~~ maybe we all miss the screaming :>
Dec. 2nd, 2003 02:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaLasair just linked to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
isiscolo's post saying she's reading a Snape/Hermione & enjoying it. Well, this doesn't even come close to describing -my- pain, man. I had a Harry/Snape dream. I was Harry, and then I became a girl because I couldn't really -do- male/male sex and I panicked. Not to worry, I woke up before I could be actually traumatized, there. I mean. Do I get H/D dreams? Noooo. I have to be like, "omg, dream!Snape is so hotttt". Embarrassing. ('Course, the truth is, I'd go for Snape before Draco, ahahahah, um. Change subject!)
~~
I think what it comes down to is, there are some things I don't -want- to understand. So there are questions I return to, simply because the questions are easier to handle than any answer. I think people in general are well-known for avoiding certain aspects of reality and for not wanting to understand those aspects. Something about me makes me keep poking, though.
Getting off on others' or your own pain, for instance. On some level, I just don't -want- to get it. I can see that pain and pleasure can have a blurry physiological boundary in one's brain at some point-- but this doesn't apply to psychological pain, to another person's pain or tellingly, to fictional pain.
I understand that some people have drastically different mental landscapes and needs than I, and that on some level I will just never understand what it's really like to live a life made of choices that are truly alien to me. I'm not sure whether I should just make peace with that or whether I should keep trying to find that hidden point of contact. I do understand enjoying violence-- tied as that is with anger in my mind. I understand rage and the fear that can fuel it. Anger can be such a release, such a burst of endorphins and a heady feeling that one's invincible. There's a near-universal attraction to that, I think.
What I'm actually thinking about is-- people who want to hurt characters they love in their fiction, and this whole connection of love with the infliction of torture, mental or physical.
Now-- hurt/comfort, I can understand much more easily. There's a balance to it, a sort of nurturing instinct gone amok, perhaps. But I can't help but question the mental health of a writer who honestly takes pleasure in fictional character-torture. I realize that fiction is not reality. I still think that our fantasies reveal as much or more about us than our actions. Call me embarrassingly Freudian if you want, but I think most psychologists would agree that dreams and fantasies are important reflections of one's psyche, even if they'd place different amounts of emphasis on them. So all this talk of "it's just fiction" doesn't quite cut it for me.
Mind you, I'm not condemning-- just trying to work out my own issues here.
I wonder if Shakespeare got off on killing Romeo and Juliet and driving Ophelia insane. If Dickens really really liked keeping Pip from finding happiness. If Hugo had fun making Quasimodo's life hell, and so on. I mean, the idea seems almost laughable to me. When one has created a good character, they take on a life of their own. I would imagine that to hurt them would take something out of the writer-- and in fact, the writer would likely prefer not to, except that the story winds up demanding certain events. I know that it takes a deep toll on -me-, writing painful scenes. I simply -can't- enjoy being on the verge of a spontaneous depression-- but perhaps it's a matter of a widely divergent writing process. Perhaps if you enjoy putting your characters through hell, you don't really identify with them. Or you don't want anyone to be happy, really.
And that last idea, I must admit, somewhat concerns me. It's not that I have some issue with tragedy or character angst-- I write it, I read it, I admire it, etc. The issue is the writer's emotional relationship with the work. It seems like the idea of depicting suffering is to cause a sympathetic reaction in the reader (and most probably in the writer). The ancient Greeks apparently thought that tragedy was edifying-- that the response of pity and tears was the sign of creative success. One cries and learns something-- or laughs and learns something. Seeing human suffering and feeling pleasure-- and moreover, being meant to do so-- seems new in the history of the arts. But perhaps I am naive. I suppose the audiences to war epics were usually supposed to feel entertained rather than sickened-- but then, war was being shown as glorious, whereas mental agony is difficult to make glorious.
Even so, the phenomenon of "I love to see my darlings in pain" seems a whole different kettle of fish.
I just don't know. I think I'd need to actually do research for this. Thoughts?
isiscolo's post saying she's reading a Snape/Hermione & enjoying it. Well, this doesn't even come close to describing -my- pain, man. I had a Harry/Snape dream. I was Harry, and then I became a girl because I couldn't really -do- male/male sex and I panicked. Not to worry, I woke up before I could be actually traumatized, there. I mean. Do I get H/D dreams? Noooo. I have to be like, "omg, dream!Snape is so hotttt". Embarrassing. ('Course, the truth is, I'd go for Snape before Draco, ahahahah, um. Change subject!)~~
I think what it comes down to is, there are some things I don't -want- to understand. So there are questions I return to, simply because the questions are easier to handle than any answer. I think people in general are well-known for avoiding certain aspects of reality and for not wanting to understand those aspects. Something about me makes me keep poking, though.
Getting off on others' or your own pain, for instance. On some level, I just don't -want- to get it. I can see that pain and pleasure can have a blurry physiological boundary in one's brain at some point-- but this doesn't apply to psychological pain, to another person's pain or tellingly, to fictional pain.
I understand that some people have drastically different mental landscapes and needs than I, and that on some level I will just never understand what it's really like to live a life made of choices that are truly alien to me. I'm not sure whether I should just make peace with that or whether I should keep trying to find that hidden point of contact. I do understand enjoying violence-- tied as that is with anger in my mind. I understand rage and the fear that can fuel it. Anger can be such a release, such a burst of endorphins and a heady feeling that one's invincible. There's a near-universal attraction to that, I think.
What I'm actually thinking about is-- people who want to hurt characters they love in their fiction, and this whole connection of love with the infliction of torture, mental or physical.
Now-- hurt/comfort, I can understand much more easily. There's a balance to it, a sort of nurturing instinct gone amok, perhaps. But I can't help but question the mental health of a writer who honestly takes pleasure in fictional character-torture. I realize that fiction is not reality. I still think that our fantasies reveal as much or more about us than our actions. Call me embarrassingly Freudian if you want, but I think most psychologists would agree that dreams and fantasies are important reflections of one's psyche, even if they'd place different amounts of emphasis on them. So all this talk of "it's just fiction" doesn't quite cut it for me.
Mind you, I'm not condemning-- just trying to work out my own issues here.
I wonder if Shakespeare got off on killing Romeo and Juliet and driving Ophelia insane. If Dickens really really liked keeping Pip from finding happiness. If Hugo had fun making Quasimodo's life hell, and so on. I mean, the idea seems almost laughable to me. When one has created a good character, they take on a life of their own. I would imagine that to hurt them would take something out of the writer-- and in fact, the writer would likely prefer not to, except that the story winds up demanding certain events. I know that it takes a deep toll on -me-, writing painful scenes. I simply -can't- enjoy being on the verge of a spontaneous depression-- but perhaps it's a matter of a widely divergent writing process. Perhaps if you enjoy putting your characters through hell, you don't really identify with them. Or you don't want anyone to be happy, really.
And that last idea, I must admit, somewhat concerns me. It's not that I have some issue with tragedy or character angst-- I write it, I read it, I admire it, etc. The issue is the writer's emotional relationship with the work. It seems like the idea of depicting suffering is to cause a sympathetic reaction in the reader (and most probably in the writer). The ancient Greeks apparently thought that tragedy was edifying-- that the response of pity and tears was the sign of creative success. One cries and learns something-- or laughs and learns something. Seeing human suffering and feeling pleasure-- and moreover, being meant to do so-- seems new in the history of the arts. But perhaps I am naive. I suppose the audiences to war epics were usually supposed to feel entertained rather than sickened-- but then, war was being shown as glorious, whereas mental agony is difficult to make glorious.
Even so, the phenomenon of "I love to see my darlings in pain" seems a whole different kettle of fish.
I just don't know. I think I'd need to actually do research for this. Thoughts?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-12-03 08:44 am (UTC)I suppose it depends whether one -wants- to be true to the most likely progression of a character's life-- and well, considering how weird life gets, what's "most likely"? But naturally, I too would much prefer seeing a balance-- allows me to bond with the character properly, yes. Then again, I don't have a pain-and-angst kink ><;
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 01:04 am (UTC)I didn't say darkfics were "more realistic" ... my point was that the negative aspects of human experience are just as valid a topic as anything else. So as for something "missing" or emotional overload ... that's not a moral question, but just a question of good writing.
But again, your definition of "balance" may not jive with another person's.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-04 09:31 am (UTC)Generally, we actually are in complete agreement when it comes to the importance and validity of exploring darker themes and all that. The difference is probably just levels of personal tolerance for amount before it's "too much". Reading actual public fiction, I've never once thought it was "too dark" for me. I read fantasy, a lot of YA fantasy, and historical novels, as well as romance of various sorts. I used to read sci-fi. So I guess I'm not reading the "right things" or something.
I -have- read a lot of dark fantasy, but not mot of the vampire/etc stuff which uses it in a fetishistic way-- I tend to just read depressing/horrific/dystopic things which don't particularly seem suited to anything but making the reader cry. Like you said though, what makes me upset would make another person upset-yet-buzzed-- or something. I'm not sure. I'd be very interested to know actual specific responses to dark works across the board.
For instance, how would you think of like, Dune or 1984 or Sturgeon's stuff (which maybe you're unfamiliar with)? They paint these dismal visions of the future, right. The characters are oppressed and depressed and they do what they can but there's not much hope. Should I differentiate between darkfic which has fetishistic elements or does all darkfic have them? Is there such a thing as fic that'd just make you sad? What sort of thing would a fic that'd make a reader sad-but-buzzed possess? Does it have to be something like over-the-top torture of some sort, something extravagant and immediate rather than some grinding specter of Destiny? I mean, Harry's destiny, for instance-- this tortures him, right. Could someone get off on Harry's pain at the end of OoTP in a fetishistic way while still appreciating the book on any sort of intended?
Someone said Joan D. Vinge's Cat series was a good example. But like... it's not really very depressing. It's an adventure story, and she doesn't really torture Cat so much as set up all these obstacles and losses for him. He doesn't angst that much 'cause he's not too much of an introspective character. He's more powerful than a lot of people he comes in contact with, being psionic. But! I do see how he keeps getting into these scrapes where he has to watch someone he loves be lost or gets disillusioned or whatever. It's a soap-opera, I guess. I dunno, now I'm just rambling and confusing myself :>
And even though I understand what you're saying about the relativism, I cling to the idea that there is some sort of universal balance in storytelling one can achieve-- like in fairy tales, for instance. But I'm just obsessed with mythic arcs to the point of the ridiculous ^^;