Should one not write a story if it's offensive or plays upon sexist themes?

[DudeistBelieve]

This one relates to me, because I'm a writer. And like all writers, I'm a pusshole. I'm fearing the day I finish my novel I've been working on since January on the world only for it to get shit on.

I bring this topic up because I saw something on Amazon that, for a moment, has shaken my confidence a bit. An E-book on Amazon, just as summary.

Andy Carter was happy. He had a solid job. He ran 5Ks for charity. He was living a nice, safe Midwestern existence. And then his wife left him for a handsome paramedic down the street.

We?re All Damaged begins after Andy has lost his job, ruined his best friend?s wedding, and moved to New York City, where he lives in a tiny apartment with an angry cat named Jeter that isn?t technically his. But before long he needs to go back to Omaha to say good-bye to his dying grandfather.

Back home, Andy is confronted with his past, which includes his ex, his ex?s new boyfriend, his right-wing talk-radio-host mother, his parents? crumbling marriage, and his still-angry best friend.

As if these old problems weren?t enough, Andy encounters an entirely new complication: Daisy. She has fifteen tattoos, no job, and her own difficult past. But she claims she is the only person who can help Andy be happy again, if only she weren?t hiding a huge secret that will mess things up even more. Andy Carter needs a second chance at life, and Daisy?and the person Daisy pushes Andy to become?may be his last chance to set things right.

Now, fair enough I think we've all seen this type of story before. It appears to be part of the manic pixie dream girl genre, 'cept here homeboy is like an adult. If I was looking for something to read, I'd pick it up, not expecting anything special. So I jump down to the negative reviews, and this is the one...

"Quirky girl helps man discover himself and come alive!" Which is a plot that's been done to death, really, and is sexist as all get-out toward both women and men. Ultimately it's a particular kind of male wish fulfillment, and if that's what you want to read, fine, but you can get an endless diet of it in pop culture without having to read this book.

Look I'll go as far as saying it is sexist, but does that mean the book shouldn't exist or even be read?

I suppose what I'm really asking here is, should an artist just create the art they want to make or should they be standing there asking, Does the world really need my voice too?

 

[Phasmal]

That's an awful lot to take away from the fact that MPDG plots have been done to death, which, yeah, they kind of have.

It doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, or shouldn't be read, but you can't fault people for looking at it and going 'Ugh another one of those'.

There's an alarming amount of people who will find a negative opinion on something and then jump to 'OH SO WHAT IT SHOULDN'T EXIST THEN?'. Like, no. It's fine that exists, but not everyone will like it, and that's fine too.

If I took a cake to my friends house and she was like 'Oh I have had way too much cake lately', the correct response is not 'Oh so should I be asking if the world needs my cake?!'.

I know my response is full of hyperbole, but... it kind of seems obvious to me.

EDIT: Although I totally get having your confidence shaken by an Amazon review. I've been looking up a 2lb loaf tin because I wanna make this lemon drizzle with blueberries and like most of the reviews say it's great and then there's this one review that says it's not 2lb it's more like 1lb. I already have a 1lb loaf tin. I have so many questions now.

 

[Casual Shinji]

People should write (draw/create) whatever the hell they want, but they should also accept the negative reactions their work might bring (assuming these reactions aren't violent).

I figure if you are an "artist" you make the things you make because you want to make them, not because you think the world might benefit from it. That to me has always been secondary when I made anything.

 

[Thaluikhain]

"Shouldn't" is a value judgement.

However, the problem with sexist themes are that they are saying something sexist. Obviously, of course, but if it's saying something that you'd not want to outright say out of a written work (something you'd not argue with people at a pub, say), I'd reconsider.

 

[JoJo]

Create the art you want to make, but be prepared for negative reactions. Because you'll never be able to please everyone, and trying to will lead to forgettable gruel. I don't read that criticism as saying the book shouldn't exist, rather the reviewer is just tired of that sort of cliche plot.

Myself, I'm writing a novel I'm aware many people could take offence to (nothing to do with sexism though, thankfully), and I embrace that. Better to be interesting and controversial than safe and forgettable.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

People should write (draw/create) whatever the hell they want, but they should also accept the negative reactions their work might bring (assuming these reactions aren't violent).

I figure if you are an "artist" you make the things you make because you want to make them, not because you think the world might benefit from it. That to me has always been secondary when I made anything.

I mean it's a weird thing, because I don't want to create something just to release it into a vacuum. But I know at the same time thats what I'll have to do cause I can have 99 good reviews and just that one negative will fuck shit up.

God forbid 99 Negative reviews. I'll have figurative Gun in my mouth.

 

[Casual Shinji]

People should write (draw/create) whatever the hell they want, but they should also accept the negative reactions their work might bring (assuming these reactions aren't violent).

I figure if you are an "artist" you make the things you make because you want to make them, not because you think the world might benefit from it. That to me has always been secondary when I made anything.

I mean it's a weird thing, because I don't want to create something just to release it into a vacuum. But I know at the same time thats what I'll have to do cause I can have 99 good reviews and just that one negative will fuck shit up.

God forbid 99 Negative reviews. I'll have figurative Gun in my mouth.

There's also the possibilty of people not even giving enough of a shit to even express a negative opinion. There have been plenty of times that I drew something I was very proud of, only to upload it to Deviant Art and have nobody even react to it at all.

It's a shitty feeling, which is why you should generally make something for your own satisfaction. It's also much easier to work that way, since you're not wasting any thought on whether or not people are going to like it. Just remember; you're not alone in your personal taste, so if you like it, chances are there's a million people who'll like it, too. The real problem is getting it to reach them, which is why some artists are popular and some aren't.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

People should write (draw/create) whatever the hell they want, but they should also accept the negative reactions their work might bring (assuming these reactions aren't violent).

I figure if you are an "artist" you make the things you make because you want to make them, not because you think the world might benefit from it. That to me has always been secondary when I made anything.

I mean it's a weird thing, because I don't want to create something just to release it into a vacuum. But I know at the same time thats what I'll have to do cause I can have 99 good reviews and just that one negative will fuck shit up.

God forbid 99 Negative reviews. I'll have figurative Gun in my mouth.

There's also the possibilty of people not even giving enough of a shit to even express a negative opinion. There have been plenty of times that I drew something I was very proud of, only to upload it to Deviant Art and have nobody even react to it at all.

It's a shitty feeling, which is why you should generally make something for your own satisfaction. It's also much easier to work that way, since you're not wasting any thought on whether or not people are going to like it. Just remember; you're not alone in your personal taste, so if you like it, chances are there's a million people who'll like it, too. The real problem is getting it to reach them, which is why some artists are popular and some aren't.

yes that's very true. However... I could live with apathy. It be like my youtube channel, or the podcast I'm doing, I fully accept that everyone and their dog has one at this point and I'm just another drop in the bucket.

I just... would rather face the razor blades picking apart my grammar or my writing style than the idea that my story doesn't match some political ideology. Stephanie Meyer is a source of inspiration to me, because I know I'm not that good of a writer but I know she wasn't either, but the idea of putting one's heart out there and...

Eh I'm harping on it, aren't I? Yeah you're probably right. I should just get it to the point I'm satisfied with and just release it. Ya know Speilberg doesn't read reviews for his movies? They come out and he goes on vacation. About two weeks later he calls the studio and goes "How'd we do? I'm still the king of this world? Good."

 

[DudeistBelieve]

That's an awful lot to take away from the fact that MPDG plots have been done to death, which, yeah, they kind of have.

It doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, or shouldn't be read, but you can't fault people for looking at it and going 'Ugh another one of those'.

There's an alarming amount of people who will find a negative opinion on something and then jump to 'OH SO WHAT IT SHOULDN'T EXIST THEN?'. Like, no. It's fine that exists, but not everyone will like it, and that's fine too.

If I took a cake to my friends house and she was like 'Oh I have had way too much cake lately', the correct response is not 'Oh so should I be asking if the world needs my cake?!'.

I know my response is full of hyperbole, but... it kind of seems obvious to me.

EDIT: Although I totally get having your confidence shaken by an Amazon review. I've been looking up a 2lb loaf tin because I wanna make this lemon drizzle with blueberries and like most of the reviews say it's great and then there's this one review that says it's not 2lb it's more like 1lb. I already have a 1lb loaf tin. I have so many questions now.

I would submit to you, two things... anyone else sees that description, doesn't like it, they roll their eyes and moves on to that new blender they're looking for. The time and the effort to make an Amazon review though, especially about a book ya know this negative reviewer didn't even read... fine it's minimal, but thats still like 2 minutes.

It's like a neilson TV rating deal. you know that one review represents like... 10,000 people lets say. This was just the one person that had this negative opinion. Theres another negative review from some hardcore christian, same amount of stars, you know thats another 10,000. 20,000 people saying the art is shit.

And it's not like bringing your cake to a friends house, but like selling a cake you made at bake sale to support charity. And you're standing there, waiting for someone to buy your cake. And your watching people walk by and buy other bake goods, but not your cake. And you see Jeffrey Malusk, he baked cup cakes, and they're selling the fuck out and you're like "What the hell? Why don't they love my cake as much as Jeffrey's stupid cup cakes?"

I'm speaking from a place of fragile artist ego. You make something, you want it to be loved! I'm just hating this idea that my story might even be rejected out of the gate. And perhaps even, I'm overreacting to that fear.

 

[Recusant]

If all you're looking for is commercial success, then... well, then I don't know what to tell you; I'm not a writer, but from what I've seen, commercial success is often less of a predictable science and more of some weird pseudo-pheromonal thing between the writer and the audience. But from an artistic standpoint? That's a different matter.

Suppose you're at a party, and are introduced to a small handful of people you're talking to all at once. Seeking to break the ice, you open with a joke that's slightly risqu?, only to notice (as the others laugh) that one of your audience is giving you a slight scowl. Not wishing to make a bad impression, you give an ingratiating, sheepish smile and say "No offense". It turns out, however, that they weren't actually scowling at you, or that they were reminded of some minor unpleasant episode from their own life, or they just realize it's absurd to make even a small deal over something totally unimportant, so they give a magnanimous grin and reply "None taken". That's the key thing, here, that our entire society seems to have completely forgotten: offense is not given, it is taken. Yes, something can be classed as "likely to offend the sensibilities of the general sociocultural zeitgeist in which it is created or released", and "offensive" is a much shorter phrase, but that doesn't change the underlying reality.

Additionally: there are only so many ways a plot can go. Ultimately, the number of permutations and story can take, even if you take coherency out of the picture altogether, is finite. Couple that with the realization that a typical first-world person is exposed to hundreds or thousands of plots within a single year, and you reach the conclusion that saying that something has been "done to death" is meaningless, because that's true of everything. We've been writing stories for thousands of years, and telling them since before we were human; the only thing new under the sun, so far as storytelling goes, is better presentation and more varied settings. It's like saying "this story sucks, because it's told in words". In all fairness, I have no idea what a "manic pixie dream girl" is, but I'm hard pressed to even imagine that it's something so radical it fundamentally changes the nature of information exchange.

Of course, idle amusement and great artistic experience aren't the only reasons to write a story, and to that end, I'd like you to reflect on some other works: was Uncle Tom's Cabin offensive? Adventures of Huckleberry Finn? Ulysses? The Jungle?

 

[Phasmal]

And it's not like bringing your cake to a friends house, but like selling a cake you made at bake sale to support charity. And you're standing there, waiting for someone to buy your cake. And your watching people walk by and buy other bake goods, but not your cake. And you see Jeffrey Malusk, he baked cup cakes, and they're selling the fuck out and you're like "What the hell? Why don't they love my cake as much as Jeffrey's stupid cup cakes?"

I'm speaking from a place of fragile artist ego. You make something, you want it to be loved! I'm just hating this idea that my story might even be rejected out of the gate. And perhaps even, I'm overreacting to that fear.

I've made things, I've wanted them to be loved. I draw, uploaded a few of my drawings in that recent 'do you draw' thread. If the thought of someone not liking my drawings hurt me that much, I don't know if I would still do it.

Artists aren't special, anyone who does something wants it to get positive attention, that's human. But if they honestly can't cope with negative feedback, well... then that's something they need to improve on. At the end of the day, the most important thing (in my eyes) is that you like what you make. There's always someone who isn't going to like what you make.

(And I have sold cake for charity before, but mine sold out first because I bake like a motherfucking boss. Would it have hurt my feelings if none of it had sold? Probably. But I would have gotten over it, examined what people didn't like about it. And probably eaten the whole thing myself).

EDIT: Going along with the whole cake thing, in this case it's not even people not liking your cake and you being upset. It's a bunch of people liking it and one person not liking it. And that's just not something to get THAT upset about.

 

[Jux]

I suppose what I'm really asking here is, should an artist just create the art they want to make or should they be standing there asking, Does the world really need my voice too?

Why not both? I don't see a problem with making the art you want to make while keeping in mind the idea 'is this transformative, or groundbreaking, or genre setting?' Art doesn't need to be any of those things, but there's nothing wrong with striving for that if that's what you aspire to.

I get that negative reviews can be harsh, but I think you'll find your own criticism of your work will weigh more heavily than anything a random person on the internet says. This coming from a guy that does wood carving in his spare time. If that review you quoted cuts particularly deep, it might be worth asking yourself why? The review is blunt, but is it also true? Is it a MPDG story, or does the story subvert that trope at some point?

edit: to address the question in the thread title, which is a bit different: Like you said above, the stuff you make isn't tossed into a vacuum. And it's good that you realize that. I think it's important that when we create something, we ask ourselves if our creations reflect our values. I wouldn't say necessarily that art that explores sexism or offensive content shouldn't exist, but how are those themes portrayed, and what kind of response is elicited?

Racism is a pretty offensive theme, but I'd say the way it's portrayed in say... The Birth of a Nation and the way it's portrayed in Schindler's List make all the difference.

 

[EvilRoy]

Ultimately while you should be able to create whatever you want, you will still have to weather the attacks of people who think that you are your work.

I've seen people on this very forum argue that if you write a sexist book, that means you yourself deep down are a sexist. Stated generally, that the greater theme of a book reflects your own personal beliefs. I think as an experienced writer you should know yourself that while this may be true some of the time, it doesn't typically indicate a particularly good writer. Generally the best writers are able to explore themes and points of view outside their own through their story, and it is rare for an exceptional book to have 'this is what I think and why you should agree' as a primary theme buried under poorly invented names.

So, should it not exist? It absolutely should - if for no other reason that people need to learn how those they disagree with think. A better reason is to explore the topic for yourself and learn in the process, releasing the finished product of your education to get the thoughts of others. To believe that simply reading a book will magically turn someone sexist or bad when they had no inclination towards such previously is nuts. It assumes the reader is a hyper-impressionable idiot - which means they were doomed anyway, so fuck 'em. Avoiding talking about or exploring negative themes is basically just pretending they don't exist, and as anyone who had a childhood bully should know "ignore him and he will stop" is horseshit advice.

All that said, and tying into my first thought, if you dare to explore negative topics people will absolutely attribute those thoughts to you on a personal level. If you try to challenge people by portraying people having these negative beliefs in any sort of positive light, you will probably get death threats. I wouldn't blame anyone for choosing not to deal with that.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Losing your job, social disgrace, dying father, trip back home, manic pixie girl... sounds like Elizabethtown.

 

[Zhukov]

"Shouldn't" is kind of a big word. Which kinda doesn't fit here.

The comment you quoted didn't even say that. It said that the book was redundant and unoriginal and sexist. And you apparently at least somewhat agree with the last one.

I'm not seeing the dilemma here.

 

[Fox12]

I suppose what I'm really asking here is, should an artist just create the art they want to make or should they be standing there asking, Does the world really need my voice too?

As someone who would like to be a proffesional novelist one day, I would argue that you're approaching this from the wrong perspective. The only person you should be writing for is you. Write the kind of novel you want to read. Don't worry about what other writers are doing, and don't worry about what your audience will think. That's how the best books get made. J.R.R. Tolkien wrote fantasy because no on else at the time was writing fantasy. He wrote the kind of stories he wanted to read. Alan Moore wrote Watchmen because he was getting bored of the cliche'd superhero stories that were being written. Watchmen was as much a love letter to superheroes as it was a deconstruction. Moore was growing tired of the same old stories, so he wrote the story he wanted to read.

If you spend your life trying to chase the market, then you'll never be really happy, and you probably won't be super successful. At least, that's what I tell myself. For me, writing is an almost spiritual experience. It's the way an atheist takes communion. Writing is the only way I can organize my ideas properly, and share them with the outside world. It's my message in a bottle.

I wouldn't worry about negative criticism. It will come, and it will go. You can't write anything with substance without criticism, because criticism means that you've asserted an idea. Let me know if/when you get it published and I'll get it on my kindle.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Ultimately while you should be able to create whatever you want, you will still have to weather the attacks of people who think that you are your work.

I've seen people on this very forum argue that if you write a sexist book, that means you yourself deep down are a sexist. Stated generally, that the greater theme of a book reflects your own personal beliefs. I think as an experienced writer you should know yourself that while this may be true some of the time, it doesn't typically indicate a particularly good writer. Generally the best writers are able to explore themes and points of view outside their own through their story, and it is rare for an exceptional book to have 'this is what I think and why you should agree' as a primary theme buried under poorly invented names.

So, should it not exist? It absolutely should - if for no other reason that people need to learn how those they disagree with think. A better reason is to explore the topic for yourself and learn in the process, releasing the finished product of your education to get the thoughts of others. To believe that simply reading a book will magically turn someone sexist or bad when they had no inclination towards such previously is nuts. It assumes the reader is a hyper-impressionable idiot - which means they were doomed anyway, so fuck 'em. Avoiding talking about or exploring negative themes is basically just pretending they don't exist, and as anyone who had a childhood bully should know "ignore him and he will stop" is horseshit advice.

All that said, and tying into my first thought, if you dare to explore negative topics people will absolutely attribute those thoughts to you on a personal level. If you try to challenge people by portraying people having these negative beliefs in any sort of positive light, you will probably get death threats. I wouldn't blame anyone for choosing not to deal with that.

This is the best post in the thread. Calling a story some sort of -ist is usually implying that heroes shouldn't have flaws, villains shouldn't have redeeming values, and/or the story shouldn't have ambiguity. In the case of the OP's example, it says the reviewer expects men and women should behave like they think they do.

 

[Amir Kondori]

There is no reason a female character helping a male character get their priorities straight/find themselves/find love again should be sexist. Same with the reverse plot. Finding joy in relationships is a big part of the human experience for many people.

People are way too quick to call things sexist today.