condition which always has a dark side to some degree. I want to "show" people that there is light at the end of the tunnel but the light is never too bright because such damage leaves scars.

I will pick up on this later in the day because I'm must get ready to nestle in bed to watch the" Comey Hearing" (now, talk about the Dark side of The Human Condition) which will no doubt inspire a poem. And if I drank, I'd have a bottle of Grey Goose vodka by my bedside instead of coffee. 

Till later, Laurie


----------



## Terry D (Jun 8, 2017)

Sam said:


> If you are someone suffering from that kind of abuse, why would you want to read something that reminded you of the hell you experience daily? Why wouldn't you want to read something that gave you the merest hint of there being hope beyond all the turmoil?
> 
> A single mother of five struggling to make ends meet would not, I imagine, want to come home and read a book about a single mother of five struggling to make ends meet. Why would you relive that hell, or why would you want someone else in that position to relive that hell?
> 
> ...



The popularity of horror novels and movies has always been highest during times of economic and social distress. People read what reflects their own experience, and they read for the cathartic experience of seeing characters in worse situations than their own. There are many classic novels which end with no light at the end of the tunnel: On the Beach, 1984, A Canticle for Leibowitz, A Widow's Story, Islands in the Stream, etc. There are many reasons people read books filled with hopelessness (although, I don't believe that's what Phil was writing about in his OP).  Also, writers who tap into their own terrible experiences often write with great passion, which shows in their writing and readers react to that.



astroannie said:


> Told to whom? Who chooses to read these stories?
> 
> I'm not suggesting people hide.  What I am suggesting is that how you frame what you say is every bit as important as the act of saying it.
> 
> ...



I didn't get that out of Fire's post at all. What I heard -- and maybe I missed the point entirely -- was that she writes what she knows (as writers are so often coached to do). Just because we examine something in our writing doesn't mean we condone it, or wish to propagate it. In most cases it's just the opposite. The writer is exposing the wound to allow the light and fresh air to help heal it. Keeping it covered and pretending it's healed rarely works.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 8, 2017)

Firemajic said:


> I am not questioning why I write what I write... I know why I write it. I will continue to write what I write, I do not need to justify it. If it is offensive, do not read it. I find poetry about romance and kittens and butterflies sooooooooooo f%$#&^$% boring, I don't relate, so I don't read it. Freedom of choice... use it.


i bet you got put in the corner a lot.


----------



## Firemajic (Jun 8, 2017)

hahaaa, well, not at first... I learned how to be silent and invisible as a survival tactic... but once I started talking... yeah....


----------



## midnightpoet (Jun 8, 2017)

I've read a lot of Fire's poems, and haven't found "oh woe is me" in any of them.  I think each poet has his/her own way of expressing themselves and often can be misinterpreted - but the very act of writing can bring its own catharsis; and if, in the process it helps the reader in their own quest for truth, redemption, ect... then great.  But it doesn't have to.  I write some dark stuff myself, often because I an interested in human behavior. Its been said before - how can you appreciate the light without the darkness?  Frankly, writing about "happy" things can be rather dull.  To answer the o/p, write what interests you.  If that turns out to be "dark,"  so be it.


----------



## Kevin (Jun 8, 2017)

Someone once here ( gone now) said that you should never talk about bad things from your past... They particularly bemoaned poetry that did that. To me, the flip side of that is repression- repressing all those _things_. I mean I get if you're walking around like a sad Sally, but wth, it worked for Morrisey, dn'it?


----------



## bdcharles (Jun 8, 2017)

I desire desperately to write stories about unicorns and beautiful lands far away, and actively attempting to write otherwise is quite detrimental to my general moodspace. However, those ethereal villains that inhabit the kingdom of ideas have a differnt agenda. My job is to keep the unicorns safe as they journey to their beloved country, no matter what the forces of darkness throw at them - and to chronicle these events, no matter how dire things get.


----------



## Phil Istine (Jun 8, 2017)

Oh my god, what have I unleashed?  .
It's interesting that there has been the odd attempt to interpret what I've written when I'm not one hundred per cent clear on it myself.
I'm a person who relies a lot more on intuition than I once did; I had emotional blockages and couldn't trust my inner world due to being repressed by fear and being actively taught that I was a "nothing".  Although there was very brief sexual abuse from outside the family, a major part of the abuse I encountered was from a crackpot religious ideology - reinforced by the fact that immediate, and much of the extended, family chose to drink that particular brand of kool-aid.  It was the main vehicle for depriving me of an education as they didn't believe it was worth educating someone with the Apocalypse so close (that only a few million kool-aid drinkers would survive).  It's a bit of a joke on here when the fiction challenges turn to the apocalypse, zombies being resurrected and society breaking down.  For me, that was a future reality, and all the adults around me believed that garbage.  Having a brother with Tourette's didn't help either as the church Elders misdiagnosed him as being possessed by demons.  I guess maybe that trying my hand at writing about such things might be an act of detoxification, though I do often prefer to focus more on the psychological stuff,  particularly the cognitive dissonance that's required to hold so many conflicting ideas simultaneously.
I suppose that the light part is that somehow I survived it all without ending up in a psychiatric establishment.  To this day I believe the main reason for that was because I erected a narcotic shield behind which I slowly healed.  I imagine that very few here will get that, but some will.
And yes, I did enjoy watching _Trainspotting_ 

ETA:  Also, it is possible to write certain types of dark things with  great humour.  I can do that about religion and even about certain  aspects of mental health.  About other areas, I wouldn't even attempt it


----------



## midnightpoet (Jun 8, 2017)

You obviously struck a cord in the writers here, and often I've noticed particular threads can vary widely off-topic.  Be glad you've struck on a topic people can relate to, and keep writing.:-D


----------



## Phil Istine (Jun 8, 2017)

duplication


----------



## LeeC (Jun 8, 2017)

I think Terry D had the most balance and insight in his reply.
http://www.writingforums.com/threads/172170-The-Dark-Side/page3?p=2087798&viewfull=1#post2087798


Most of us can relate to some form of abuse, and can easily imagine things that go bump in the night. What occupies our minds is commonly what we write about. What I see as a distinction is those who write with the thought of getting an idea across in the hope of helping others (as with On The Beach), as opposed to those that write apocalyptic/whatever stories for purely “entertainment” value (or because that’s where they think they can make a buck). I’d lump many feel-good stories in with the same idea, Of course, who knows for sure why any author wrote a particular story, it's what the reader gets out of it that matters. 


Reading is both an escape mechanism, and a means of broadening our perspective (if one is open minded enough). Which also introduces another gray area. If one is writing about abuse, one of the other dark shadows in the human heart, or even how we seem determined to destroy the habitat and biodiversity that sustains us, no matter how good the writing is any points intended are lost on many readers. As evidence, look at how many refuse to accept how severely we’re diminishing the potential quality of life of our children by accelerating environmental destruction. Yet those same people can really get into what they perceive as a good horror or porno book, or escape with fanciful feel-good stories. Says a lot about our self-proclaimed intelligence on the whole.


“_What we are doing to the forests of the world is but a mirror reflection of what we are doing to ourselves and to one another._” ~ Chris Maser


----------



## Nellie (Jun 8, 2017)

Phil Istine said:


> Oh my god, what have I unleashed?  .



Quite frankly, you have unleashed the devil! :devilish:



			
				Phil Istine said:
			
		

> It's interesting that there has been the odd attempt to interpret what I've written when I'm not one hundred per cent clear on it myself.
> I'm a person who relies a lot more on intuition than I once did; I had emotional blockages and couldn't trust my inner world due to being repressed by fear and being actively taught that I was a "nothing".  Although there was very brief sexual abuse from outside the family, a major part of the abuse I encountered was from a crackpot religious ideology - reinforced by the fact that immediate, and much of the extended, family chose to drink that particular brand of kool-aid.  It was the main vehicle for depriving me of an education as they didn't believe it was worth educating someone with the Apocalypse so close (that only a few million kool-aid drinkers would survive).  It's a bit of a joke on here when the fiction challenges turn to the apocalypse, zombies being resurrected and society breaking down.  For me, that was a future reality, and all the adults around me believed that garbage.



I find this very interesting, too. This is part of the reason I write. I was mislead into thinking there was this *Almighty *figure who could do NOTHING wrong and everything right. Except for the abuse behind closed doors. That is why I hate church now. Nothing but power, control!!



			
				Phil Istine said:
			
		

> Having a brother with Tourette's didn't help either as the church Elders misdiagnosed him as being possessed by demons.  I guess maybe that trying my hand at writing about such things might be an act of detoxification, though I do often prefer to focus more on the psychological stuff,  particularly the cognitive dissonance that's required to hold so many conflicting ideas simultaneously.



Another reason I hate church. When a person suffers from a brain disorder ( I do as well), the church often times dismisses it and tells the person "to get over it." The brain is very complex and one does not just get over the brain misfiring and seizing. At one time the church blamed the devil for that, too. If folks only knew the things I've seen and the "voices I've heard", they would have sent me to the crazy funny farm.



			
				Phil Istine said:
			
		

> I suppose that the light part is that somehow I survived it all without ending up in a psychiatric establishment.  To this day I believe the main reason for that was because I erected a narcotic shield behind which I slowly healed.  I imagine that very few here will get that, but some will.



Great for you. They only messed with my brain, causing more problems. 



			
				Phil Istine said:
			
		

> ETA:  Also, it is possible to write certain types of dark things with  great humour.  I can do that about religion and even about certain  aspects of mental health.



It is possible to write about dark issues with great humor. I recently found a book of Poems written by doctors and patients, some funny, some very sad. The title is "Poetry In Medicine".


----------



## John 3 (Jun 8, 2017)

I suppose I’m odd one out in this discussion as I very seldom write from a personal perspective and even then I prefer to keep any emotion as an undercurrent because I feel it helps the reader to better share in the poem.
 Once you place your writing into the public domain then your readers make the soul judgment on your work.  
 I have to be honest, having been a Mod, Administrator on other writing forums I have had my fill of this kind of poetry. It’s invariably written in the first person and it doesn’t matter if the writer is a young teen who has been dumped by their boy/ girlfriend or an older member telling you their life problems over and over again.
 I’m simply a reader of poetry, I am not a doctor, Psychiatrist and I certainly don’t contribute to Aunt Agatha’s agony column. You want my sympathy, fine you have it, but please move on to something less introverted that reads like a need for personal therapy.

There’s a whole world out there to explore


----------



## Phil Istine (Jun 8, 2017)

When one makes assumptions about a writer's intention, I wonder if they are really saying that this would be their own intention if they were to write that way.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Jun 8, 2017)

For me it is memories of past things. All part of things I dread but strong emotions of the past (my past). That's why sometimes I write dark things. Hopefully, that changes for good. I need to improvise and become a selling writer and liar. Some of the story facts used in my short story were real and others fake. As when I use the setting of a boneyard or something of that nature.But learning to be a liar can be taught supposedly. Been doing these writing exercises such as telling me convincingly in the craft book how a rockstar would think if I wrote it out as a story. (part of me lying) I am not, for example, a rockstar but I am always not this made up character in these stories I write. I am only one person. Supposedly by observing the real world you can create lies and write a story. By collecting facts of the real world. Supposedly you can work by being honest and dishonest at the same time.

The book I am using for this is a writer's workbook by John Vorhaus, and working at it slowly how to be a better liar when writing. 

(it was suggested I be a liar when writing a story and I found this book I neglected)


----------



## am_hammy (Jun 8, 2017)

For me, I don't intentionally seek out dark material to read or absorb because I know my brain and I know where it leads. It depresses me. Will I read great literature that happens to have dark material in it? Yes. Will I read a person's work who I am close to and it might be ridiculously dark? Yes, if they asked me or if I felt compelled to read because I want to support them by reading but I might not say anything or even have an opinion to share or seek it out on a daily basis.

As for myself, first and foremost when I write, I write for catharsis, so it's only natural for me to write in a darker matter because I'm trying to drain my emotions. I might not always show those words off to anyone, but they serve me a purpose of getting it all out but rarely do I read it again.

Sure there's been stuff that I've intentionally written in the last few years that might be considered dark, but as many other people have said already, I try to add the darkness if the subject of what I'm writing about calls for it. However, my definition of dark vastly differs from many others which is why I feel like this subject is tough because it does not seem there is a universal thought process everyone can agree upon.


----------



## SilverMoon (Jun 8, 2017)

The first line in Walt Whitman's epic poem* "*Song of Myself"* ..."**I celebrate myself, and sing for myself"...*is precisely what we dark writers do. The very fact that we are here to write about a hideous past is a celebratory feat. I feel like singing after I've written a painstakingly powerful  Confessional poem. And I feel grateful. Many sufferers are not walking the earth.

There's been some heat to discussions about "the light at the end of the tunnel" and would like to explain what I meant by my contribution. 



> Originally Posted by *Myself* I want to "show" people that there is light at the end of the tunnel but the light is never too bright because such damage leaves scars.



To reiterate and clarify. The very fact that I am here to write about my past makes _me _the light at the end of the tunnel. The example. That imperfect light. But light, nevertheless. Nothing to do with "Nirvana is awaiting you".

Back to Whitman's first line - what I said is diametrically opposed to his meaning. He was obsessed with how good life is. But I got what I needed from this line. I could go on about my passion for the interpretational  but, here, need to share my passion for personal discovery through writing.

Writing about the basement of my youth allows me to re-discover myself as a woman, now freer, in order to write about the particulars about the girl in the dark. I have little desire to write with detached persona. For this, I am grateful.

And am grateful that I have this same goal as Fire, who _has_ kept me company. 



> Originally Posted* FireMagic *Being abused is isolating, lonely, I did not know others suffered the same atrocities that I did.. I thought I was the only one... so, when I write of my experiences, it is in hopes that someone reading, and going through what I did, will feel less alone...



And I never knew you were taught not to speak in the literal sense. I am so glad you made up for it! Your words resonate like a bell in tower. You, my friend, are the wakeup call.

I was taught never to cry. I am truly incapable of it. If an inkling of pain registered on my face, my father would smile. My poems are my tears. My only means.  If not for writing, I'd be a dessert. A mad woman in the dust.

I close with this. An excerpt from a poem by Helen Spisak titled *"IN DEFENSE OF THE DARK"*

"Darkness lives or hides in us all
You don't have to light every corner of your soul"​


----------



## Smith (Jun 9, 2017)

^Exactly. To explore the dark you typically need a light of some sort if you want to see anything; I mean that literally. Figuratively speaking that's what I feel a lot of darker writing does. Those places need to be explored by somebody, *but certainly not everybody*, which explains the slight differing of opinions and experiences presented in this thread. Also it makes people feel less alone and that goes both ways, for the reader and the writer, and sometimes that's all a person needs. Not to mention it's a cathartic and personal experience for the author themself as am_hammy mentioned.

It is certainly important though that you're staying true to yourself. I write what I feel, and I write what I want to. I don't go out of my way to write something exasperatingly depressing because it's fun or because that's what sells. It's also ideal that the work-in-question is actually going somewhere, or "moving", although I insist on being semantic here by reiterating that it doesn't need to be going anywhere positive.

In the music industry the bands that die are usually ones who don't evolve, for one reason or another. That's why Linkin Park - while I do not enjoy their new sound - aren't making angsty and violent gold-records like Hybrid Theory or Meteora from nearly 20 years ago. They grew up. But those albums _were_ them at that point in time, and some of those songs are about as dark as a blind man walking into a Lovecraftian cave.


----------



## NicaNieves (Jun 12, 2017)

Fuel for the fire! I'm a Christian and so I have a cap on how deep I'll go, though I find it all very interesting. Use your experiences, your views, make it all tangible, make it drip with authenticity. If its what you enjoy then do it.


----------



## Powerless (Jun 12, 2017)

_“They say there is no light without dark, no good without evil, no male without female, no right without wrong. That nothing can exist if it's direct opposite does not also exist.”_ Laurell K. Hamilton, Incubus Dreams


----------



## Glatteis2 (Jun 13, 2017)

I just saw this post, so why not. 




Sam said:


> My question would be: why do you write that way?



Why?

As I said in my introduction - _Having grown up where I __have,__ lived where I have, knowing the people I do makes for good "dark & dirty" characters. I mean just a couple months ago I ran into someone who lived near where I had as a kid. The way he responded was perfectly understandable_ - I write about the dark because that's what I know. And I know it _*very*_ well. I still happen to be standing despite abuse, despite both physical and mental scars, that have brought others to their knees, either broken them or sent to them the slammer or have put some of those I knew six feet under. 

I did, after all, grow up in rough neighborhoods. In tough places where one's lullaby wasn't the radio crooning gently into the night but gunshots on a near nightly basis when the weather was nice. People usually question "what's wrong with people" when they read of a murder in the news. One place if you didn't hear about something going down you instead found yourself questioning what could possibly be wrong. 


But on that note, it's likely why I'm a tad critical of those who _attempt_ to write about the dark. I've read many 'dark' books written by authors who should stick to dishing out candy canes and finding rainbows on every horizon. It isn't their writing style, it isn't even the characters or plot or lack thereof. It's the fact they write such cliche rubbish anyone who has truly experienced the darker sides of life would get tired of reading it.


The interesting part, for me, about this conversation is there's mention by others when writing about the dark you should include a bit of light. 

I can't quite figure out the "why" in their mentality. 

I mean is someone kidnapped by a serial rapists/murderer, for example, supposed to look at their own death as something good at the end of the tunnel? I am quite sure [sarcasm] that David Ray's victims relished what was done to them before they gave up the ghost. Or for is that victim supposed to labor under some fanciful delusion despite, as like with old Red Jack [Jack the Ripper], this guy has been in the news for months & the police have done nothing but stumble over their own feet that they'll be the one to escape this individual's clutches may be missing an ear for all their worries? 

Or as another example is the prostitute, who started her trade as a runaway teen and who has only known this "life" outside of an abusive household growing up, desperate for drugs & booze supposed to be dazzled by the pretty lights of the police cruiser? Of course, the police have come to 'save' her & not possibly to throw her in the jail for a day or two. When her pimp learns that she's been costing him money, or gets it into his head she might have ratted him out to the coppers, she'll be 'welcomed' with open arms. Forget the fact he knows where her daughter is & has more than once threatened to turn that kid into not a punching bag but another body for the morgue. 


Pleeasee. It'd be better to write a story where Bambi beats off the hungry wolves & they, in turn, become vegetarians. 



I've always felt if someone wants to write about the dark then you better learn to like it. Want to write about a murderer, well you got to "become" one. I'm not saying go out & kill someone. I'm saying get inside your murderer's head. Every little tick, every teeny nuisance. But do try to keep them human*. Not everyone who rapes, murders, etc. has little devils & angels perched on their shoulders whispering do this, no do that. Still ask yourself why would Joe Dick, the office accountant, suddenly decide that the cleaning lady's head looks better as a bowling ball. 



*Some [the naive] like to say serial shootings, school shootings, are people who "snapped". Funny isn't it that many times those "snappers" were giving signs so large a blind man could see; if anyone bothered looking that is.


----------

