Director Ron Howard recently found himself in the crosshairs of controversy, not because of something he said, but because of something a 
character in his new movie says. L.A. Times columnist Patrick Goldstein writes about it in Ron Howard on “The Dilemma’s” gay joke: It stays in the movie. Universal Pictures decided to pull a trailer for the movie when they learned that a gay joke had rankled a lot of feathers. Apparently, the character played by Vince Vaughn makes fun of an electric car by saying, “It’s gay.” However, the joke hit a raw nerve.
Goldstein states the obvious point:
Just because a character in a film says or does something wildly inappropriate doesn’t necessarily mean that the filmmaker agrees with it.
Writers talk a lot about their characters being autonomous. Which means, at times, your characters will say or do “something wildly inappropriate.” In fact, remaining true to your characters means letting them act in ways you don’t personally agree with. Nevertheless, it amazes me how many writers hedge at these implications.
In speaking about character dialog, Stephen King, in his book On Writing says:
As with other aspects of fiction, the key to writing good dialog is honesty. And if you are honest about the words coming out of your characters’ mouths, you’ll find that you’ve let yourself in for a fair amount of criticism. Not a week goes by that I don’t receive at least one pissed-off letter (most weeks there are more) accusing me of being foul-mouthed, bigoted, homophobic, murderous, frivolous, or down-right psychopathic. In the majority of cases what my correspondents are hot under the collar about relates to something in the dialogue… (pgs. 185-186 emphasis mine)
Maybe this is why so many authors sanitize their characters — we’re just trying to avoid “criticism.” We don’t want to appear “foul-mouthed, bigoted, homophobic,” etc., so we censor our characters. Besides, if we’re aiming for a specific market, every expletive, every gay joke, every hangover, every sexist taunt, incriminates US and takes us one step closer to the rejection pile.
In his letter to Goldstein, Howard thoughtfully ponders the controversy and its implications for art and freedom of speech:
I believe in sensitivity but not censorship. I feel that our film is taking additional heat as an emblem for many movies and TV shows that preceded it that have even more provocative characterizations and language. It is a slight moment in THE DILEMMA meant to demonstrate an aspect of our lead character’s personality, and we never expected it to represent our intentions or the point of view of the movie or those of us who made it.
… Anybody can complain about anything in our country. It’s what I love about this place. I defend the right for some people to express offense at a joke as strongly as I do the right for that joke to be in a film. But if storytellers, comedians, actors and artists are strong armed into making creative changes, it will endanger comedy as both entertainment and a provoker of thought. (emphasis mine)
It’s ironic that someone as ideologically liberal as Ron Howard is now forced to defend free speech against his own compatriots. But such is the collision of art and ideology.
Goldstein summarizes:
I’m not sure that I’m all that comfortable with most of the gay jokes I’ve heard, but once you start trying to make value judgments about one joke over another, you’re on a slippery slope to the arid wasteland of political correctness.
I can’t help but feel that many publishers and writers need to take note of this incident and its “slippery slope.” Are we demanding characters that fit into our worldview, or the worldview they actually inhabit? Are we constructing characters who are truly autonomous, or just puppets for our own opinions and values? And do we have the courage to let our characters speak their mind, without interjecting our own?
Or is all this talk about autonomous characters just blather?
Political Correctness is so insidious because it is an attempt to ‘improve’ somebody else without consideration for their worth just as they are. Love wants what is best for somebody else. Political correctness wants to bludgeon you to become just like me.
I find it amusing when people don’t get angry at the flawed character saying the flawed thing, they go straight to the writer / director. I’ve seen the clip. I’ve met people like that. It was an honest depiction of a type of person. Wanting to change people without righteousness is like wanting to put out a fire with a tornado. There’s still wreckage when it’s over, just of a different kind.
Ok, thinking more about this, one thing that irritates me about PC is that it demands perfection in others without any meddling from the cross. Political correctness is fake, it’s hypocritical, and it’s entirely situational.
I am wrestling with this so much I am unable to sleep. My second book is coming out any day and I’m extremely anxious about my responsibility as a Christian writer verses depicting characters that are real. It doesn’t seem authentic to have a prostitute who never swears. Even worse imo is a married couple that never makes love! But I understand Christians not wanting to read those things since it’s so prevalent in our culture. Yet I truly believe we risk divorcing God from His passionate nature and becoming a people who are more against things than a people who delight in Him. On top of that we are so anxious about following the rules we can’t feel God’s delight over us! God loves messy people. He wrote about messy people. He wrote passionately about sex. Why can I not feel free to do the same? I really wish someone would help me in this area. The CBA rules just seem to rigid and frankly, not of God.
I found this story really interesting and slightly scary. Interesting quote from Stephen King. I also read another piece somewhere recently that complained about how people just want to read about people they like with nice stories and not the reality of life.
Sarah, I so appreciate your passion and share your concerns. I believe your dilemma illustrates a fundamental flaw endemic to Christian art. Rather than follow Ron Howard’s example and remain true to our characters, we Christians have allowed a type of political / religious correctness to shape our fiction. I totally understand and appreciate believers wanting to read “clean” stories. Really. I get that. The downside is that remaining true to the Christian market and remaining true to our stories and characters has now become two different things. Meanwhile, a coalition against cussing has formed. Anyway, I hear you, Sarah. Hang in there!
Right on, Johne and Sarah!
I totally agree. Write what you feel and let the chips fall where they may.
But to answer the title of your blog “Am I Responsible for What My Characters Say?”
Yes, ultimately you are. So what.
But how do you keep from being deceived? If you merely write what you feel, how can you be sure you’re not writing from the part of yourself that will pass away? I wouldn’t have a problem with my critiques if it weren’t for that section about Jezebel in Revelation. She gives me the shivers because I see her in my eyes. I don’t want to let her, or the Pharisee, reign in my stories. How do you navigate your own writing? Comments please.
Sarah, “we see through a glass darkly” (I Cor. 13:12). Until we go to be with the Lord, none of us will ever have a perfect grip on the truth. Or our own heart. Only time will tell how our stories winnow out in eternity.
Honestly, I wouldn’t over-spiritualize the process. Our writing talents are tangled up in who we are. If I waited until I discerned the depths of my own heart and motivations, I’d never write. All we can ever do is to follow God to the best of our ability and surrender our talents. Thanks for your comments!
Not to be too precious about this, but I think there are two way to look at this, and they go to how you define ‘responsible’ and how you define the magic and art of how characters and what they say are invented.
One definition is about being “answerable or accountable, as for something within one’s power, control, or management.” In this sense, the responsibility goes to the character, not the author. If we are honest about our character’s motivations and history, they have to say or do certain things to be true to themselves, and thus they will say or do whatever is appropriate for them to say (even if relating those things is not what we, the author, believe in or defend).
Another definition is one who is “…chargeable with being the author, cause, or occasion of something.” In this sense, of course we’re responsible – without our intervention, our characters wouldn’t exist. We ultimately do have the power to edit or embellish or eliminate our characters. But if we’re going to be honest with our stories and our characters, we have to give them the pretend ability to be autonomous to truly become the truest character they can be, and if there are no perfect people, we shouldn’t be surprised if there are no perfect characters.
Furthermore, allowing characters to be baser than we are allows us to see them receive their due measure of judgment, reaping what they have sown.
Case-in-point: Denzel Washington is one of the highest profile Christians in Hollywood. So how does such a man reconcile his role as one of the worst men in Training Day (a role for which he received an Oscar):
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/movies/interviews/2010/denzelwashington-jan10.html
That says it all right there; how we can be devout ourselves while creating art that includes less than devout people. As fallen people, we ache for the sun, but we learn from the mistakes done in the shadows. As writers, we can let our characters be proxies for us inhabiting those shadows. And thank God for that!
Three cheers for Ron Howard.
If our characters aren’t real no one will read our books and we might as well do something else. Of course we’re responsible for what our characters say. We should know our characters well enough to know what they would say in any given situation and then we should make them say it.
I don’t have to put cussing into my books or brutal murders, because I’m not writing about truck drivers or hit men. I’m writing about teen girls. And because I don’t want to write about sexual encounters, I’m not writing about contemporary teen girls. I’m writing about fantasy worlds, where teen girls don’t have sex. But if I wrote a contemporary book that took place at a high school and none of the characters had sex, and there were no homosexuals on campus, I’d be writing falsely. I doubt if there is a public high school campus in the country that has only virgin girls attending.
So if I were writing a contemporary, I could have virgin characters, and Christian characters, but I’d also have to have sexually immoral girls and boys, including gays (or at least people with gay relatives). I’d also have to have…people who make gay jokes.
Thanks for letting me ask questions – your comments help – a lot. I don’t know many writers and your perspective is definitely different from what I’ve been getting.
Good thoughts and topic. I’ve run into this dilema, but not this specific one. I mean, I don’t cuss, and so I tend to not have my characters cuss either. It sounds unnatural to me. But most of what I write is YA fantasy and space opera, so that is actually a good thing.
But I have them do other “bad” things, as I’ve discussed in previous threads, that would make some think I approve of those activities.
I used to work for a bookstore as a bookkeeper (hmmm, that sounds interesting, as if I had a safe with all the books in it). He had read this fiction book from Frankie Schafer (sp?), son of Francis Schafer. And in that book, it was filled with lots of cussing by one of the characters. Apparently lots. And my friend had a hard time dealing with why such a good Christian would write such a foul-language book. I never read it, so I can’t really comment on the book itself, but it goes to your point.
Just like J. K. Rowling is accused of being a Wiccan. People believe anything they read, even from the Onion.
But it all goes back to characterization for real people. To date, I’ve not needed to have a character that cusses up a storm. But that doesn’t mean I won’t someday. If it can be done so the story is redemptive, and it would have impact, and reach a segment that a nice clean story wouldn’t.
We’re back to audience.
Yes, the wages of sin is death, good for Denzel Washington. He has obviously found even ground between himself, his witness and God. That is what we must do as well.
If you’ll notice, in this thread homosexuals, sexual activity, foul language, prostitutes and the like have been discussed without a foul word or graphic description being typed. Adult material discussion in a godly way. What words or pictures come to mind when you say those two things?
It takes much more creativity to write Christian than it does to write secular. Stephen King also said that when scary wasn’t working he went for the gore. That means that he didn’t push through creatively to get the scary, he took the lazy way out.
I review Christian books and I am hard on Christian writers because I believe we are held to a higher standard than secular writers. Because of that standard (just like pastors are human, but are held to a higher standard), we have to work harder.
Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things. 9 The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you.
That’s not a suggestion, it’s a command. How do you reconcile that with gutter talk or graphic sex?
Here’s the crux, imagination is much worse than reality. It is why we worry so much. B.J. Hoff teaches that if you use suggestion, the reader will add a multitude of details with their imagination that you could waste a thousand words trying to describe.
Yes. We are responsible for what our characters say and do. We, not our characters, will face Christ’s Bema Seat of judgment. Writing in such a way that allows the reader to fill in the blanks to whatever gutter degree they desire is the hardest way to write, but is worth the effort in the long run.
Thanks for your comments, Gina. You said, “It takes much more creativity to write Christian than it does to write secular.” I’m assuming by that you mean that keeping the gore and language out of our work requires more creativity, more work, than just allowing it. While I agree that some language and gore can be lazy writing, I don’t believe that leaving gore and language out of our fiction necessarily (1) makes it “Christian,” or (2) requires more creativity. A good story is a good story whether or not it has sex, language, or blood. Unless you’re prepared to say that any story which contains sex, language, or blood is not a good story.
Re: Phil. 4:8, you might want to read my post Can Horror Fiction Be Redemptive?, and make sure to read the comments. At the heart of the Phil. 4 argument is the implication that we cannot focus on evil without being corrupted by it, we cannot “explore” darkness without being tainted by it, and we cannot have a character cuss without being judged for it. I just think it’s a misreading of the text and applied far too recklessly to the Christian fiction discussion.
Appreciate your thoughts, Gina!
I read a book a few years ago where the author had his characters bashing conservatives. It wasn’t a needed part of the plot, either. He claimed it was his characters and that they got out of hand. A couple years later, he was saying the exact same stuff on Facebook and Twitter as himself. No characters to hide behind.
I think if a lot of authors are honest, they’ll admit that there is a little bit of themselves in every character they create. So if your characters are doing something like has been discussed here, maybe that means you need to look at your heart. I know it usually does for me.
Then again, I normally subscribe to the less is more approach to things. I know that married characters have sex. I don’t need it read about it, however.
So yes, you are responsible for your characters.
I’m writing a novel this month on nanowrimo.org. One character, an unfaithful husband suffered a stroke, and his wife is having to change his diapers among other things, and I have no problem as a nurse of having her say exactly how she feels about having to clean his unfaithful organ, or how he fusses at her for rough care of his special apparatus. It’s real and it’s part of the story. I hope to show how that man’s unfaithfulness affected his faithful god-fearing wife (as well as the supposedly impartial nurse giving patient care). I do have some concerns about how my family might respond, but if the book sells, I’ll hold my head high and hope a compassionate Lord forgives me. If it doesn’t, I will have gotten the words down and explored my own feelings as a new author.
I’m wondering, Cile, if you’ve ever lived through unfaithfulness? I have, I seriously doubt you could expose the depth and breadth of the pain and anguish caused by it with mere language and “rough care”. I hope you can show how the betrayal affects the faithful and god-fearing spouse. In my opinion, there are not enough Christians taking a stand against that kind of thing.
@Mike, I did read that thread and even commented. I’m well aware that I’m liable to walk away with tomatoes all over me. I know how most of the Christian Fiction crowd feel about the verse, and how passionate authors can be about being “real” in their prose. It still doesn’t change the fact that we cannot pick and choose which commands we’ll obey to remain on God’s good side so to speak. Jesus said, “If you love Me, keep My commands.” That is not being legalistic, but realistic about loving Him.
Leaving gore and foul language out of a work does not make it Christian… I believe there was discussion about what makes fiction Christian, too. (You do have some interesting discussions.) It does take a bit more creativity to suggest gore and make it come alive in the imagination of the reader. It is much easier to just write what is in our own imaginations and feelings. I have read some good stories that have all those elements, but I won’t read them anymore. I won’t watch any movie that takes God’s name in vain, either.
I do not believe I am the only person in the world who has experienced a wicked relationship. When we willingly expose ourselves to evil, when we dwell upon it, we are affected by it. I have a very dear friend who has told me time and again that if a Christian is strong in belief, no amount of exposure to evil will taint that Christian. I know differently because it took years to scrub the filthy thinking from my soul after my divorce. Satan is subtle and his web of seduction can ensnare a Christian before he/she even realizes there is a web. It happens all the time. This is why God warns us time and again through His word.
Each character we create is part of ourselves. We bleed through the words, and we cannot hide our own personality for it is through our experiences and personality that we create. Because of that we live vicariously through our characters. That, more than anything else, makes us responsible for the actions of our characters. While we were yet sinners, God loved us and sent His Son. Therefore, if the character does not repent his actions, then there is a consequence and that is what elevates just a story to something that would please our Father. I’m just saying…
I appreciate your sensitivities to this subject and your heart for God, Gina. Thank you so much for commenting!
For me, it’s not so much the expletives as the sexual scenes (and I don’t mean anything close to graphic – I don’t write like that) that poses the greatest difficulty. Why would I feel the need to include anything? Because of two reasons: 1. If Christians don’t write about a frolicking, joyful physical relationship between a man and wife -who will?! Believe it or not there are lots of people out there who do not think it exists past the first year. 2. I want to instruct young women on the realities of life: how a husband is affected by stress, how a young man isn’t thinking about commitment, how a wife discovers that through making time for her husband physically she finds renewal, and on and on. When I was told that Christian publishers wouldn’t touch a book with any kind of love scene – and again, my work is MUCH less than what the majority of Christians are watching on TV – I thought that was just wrong. It’s a fine line to walk, I don’ t want to be sensual, I want to be salt and light. But I am becoming more and more convinced God wants me to not “take the easy way out” by writing only to please the rules no matter the subject. To be honest, when I read through Songs and other parts of the OT I think God is much more explicit than I am. 🙂 I’ll try to shut up now.
Hi, Gina,
Betrayal of a faithful and God-fearing spouse is terrible thing, and it is good that some write about that. That doesn’t mean we all should. There are a billion other wrongs out there equally worth exposing via the written arts. Everyone has their own focus, their own giftedness. We each have our own path, our own roles, our own strengths and unique focus. This is a good thing.
This has the sound of wisdom, but upon closer examination, I don’t think it’s actually true.
Let’s take children. When my wife delivered a child, it is true that the child was something she helped create, but when the child was born, is was no longer a part of her. It was a new creature with its own existance and responsibililty toward God and so forth. She had responsibilities with regard to the child, but it was no longer part of her.
It is the same with our characters. When we create them, they exist apart from the creator.
Furthermore, it is possible to handle something foul-smelling without *becoming* something foul-smelling. Writing about sin is not the same as performing the sin or becoming the sin (otherwise Jesus would have sinned when he related stories of sinners via his parables). Jesus spoke about The Wicked Husbandmen. They were his creation. That doesn’t mean Jesus became sinful as a result.
If you’re saying we must be careful when we execute the art we produce, I agree. If you say we can’t create certain art because we become personally responsble for the sinfulness of our characters, I don’t agree.
Fiction is a story that can shed light on reality. Some people say fiction is a lie. That’s preposterous. Fiction is fiction, the artful mechanism of shedding light on truth using imaginary things or events. Saying that we experience real sin (or maintain real responsibility for describing sinful activity) is the difference between being burned by fire and describing the effects of fire: one is very real, and the other is mere narrative describing the event.
When Doug TenNapel wrote Black Cherry, the character of Eddie the swearing, boozing, whoring mob thug wasn’t a part of the author, he was a character penned by the author for the purpose of reaching his target audience with a gritty noir redemption story. The separation between author and character is an important distinction.
Johne, exactly! The point is that without the author’s thought process, the character would not be developed. My evil character would differ from your evil character because I am uniquely different that you. My experiences, my personality, and the evil that I have been exposed to is different than yours. IMO, this is why some fictional characters remain two-dimensional and others come “alive” in a seeming three-dimensional world.
But, I disagree that characters can be compared to children. From the moment a baby is born, his life experiences are separate from the parents, his persona is different because he has a soul. We give characters their souls, but they come specifically from us and our life lessons. They cannot exist apart from the creator/author because with out us, they have no life at all, they cannot move forward, they cannot interact with other characters in situations.
I never said we will be judged for the character’s sinfulness. We will, however, be judged on how we reflect the glory of God to our circle of influence. This is the higher standard that I mentioned.
It is good to create real life situations and show how Jesus can take the worst sinner and make her clean. (However, it is like I tell my Sunday School class, don’t get your theology from TV or from novels, get it from the Bible.) I was pointing out that we are responsible for the consequences because it is through our inventiveness that each character faces the consequence of his sin, or experiences Grace in all its glory.
Johne, you make some terrific points here! Like you, I draw a distinction between the author and his/her characters (which I think Ron Howard and Patrick Goldstein do in the above post). In fact, I’d suggest the sign of a great character is that they are truly autonomous from their creator. This seems to bare a strange parallel between God and Man. Is God culpable for creating a being who can choose to sin? Most would say no. So what implication does that have upon the author / creator and his/her characters? Johne, thanks so much for your thoughts. I really appreciate your involvement here!
I was going to say what Johne already said. I think I know what you’re getting at, Gina, in saying that there is a part of us in each character. And in some subtle sense, there is probably an element of truth to that. We write what we know, what we view from our ego-centric view point.
But I had a flash fiction that appeared in Everyday Fiction, which the main character was a woman who was deceitful and killed to protect her ship and control. And she did so in what would be considered a casual, even a bit of enjoyment, at taking the guy down.
Now, this character may have a twinge of me in there somewhere. I don’t know. But I know I could never do the things she did. I could never have the mindset she had. I could never approve of what she did. There is no way that I am equivalent with that character.
Was the story Christian? Not if you consider the story something for the CBA audience. Religion never enters the picture. The venue has a lot of secular readers. But I think the story depicts very clearly how sin pulls us into its web through pride, and then takes us out. That’s the whole point of the story. But the character who represents one who takes advantage of that pride is not a “good, Christian character.” I never had her cuss. She aludes to sexual things, but that’s about it. But her violence is something none of us would condone.
By writing that, I don’t become that character, and I’m nothing like her, nor do I by writing her, promote or suggest I agree with such violence.
I think it is wrong to conflate the values of a character as being the values of the author. I’m going to write characters all over the values plane, many of them opposite what I believe and do. Readers would be very wrong to think I held the same values as my characters.
But, I do hope that whatever values my characters have, that I show in one way or another the consequences of living that type of life. Sin always has consequences, and showing that is what helps someone in that kind of sin realize there’s a point B they need to get to.
Okay, since I mentioned it, here’s the story I referenced:
http://www.everydayfiction.com/the-captains-chair-by-r-l-copple/
Ah… but R.L., she was protecting herself. You did insert your own values. Writing the story from her POV, the reader vindicates her. If you had written from the alien’s POV, then she would still have been vindicated and the alien would have gotten just dessert. Your values imposed upon your characters that have their own flaws and sins.
Am I ultimately responsible for the things my characters say? Sure, why not? I not only made them up…but I decided how I would portray, which means I decided which words to put in their mouths (and which ones to leave out).
But do the things these characters say–namely their bad behavior–somehow impugn me, the writer, as a person? Does my character (the one I created) actually equal my character (the essential qualities that make me me?) I don’t think so.
Fiction thrives on conflict. In some way, all conflict is the result of the Fall.
Thus, no conflict (sin)/no story.
What irks me is that I can write about a character who cheats on his taxes, kicks his dog, mistreats children, and maybe kills a few people along the way…yet HE’S still the bad guy. But if he sleeps with a prostitute, or maybe utters a naughty word as he pulls the trigger, then some how I’M the foul-mouthed pervert.
It just seems like writers are only held accountable for whatever pet sins offend particular readers, which should eventually make equal-opportunity offenders of us all!
Since we’re here, I’d like to challenge this point, Mike, and see where the discussion goes.
When a potter crafts a pot, is he responsible for the pot? What does that even mean? A pot is a pot – there’s no responsibility involved. Once it is created, it reflects something of the one who made it, but beyond that, it’s a pot. It has no volition of its own. The person who uses it is responsible for what they do with it, but that’s on the person, not on the pot. I think it’s fair to say that readers are responsible for what they do with thoughts they think while reading about our characters, but that responsibility lies with the reader, not with the author.
I wonder if it isn’t a little different between acting and writing. When Denzel played rogue detective Alonzo Harris, he lent his face and voice to the role. You could see this guy who looks like Denzel Washington doing these questionable (and ultimately illegal and immoral) things in the telling of the story Training Day. For him, it was important that Alonzo depict the sowing of what he reaped. That was an honest decision. But is it not also honest to portray the reality that many such people don’t reap what they sow in this life?
In this sense, the author is a step removed from their characters. They crafted them to tell a story, but without further context, we usually don’t know what the author’s perspective is on an issue if they are being true to a character’s essence. In that sense, the character is responsible *in the story* for what they do or don’t do, not the author. The author is responsible for crafting a story. What happens in the story is dictated by the framework of the story. As with the pot, I’m not sure I agree that ‘responsibility’ is the correct word to apply to the result.
Johne, I have truly enjoyed this conversation. It has made me dig into my own thought processes. I have a question, do characters really have free will?
Actually more people do reap what they sow than not. It’s a Biblical principle. It’s what makes satisfying endings, too.
Here’s another question, if your story were to win some bodacious prize and national acclaim, would you then be responsible for your characters? Or would you give back the prize money and say, “Oh, I can’t take this because the characters wrote this story themselves.”
Lots of authors are fond of saying that their characters go off in directions never intended by the creator, but in the end it really is like “Stranger Than Fiction” and the decision is up to the author not the character.
Thanks, Gina! I, too, am enjoying this conversation. I, too, am digging into what I think about all this.
Not in the traditional sense. But this gets back to what the others up-thread were talking about with regard to being honest about representing the words that would come out of a character’s mouth. I know people who get all mystical about their characters. I, too, have been surprised by a sudden twist in my story that I hadn’t seen coming, but the creative process is marvelous as it is without worshiping our creations. Instead, I worship the one true Creator and revel in my inventions that take place in His creation.
I would suggest that the Biblical principle is that everybody will reap what they sow, however, there is no guarantee that they will reap what they sow /in this life./ We are specifically told to give up waiting for the reaping because God will judge on His schedule, not ours. We know that ultimately, everybody will reap what we sow at the Great White Throne. Whether people reap what they sow while living is not our concern. We have been given specific marching orders: we are to love God and our neighbor as ourselves, and we are to make disciples. That’s our primary concern until Jesus comes.
What’s the difference between credit and responsibility? Credit is defined as “commendation or honor given for an action.” There are two aspects of responsibility involved with written storytelling; the art and craft of telling the story, and the moral culpability of the characters /in/ the story.
The first definition of responsibility is “answerable or accountable, as for something within one’s power, control, or management.” As Mike Snyder wrote up-thread, we are each of us responsible for crafting our stories. If I have an agreement to produce a story and present it by a certain date, I am responsible for making that deadline and for crafting the story to certain specifications agreed to beforehand.
The second definition is the one we’re debating here, culpability for the moral decisions or words or actions of characters in the story, “having a capacity for moral decisions and therefore accountable.” This is the definition I believe we as authors are a step removed from.
Therefore, we are of course eligible for credit for producing our stories to the highest standards we can. We did something. We crafted something that wasn’t there before. As the artisan, we of course are due credit for the work that was created. However, if a character in the work is depicted as saying or doing something reprehensible as part of the story, the author is not responsible for that action because the action occurs on the level of the story. At the artist’s level, a work was created. On the character’s level, a story is told.
Let’s say a character does something most people would agree is sinful and wrong and drowned a puppy. Did the author kill an animal? Or did the author make an artistic statement about the effect of sin and the unfairness of life in a sinful world?
Gina, this probably won’t answer your question, but I’ve thought a lot about it during this conversation. When I officially received news that I was offered a two-book contract, I went into my garage and wept. (Don’t ask me why the garage.) But the person I was happiest for — and this will sound totally sappy — was the protagonist of my novel, Ruby Case. Ruby finally got to tell her story!
If, as Stephen King suggests, stories are “relics,” part of an “undiscovered world,” then characters somehow exist “in” yet “apart” from us. Yes, in one sense, I “created” Ruby. But in another sense, I “unearthed” her, trait by trait. She became, to me, a totally separate person. So much so, I could say, “Ruby wouldn’t do this” or “Ruby wouldn’t say that.” Did she exist apart from me? Well, yes and no. She would never have been “discovered” by anyone else, because she was in me. But once I “unearthed” her, she grew more and more independent.
Sounds weird, huh? All I could say is that the single greatest joy of this time, for me, is being able to introduce my readers to sweet, simple, and utterly faithful, Ruby Case.
One of the greatest mysteries to me is how an author, who is creating a character out of whole cloth, can tread the line between this choice and that choice and instinctively know which of the two is the more ‘honest.’
No! It doesn’t sound sappy or weird. How can an author create a character that seems alive and real if that character is not alive and real to the author? I can remember fretting over what to do about Tara in a shambles and how I could help Scarlett. Then I thought, “How stupid, she’s a character in a book!” But, for a moment she was as real to me as a friend.
Thanks Gina. No, I haven’t lived through unfaithful unless one considers the attention a spouse gives his work or hobby a type of unfaithfulness. But, I have heard the cries of many who have lived through sexual unfaithfulness, and my heart hears and weeps. And it did take years to allow the festering of what I wish to say form the boil that needs lancing.
The thread here makes me wonder if my book is fiction. Maybe it’s creative non-fiction, or memoir, with enough fictionally altered facts to hopefully disguise the amalgamation of the new characters.
A nurse catches glimpses of people’s lives, so I haven’t a clue if the stoke man asked God for forgiveness, but I have no doubt he apologizes to his wife continuously. I appreciate your feedback and now I’m wondering if I need an earthly attorney in addition to the heavenly one?
Michael, loved your input.
Cile, I hear you! No one has to suffer child abuse to understand how horrendous it is. Betrayal is betrayal no matter if it comes from a friend or from one’s spouse. I pray that you will also deeply explore the forgiveness part of this. That is where the soul stretches and grows and reflects God’s glory. It is harder to do than suffering the betrayal! It took 4 years for me to quit grinding my teeth and to get over being angry. It took 10 years for me to completely forgive. (Maybe I’m a slow learner!)
Johne, I do understand what you are saying.
God would not hold the author accountable for the actions of a character, literally because the character is two dimensional. I agree with that.
In India and Scotland (among other places) there is a thing called culpable homicide. It is different from murder and similar to our definition of manslaughter: No intent for evil purpose, or as my daughter used to say, “On accident”. So the question remains, if the author’s own fictional work, born from his imagination, experience and design causes someone else to commit some sin described in that work, is the author responsible? Jesus did say, “He who causes the least of these to stumble, it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and be tossed into the sea.” Is the publishing company culpable for publishing the work? Paul also taught the Romans that the stronger Christian should act in such a way not to cause the weaker Christian to stumble.
Isn’t our ultimate goal to bring God glory, and our ultimate responsibility to spread the Gospel, being the salt of the earth and a light to the world? To answer an earlier discussion question presented by Mike, I believe that what defines Christian Fiction is if it brings God glory then it has served the ultimate purpose.
I’ve been waiting for this side-topic to crop up (and admit right away I’m not entirely sure how all this plays out).
‘Did he fall or was he pushed?’ I’m unclear on the ’causes someone to sin’ thing. My thinking is that nobody can cause somebody else to sin, we each are responsible for our own decisions. We each are responsible to resist temptation. We each are responsible for our own sins. I can’t say ‘my wife made me’ do this-or-that. I am responsible for my own behavior, not hers, and same for her.
However, there is something to be said for the motivation of the author when creating the work. This is where I think responsibility on the part of the author factors in: intent.
Let’s take the obvious recent example – Philip Pullman wrote the His Dark Materials trilogy, an obvious and deliberate attack on God that reads more like propaganda than mere story. Pullman isn’t just spinning a tale, he aims to persuade. In this case, I wonder if Pullman isn’t responsible for his intentions as he wrote. I think that would satisfy both theories; that authors are not responsible for the words / actions of their two dimensional characters, but /are/ responsible for their intentions for the work, especially as that intention seeps into the work.
If JRR Tolkien resisted the claim that his LOTR was allegory, we still nod our heads from the vantage of time and suggest that despite his claim, we still see what looks like the result of an overflowing cup of belief and faith. In that, his intention perhaps was to serve God while telling his stories, and as such, his worldview perhaps unconsciously colored the crafting of his story despite a conscious decision to avoid allegory.
I believe you are correct about the author’s intentions thing.
As to the stumbling thing, I agree that each of us is responsible for his own sin. However, Jesus says quite a lot about our responsibility in leading others (Luke 17). Offenses will come, just like troubles are common to man. That still does not release us from the guilt of causing someone weaker to stumble by what we say or do. Matthew Henry comments
And Jesus says quite plainly “…woe to him by whom (offenses) come.” I read this as something that we authors should take extremely seriously.
When we submit to the LORD our talent and willingly allow Him free reign as to the content, development, climax and outcome then we ultimately do have a story that brings God glory. I believe this is an act of obedience, using our gift to further the Kingdom. This is that higher standard I was speaking of earlier. Fiction is not for teaching theology, but is for exhibiting how much more abundant life is while under Jesus’ wings, and we are given 100,000 words to get the protagonist from sin and disgrace to Grace.
Characters are fictionalized, and in real life you are going to get people not being political correct, people who are going to bigoted. Therefore, when writing novels, to move away from that reality is painting a scene not depicting what is really going on. I find it too, when writing my characters and some particular characters are unsavoury and they are going to swear. What do we do? Put the swear words in? or just change it to words like fcuk, w.t.fuq? I’m not wanting to offend my Christian readers, but my readers are based at the secular market. Any suggestions or opinions on that one?
Vonny, please take this as my opinion only, but as a reader of more than a thousand novels (both secular and Christian), it makes me angry that the author flowers up the curse word or gets way more graphic than is needed. It usually takes me by surprise and I fill in the blanks and say the word in my mind. I worked really hard to shed the filth from my speech. Don’t want to go there again. Besides, when the author gets really wordy spelling out things that my imagination can paint for itself, I usually skip whole paragraphs or many pages. I expect the graphicness from the secular author, but am now starting to expect it from one or two Christian authors.