We've kind of gotten into this on another thread and I've had this discussion with a couple of other people lately, so I thought I'd get you guys' thoughts on the subject. The question is this: How do you portray sin for what it is without going over board?

I think we'd all agree that sin should never be portrayed as something positive or glamorous. However, most of us also deal with evil and evil people in our stories.

Many would argue that we must be true to our characters. Some authors *coughteddekkercough* feel that it is necessary and even beneficial to portray the full horrors of evils in all its ugly, gruesome, squirm-inducing glory. These authors use violence and sometimes even foul language to make a point. They feel that to do otherwise would be sugarcoat a sin cursed world. They think that watering down wickedness would be a disservice to their readers and an inaccurate portrayal of reality.

But then we have the other side. Other people feel that to show sin in such detail is to violate their reader's conscience. They argue that delving into the mind of evil is a very dangerous thing. Even C.S. Lewis, after writing the Screwtape Letters, said that he had a hard time pulling out of a demonic mindset. He later swore never to write another book like that again (though he ended up breaking this promise.) Those of this view also point to the fact that Paul told us in Romans to be knowledgeable in the things that are good and innocent in the things that are evil.

I'm curious what you guys' take on all this is. Which view do you all hold and why?

It hurts me a bit to make my characters be mean (and I don't mean really really mean, I just mean stupid arguments and stuff....I'm a softie), because they're quite real to me most of the time.
Sometimes I have to create a character with the specific purpose of being a bad guy, and then I also have to force myself to make him bad enough to be realistic. LOL (Same method I use when killing off characters - because I don't want my characters to die, I have to create specific characters for the purpose of killing them off because then I am not emotionally attached to them. It's a little strange....)

As to what I read/watch:

This is why I don't like buying books before I can read them at the library. I prefer things to be implied or offscreen. Sometimes you can make your bad guy seem worse by implying things - worse than actually showing what he does.

For example, in the original Star Wars trilogy (the ones from the 70's and 80's), you don't see most of the oppression that apparently the Empire participates in. You don't see the active violence of the stormtroopers actually killing anyone 'cause they're lousy shots onscreen, but deadly offscreen. You don't even see more than about three seconds of the two torture scenes in the trilogy (and some films would, you know...). You don't need to. Everything is implied because of the way characters act and react.
Another example from the same films is Darth Vader - he doesn't do a ton of active violence either. The things that make us concerned about him whenever he walks on the screen are (1) visuals (his black metallic costume) (2) SFX (his breathing) (3) the respect other characters give him. (And during episode 5, also because he keeps killing off his officers in an unconventional manner.)

Another example: in Narnia (LWW) we don't see the capture of Tumnus and subsequent apparent torture - we only see the aftermath (statues and a banged up face). In the battle sequences, there is no blood, but to get across the horror of war, heroic characters are wounded or fall in battle (gryphons, Orieus, Edmund) to the shock of Peter.

That's all in the violence direction - I know there are ways to imply the other 'big' stuff but I don't write/watch things that need to! (Fantasy doesn't usually deal with anything but violence.)

Oh, and on foul language - I really hate it when Christian writers use it. I see other ways of making my bad guys seem bad (see Darth Vader, above ^^), and I wouldn't write anything that I wouldn't want my siblings to read...
(...I wish I had my own copy of the Space Trilogy so I could take a black marker to the language and enjoy the sci-fi allegory much more...)

ON THE OTHER HAND--

I have heard it said that some people need a good kick in the pants to wake them up, and a book or film that tells it exactly as it is can do that.

Just don't ask me to read or write said book....

I think first you need to ask yourself if you're trying to get as close as you can to evil without being actually offensive. If you're not, and you're simply trying to write an authentic book...things become trickier.

(All the below are just my opinions. If your conscience is telling you not to do something follow it. )

Foul Language

This is a crutch. As the link Jay posted so aptly states, there are so many other ways to SHOW that your character is a depraved, perverted creep. And in my opinion you can get a lot more reaction that way, than loading his language with bombs.

I've read "Christian" fiction with such language (NOT Ted Dekker btw. ) and it doesn't help with the character. It just makes me get tired of reading it.

There are ways to get around this. ALWAYS.

Violence

Here is where...I admit that I kind of struggle. Violence doesn't bother me. Not in movies, or books or really much of anything. Everyone has different threshholds for what grosses them out, and how much action is too intense etc...

I think tell what needs to be told, and what is going to make a point about the characters involved. Leave it at that. Don't go out of your ways to horrify readers (tempting though it may be.)

And write for the age group you are targeting. If you're writing a kiddie paperback don't go into graphic detail on how someone was cut up in battle. In an adult book if that is somehow important...maybe a little more detail can be allowed when necessary.

Gratuitous violence is just plain tacky. Anyone with a half-sick mind can come up with gore. Being able to sadden or chill your readers just by character development and suggestion? That is the mark of an artist.

Love Scenes

Is there really ever a time when we need to be told exactly what two characters are doing in private? I think not. If anything explicit love scenes are even more tasteless than gratuitous violence.

You as a writer are responsible for the purity of your readers when they take in your material. Treat that responsibility with care. Sometimes things can't be avoided but there's a way to treat sensitive subjects. ("In Gone with the Wind" there's a scene where we know what's going to happen, but the movie cuts out and doesn't go into tawdry detail.)

As far as romance allows...again, don't cause your audience to lust after a fictional character. Keep things pure, and if you happen to have an unhealthy, obsessive relationship in your book...portray it as such and show consequences.



That's my very long-winded two cents.

For foul language, just say something like, "He swore under his breath," or "He let out a horrible stream of profanity,"

For violence, well there is almost certainly going to be some, but you don't have to go into all the gory details of it. J. R. R. Tolkien does a good job of this in LotR, even with his many battle scenes.

This made me laugh.

I'm a “don't violate their conscience” type of person, however, I don't hold to the extent that Lewis did. I don't see anything wrong with the Screwtape Letters because of the audience that was being targeted. If you're writing for children then you obviously need to tone some stuff down, violation of their conscience happens very early. However, if you are writing for the young adult arena (my guess is you are) then violation of conscience isn't reached until a much later point.

I think language isn’t necessary, even in the real world. I know a lot of guys who swear profusely and I have never once found a reason why they needed to. And just as a side note, if a woman is in your presence and you say ‘excuse the language miss’ it only makes it worse. Now we don’t just have filth pouring out of our mouths, but we are conscious of this fact, know it could be offensive to the present audience, and do it anyways. I know it is used in the world, but I don’t see a reason to further pollute your audience’s mind with inappropriate adjectives and adverbs. I’m with Griffin, say ‘he swore under his breath’ or something of that nature. No violation of conscience, but we get the picture. I use that in my own stories.

Violence is a part of life; I don’t think you should avoid it if it will help you in your story. However, we don’t need to go into great detail about how someone was decapitated.

And although I believe romance is perfectly acceptable and godly, I also think it should be chaste and pure. Make your love self-sacrificing and honorable.

Hope that was helpful.

I think you summed it up nicely.

Thanks Jonathan.

I am in the "don't violate their conscience" group as well. I personally am hit harder by not 'seeing' what happens than reading it.

I don't put bad language in my books either. For one thing, they tend to stick in my head. For a second, I don't really know any, even if I wanted to use them.

It really does depend on whom you are writing for (I remember being 7 and thinking that the phrase "a dirty word" was bad!). There is always too much you can put in books. I think the keys are focusing on the Lord, and balance. I know in my book there is violence, but I try to make it worse by not showing it. And I am trying to write it to spread a message God has laid on my heart, so I am looking to Him to show it through me, and write it according to how I believe He wants it written.

Sorry for my run on sermon.

That's a good thing Shawn! I applauded your parents for keeping you out of those situations. Unfortunately, at my age you have to deal with the world more.

I think Shawn's statement is a good example of why not to use explicit language. Do we want to be responsible for introducing those words to people? I don't! And may I point out that Shawn isn't a child, so she's not under the 'it doesn't take much to violate their conscience' category.

I have great parents.

Matthew 18:6, Mark 9:42, and Luke 17:2 are all different wordings of the same basic principle: If you cause someone to stumble, uh-oh for you! As writers, we have a great honor bestowed on us: we can influence the mind and emotions of the reader, whether for good or evil. If we do not use this wisely, we will be rebuked and have the knowledge of destroying someone's innocence. It is both a terrifying and great responsibility God has given to us.

Very nice Shawn.

*bends in a bungled bow* Why thank you.

I seem to have a reputation for being able to talk to adults. My mom says it's partly the way they raised me.

I was always that way myself. My parents raised me to be able to interact with very young children, or carry on an intelligible conversation with the grey haired. That’s something I like about the Forum. There really is no age discrimination. We all just talk with one another about our views. We are known for our minds and thoughts, not our age or looks.

Yeah, I know what you mean, sometimes I'll be reading a post, look up, and be surprised at the person's age.


That's a great point, we don't want children exposed to something their parents wouldn't want them to be just by picking up a book at the bookstore.

So, if there were a character in a book, and they eventually changed later in the book, but did swear and such at first, how should one handle that? I know it'd be fairly easy to not show some of the things the character did, but what about swearing in a conversation? Where "he swore under his breath" might not work so well?

I can't really think of a situation where this would be necessary, but I've still been wondering.

I think your scenario is very unlikely Arias, but should it come up I would just find some other way to handle the situation. I don't have anything against Dekker for using language in his book, I understand his point of portraying a sinner, but I also wouldn't want to be held responsible for introducing an inappropriate word to Shawn.

I know what you mean... don't think I'd like it too well to know someone learned something from me that they shouldn't have.

I agree.

Well, since this topic has seemed to become more focused on bad language and not so much on the other aspects that were previously discussed, I will throw in my two and a half cents.

One of the best ways to getting around bad language in dialogue can be to use bad words from your own languages. That way it's not one that the reader will know or be faced with in the world. Examplia gratia:

(From Artemis Fowl books...very good by the way)

Commander Root swore, "D'arvit!"

It conveys that he's upset...and it's not a real word so no problems with the reader. It's what I plan on doing in my writing if I ever need a bad word in dialogue. And throughout the course of the book the reader becomes familiar with the word and recognizes it so that you don't have to write 'he swore' every time.

eruheran

Didn't think about that one Eruheran. Good two and a half cents.

Well, let me offer two examples:

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

and

The Pianist

Most people don't really understand how evil Nazi Germany was until they've seen those movies and had the issue forced on them point blank.

I think it's striped pajamas, but I could be wrong. (I just noticed how weird the word pajamas is...)

Well, I thought I wrote striped, but it might have been edited. Thanks for watching out for things like that.

You're welcome.

Oh, yeah, I edited before reading the next post. hehe

I, too, am in the "don't violate their conscience" camp. I'm also in the "don't violate my conscience camp" - as the writer, I dwell on the content of my books, labouring over every detail, for much longer than the reader will. Should I be thinking about this wickedness in the detail I am attempting to portray? If not, I've gone too far - don't write it.

Everyone's bounds are different. You have to decide between yourself and the Lord (and your parents) what your limits are. You should also consider your audience and your end goal. I believe there is a difference between fiction and nonfiction. Are you writing a history text for mature adults with the goal of fully exposing the evils of the Nazi concentration camps? Go for it; your audience is expecting a level of intensity. On the other hand, are you writing an adventure novel that a teen will pick up and read for fun? You probably don't want to fill their head with vile language and explicit love scenes, especially since you're packaging it with your cast of lovable characters, characters your reader might get attached to...

I don't think we, as writers, are sugarcoating reality when we assume a level of decency in our books. I don't believe books need to be - or should be - exactly like real life. They are fiction for a reason. They serve a different purpose. By removing foul language from your book, you're not denying that it happens in real life. You're simply making a statement that you don't think foul language should be dwelt upon.

I agree that a lot of evil is better implied. I am a supporter of using phrases like "he swore" and not typing out any of the actual words, etc. I don't think that weakens the effect of the narrative. In fact, for me as a reader, it strengthens it. I'll distance myself from a book - if I don't close it altogether - if there's unnecessary description.

This is very true. The amount of time that we're going to pour into each scene ensures that we keep ourselves pure, not just our readers. It's one of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with writing (or even reading/watching) horror stories. I just don't want to go there.


That last sentence is really thought-provoking for me...I've never thought of it that way. Thanks for your great comments Philli. (I love this forum....not only do we write but we discuss actually meaningful things...thank you all!)

eruheran

My own personal opinion is that it is very hard to draw lines on what you ‘should’ and ‘should not’ put in a story. Much of this is dependent on the maturity of the author, the intended audience,the setting, characters, and storyline. Most importantly, what God says.

HOWEVER, it is very important that to try your darndest not to glorify sin in anyway. Woe to he from who temptation comes. The more horrid the sin you put in your book, the more dire the consequence should be. If a character screws up in a catastrophic way, it had better ruin his life for a good part of the plot. If not all.

Also, putting in sin for the sake of making it 'realistic' isn't necessary. Yes, characters will have flaws and will sin. But that doesn't mean excessive swearing, violence, and other immoral behaviors is called for.

A good start might be to look at the Bible for how it deals with sinful behaviors.

- Terra

They are amazing films, however not for the faint hearted! I have watched 'The Pianist' and although I couldn't watch it and enjoy it and fast forwarded a lot of it, it was a moving film. I switched 'The boy in the Striped Pajamas' off as I found it too upsetting.

If it's a true story like Nazi's etc I find it harder to watch than if it's fiction, I think it's because it really happened to someone, whereas if it's just a story you realise it's all made up.

Ok, here's my view on the subject.
For profanity, I would never actually type out the words, but put things like, "he swore silently". Usually, I never put "he shouted profanity" because I don't like imagining someone shouting cuss words. It just seems crude and pointless. I do not let my characters swear pointlessly, because it does little or nothing to help the story along or make a point. If they get stabbed in the shoulder, I will allow them to swear silently. Sometimes, like when you hit your finger with a hammer accidentally, you need a word just a bit stronger than "oh, darn". That, I understand. If you are one of those people who doesn't mind typing it out, that's ok, but you don't need to have them swear like, every two lines. Just once or twice is enough to make the point.

As for violence, I don't think it's bad, as long as you don't go into lengthy descriptions, like, oh, say, how the blood spatters looked, or how the brains leaked out of the skull (EWWW!). something simple like commenting on how much blood was coming out, like, "the wound was deep, and he lost a lot of blood" or "despite the depth of the cut, he lost little blood." That is fine by all means. Non-gore related violence like burning down an occupied house is ok, supposing you don't go into great detail about how their futile screams filled the air, and you could almost hear the life being sucked out of them, as oxygen was spent by the licking flames and fire scorched their flesh. If you went into ANY further detail than that, you have probably gone too far. Even that might be a bit much.

As for more, er, private scenes, skip it. Leave it out.

Since the writer dwells on the words much more than any reader ever would, it would be good if you didn't have to dwell on the sin. I'm sure people would get the general idea.

Thanks for sharing, Childoffaith. Sounds like you fit in quite well with the rest of the thoughts that have been shared

With profanity, repeating it is practically the same as participating. The point of it is offend the hearers, which is wrong. Also, describing what should not be seen is, of course, wrong as well.

That aside, portraying sin is not wrong at all.

But if you want me to read a book then you need to provide a right point of view on the sin. Portraying it is not encouraging it, but there is no use in seeing it unless you also portray the Christian view of the sin, somehow. It has usually been done best by an exemplary character. You could blaze a trail I suppose by trying to do it completely from a narrator.

As to violence and hard language, which is not the same as foul language, you want to make sure you are giving it to the right reading level. And of course you must give the Christian perspective of these things as well. Which includes never treating them lightly, or as something funny.

Good thoughts, Patrick.

Thank you Jonathan.