![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So I've been hearing all the noise about the latest Game of Thrones episode from the other night, and the fact that there was some major Ick Factor going on in one of the subplots. Well, we don't have cable and I'm not really that interested in the series (books or show--it just doesn't sound like something that would capture my interest is all), so I don't really have much to say about that. I'll just let y'all chat about that.
However, in my recent revision of The Process of Belief, I came upon a short linking scene. In short, two of the most important characters are polar opposite deities yet forever linked spiritually and emotionally, and they face of at a key moment in the trilogy's overall plot.
Here's the passage I came upon:
( It's a bit long and problematic so it's behind this here cut )
So...yeah. The long and short of it is that her betrothed D'kami, under the guise of Saish the chaos deity, has just temporarily kidnapped Denysia (our spunky teen hero and the One of All Sacred, the balance deity), mainly to get her away from her well-meaning but overprotective older sister so he can explain their current situation without interruption or outside influence. The move is very typical of him--acting before thinking, and reacting to the first thing that comes his way. In this case, Denysia's harsh dismissal of their fate.
I came upon this scene a few days ago during revision, and for the life of me, I'm not entirely sure why I wrote some of it. The scene itself didn't bother me all that much...only those last two paragraphs at the end. It wasn't so much that it played out sort of like an abusive relationship rather than anything else, especially with Saish's reaction to her harsh words and her immediate apology afterwards. Why did I write that?
Why indeed. I thought about it some. I wrote the scene probably sometime around 2003 if I'm not mistaken, so if I was inspired or influenced by anything, perhaps it was the comic books I was picking up at the time, or maybe one of the movies or books I watched or read then. Eventually it dawned on me that the point here was shock value. I seem to remember that from the mid-90s to the early 00s I saw quite a bit of 'shock value as proving a point' thing. The 'let's see how far we can take this' thing. I don't know...back then I think there was a point to it, perhaps a reactionary point to the more conservative ideas popping up at the time. You know, going that far because the more popular stories wouldn't dare to.
I think the end of that scene was written exactly for that reason, but in hindsight I don't think it worked. It was supposed to show Denni rebelling when she really shouldn't be (not because of a preconceived gender role, but as her role as deity--the whole point of her character is to maintain physical and spiritual balance in the universe through peaceful means) and Saish calming her down the only way he knew how at the time. The end result sounds like he's being abusive, and hurts her when she steps out of line. Yeah, not my plan at all. Not in the least.
That said...the new version looks like this:
( slightly shorter revised edit )
So yes...much better here. [Yeah, the prose still needs a little work, I know.] Denysia is still on the defensive, but she's not helpless. She's fighting back and making it hard for her captor, which is definitely more in character for her. Additionally, Saisshalé is not hurting her, intentionally or not, making him less 'chaotic' than he seems. In the end it also serves as a signpost of the overall plot at this point--the predestined fates of these two characters are breaking down, and they are both creating new future events in the process. The shock value is gone, but the tension is heightened in the process because it's hit both of the characters deeply and personally.
I think this was a good personal example of where writing to shock can really fall apart. It can of course be used, especially if one is writing in the kind of genre that expects it, or if the writer (say, like GRRM) is using it to show a larger point of corruption within specific systems. Or you're Chuck Palahniuk or JG Ballard. Either way, this whole exercise made me think a bit more about how I've treated a number of my characters. Is it really worth the shocking moment, if it's only for the shock value? Not really. There's got to be a reason behind it, and furthermore, that reason has to be clearly defined. Otherwise it not only fails its intended reaction, it can have unintended and unfortunate alternate meanings.
However, in my recent revision of The Process of Belief, I came upon a short linking scene. In short, two of the most important characters are polar opposite deities yet forever linked spiritually and emotionally, and they face of at a key moment in the trilogy's overall plot.
Here's the passage I came upon:
( It's a bit long and problematic so it's behind this here cut )
So...yeah. The long and short of it is that her betrothed D'kami, under the guise of Saish the chaos deity, has just temporarily kidnapped Denysia (our spunky teen hero and the One of All Sacred, the balance deity), mainly to get her away from her well-meaning but overprotective older sister so he can explain their current situation without interruption or outside influence. The move is very typical of him--acting before thinking, and reacting to the first thing that comes his way. In this case, Denysia's harsh dismissal of their fate.
I came upon this scene a few days ago during revision, and for the life of me, I'm not entirely sure why I wrote some of it. The scene itself didn't bother me all that much...only those last two paragraphs at the end. It wasn't so much that it played out sort of like an abusive relationship rather than anything else, especially with Saish's reaction to her harsh words and her immediate apology afterwards. Why did I write that?
Why indeed. I thought about it some. I wrote the scene probably sometime around 2003 if I'm not mistaken, so if I was inspired or influenced by anything, perhaps it was the comic books I was picking up at the time, or maybe one of the movies or books I watched or read then. Eventually it dawned on me that the point here was shock value. I seem to remember that from the mid-90s to the early 00s I saw quite a bit of 'shock value as proving a point' thing. The 'let's see how far we can take this' thing. I don't know...back then I think there was a point to it, perhaps a reactionary point to the more conservative ideas popping up at the time. You know, going that far because the more popular stories wouldn't dare to.
I think the end of that scene was written exactly for that reason, but in hindsight I don't think it worked. It was supposed to show Denni rebelling when she really shouldn't be (not because of a preconceived gender role, but as her role as deity--the whole point of her character is to maintain physical and spiritual balance in the universe through peaceful means) and Saish calming her down the only way he knew how at the time. The end result sounds like he's being abusive, and hurts her when she steps out of line. Yeah, not my plan at all. Not in the least.
That said...the new version looks like this:
( slightly shorter revised edit )
So yes...much better here. [Yeah, the prose still needs a little work, I know.] Denysia is still on the defensive, but she's not helpless. She's fighting back and making it hard for her captor, which is definitely more in character for her. Additionally, Saisshalé is not hurting her, intentionally or not, making him less 'chaotic' than he seems. In the end it also serves as a signpost of the overall plot at this point--the predestined fates of these two characters are breaking down, and they are both creating new future events in the process. The shock value is gone, but the tension is heightened in the process because it's hit both of the characters deeply and personally.
I think this was a good personal example of where writing to shock can really fall apart. It can of course be used, especially if one is writing in the kind of genre that expects it, or if the writer (say, like GRRM) is using it to show a larger point of corruption within specific systems. Or you're Chuck Palahniuk or JG Ballard. Either way, this whole exercise made me think a bit more about how I've treated a number of my characters. Is it really worth the shocking moment, if it's only for the shock value? Not really. There's got to be a reason behind it, and furthermore, that reason has to be clearly defined. Otherwise it not only fails its intended reaction, it can have unintended and unfortunate alternate meanings.
