I do not go for fluff. If I went for fluff, I wouldn’t be into Greek mythology, Game of Thrones, Mistborn, Tyrants and Kings, or most my other fandoms. I find it hard to get into a story without difficult situations and high stakes and, lucky for me, that stuff has become popular. Quite a few authors have even begun relying on break-ups and character deaths to drive their plots instead of more traditional methods—like actual character development.
I see a lot of posts floating around the author blogs and social media about laughing over character deaths and making readers cry. Seriously? Is that what storytelling is supposed to be about? Because you wouldn’t know different by looking at the chatter that’s been popular lately. Stephen King says to “kill your darlings,” but many have taken that to mean “write lots of random red shirts to be killed off willy-nilly when you don’t want to come up with an actual storyline.”
As a reader, little else drives me as crazy as when I feel the author did something on purpose solely to incite reader reaction. For me, it usually has a backwards effect because I see it coming and I just turn into a smoking mountain of volcanic rage.
As a writer, I have become very careful about making sure my stories’ deaths and tragedies are not in vain. Taking out extra characters, combining characters, and redistributing roles is a good way to cut down on excessive tragedy, not to mention create more succinct stories overall.
This may be a groundbreaking thought, but having characters killed, raped, maimed, or anything else for shock value is not good writing, it is lazy writing. If a story is well written, you don’t need arbitrary violence to illicit reader emotion. Does this mean there shouldn’t be surprises? Of course not. It simply means that bad things within a story should have reasons beyond audience provocation.
However, in this case, like so many others in literature, it is all perspective. Summarily, if there is a definitive purpose to the unfortunate event, leading to plot advancement and/or realistic character development (preferably both), it is serving a veritable purpose and is actually good. (Unless you’re having some sympathetic innocent raped and/or murdered to advance the character arch of someone else. Don’t ever do this. Just don’t.)
And I’ve never actually laughed about killing characters when it came down to it, no matter how much I hated them. Are there actually writers that do this?
I read a story where the author made you fall so in love with one of his characters…only to burn that character alive at the end of the story! Long drawn out death. Never forgave that author! I was so involved with the plot, it might have been a real person in my heart, not an imaginary one. That type of violence does not leave you and I certainly wasn’t “entertained” by it. Grrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!
LikeLike
I know! Absolutely shameless.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Such a great post! I’ve read many books where a beloved character was killed off. Luckily, most of their deaths did lead to something important in the story. I didn’t have to like it, just understand it. Sadly, a couple of them went the other way. Useless death. If it weren’t for the books being on my kindle, my precious!, I would have thrown the book. LOL
LikeLike
Yes, I too have been forced to refrain from hurling my Kindle, LOL. Like you, I have to understand, but that DOES NOT mean I necessarily LIKE it.
LikeLike
This post. THIS POST. Thank you!
LikeLike
*primadonna voice* Thank you. Thank you. You’re too kind. Thank you.
LikeLike
It depends on the story. For example, I have 9 novels in the works regarding the fall of nine worlds, all a separate form of tragedy. It is my hopes that in each one you do not see it coming in the manner you might expect, and especially not without a purpose to the story line. I agree that some are without character development and pointless. Game of Thrones was a waste of time for me. For me there has to be an equalizing force between both good and evil. Gandalf said it best, “It does not end here, death is but a path we must all take.” And with that came the challenge to the 16 stories that will follow my trilogy.
LikeLike
Well, if you’re writing about the apocalypse (nine of them, no less), OF COURSE people will die, it’s expected. But as you say, they have to serve a purpose. That’s just the way this craft is supposed to work.
And, I can’t speak for the television series, but I have found the GoT books I’ve read so far to be a remarkably well-crafted exposition of how “good” people can turn bad and even “bad” people can still love incredibly deeply.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on By the Mighty Mumford and commented:
WELL, IT IS HOW WIMPS DEVELOP CHARACTER! 🙂
LikeLike
Fantastic post. You hit a bunch of good points. Are the authors lazy or not creatively able to do better?
sherry @ fundinmental
LikeLike
Sometimes I think they’re just trying to be edgy. Kind of like elementary school kids using cuss words.
LikeLike
100% agreed! When it comes down to what you’ve described above, it’s ultimately just the writer pandering to the audience. If it doesn’t advance the plot, don’t put it in the book. Including shock value deaths! Ugh.
LikeLike
Exactly! Shock value =/ story value.
LikeLike
I don’ know if I share all your feelings, but I do agree with every book tragedy must push the story forward and be an integral part of the plot. I have stopped ready for less.
Anna from elements of emaginette
LikeLike
So long as it advances the plot in a believable fashion, okay. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person