The fetishization of violence - CrimeSpace2024-03-28T16:23:36Zhttp://crimespace.ning.com/forum/topics/537324:Topic:52009?commentId=537324%3AComment%3A53250&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noCrime fiction needs the reali…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-07:537324:Comment:532502007-07-07T17:33:50.876ZI. J. Parkerhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
Crime fiction needs the realism. Literary fiction frequently relies on poetic language, the exploration of theme, the delving into the subconscious.
Crime fiction needs the realism. Literary fiction frequently relies on poetic language, the exploration of theme, the delving into the subconscious. Brian,
I hear you about real…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-05:537324:Comment:526612007-07-05T06:58:55.649ZDennis Venterhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/DVenter
Brian,<br />
<br />
I hear you about real versus realistic versus realism. And I agree totally about that inner critic that causes books to be flung across the room. But as John said, to each their own. One person’s howling book-toss inspiration is another person’s cooooool moment. Because I have a legal background, I have to turn off my inner critic whenever I read/watch a law drama. Otherwise I’d be hurling books across the room or remotes at the TV at very regular intervals. So it is with “unrealistic”…
Brian,<br />
<br />
I hear you about real versus realistic versus realism. And I agree totally about that inner critic that causes books to be flung across the room. But as John said, to each their own. One person’s howling book-toss inspiration is another person’s cooooool moment. Because I have a legal background, I have to turn off my inner critic whenever I read/watch a law drama. Otherwise I’d be hurling books across the room or remotes at the TV at very regular intervals. So it is with “unrealistic” violence – I guess it just depends on how demanding your inner critic is.<br />
<br />
As to whether violence has become fetishized, I think commonplace is a better adjective. I’d argue that “American Psycho” was the ultimate fetishization of violence (purposely so) and that was written, what, fifteen years ago? As widely criticised as praised, it is generally considered a work of literary importance. Should the fact that similar (and I’d argue generally less graphic) violence has become more commonplace in genre fiction render it "torture porn"? Sure there are some splatter flicks that go over the top – but over the top by whose standards? For me, maybe. For a Rob Zombie fan, maybe not. And to not have the splatter in splatter flicks would change their very nature. Like John points out, look at the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Genres evolve and go through popularity peaks and dips. A few years back, it was really difficult to get anyone to read a horror script. Then “Saw” happened and suddenly every prodco in town was screeching for the horror, the horror.<br />
<br />
There’ll always be a case of some people being pulled out of a story by certain events. For some it’ll be the contrived situation of a moustache-twirling Belgian sleuth gathering the likely suspects together to point out the baddy, to others it’ll be the lack of realism (in the fictional sense) of the violence portrayed. But I don’t believe that stylized, graphic violence necessarily makes it fetishized, particularly not if the character is well-enough drawn to justify it. Why should it be the other wa…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:525892007-07-04T17:56:52.674ZJohn Dishonhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/whiteskwirl
Why should it be the other way around? Is there something intrinsic to the nature of genre fiction that automatically makes it more realistic than literary fiction?
Why should it be the other way around? Is there something intrinsic to the nature of genre fiction that automatically makes it more realistic than literary fiction? Yes, indeed.
But I think that…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:525792007-07-04T17:50:35.604ZI. J. Parkerhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
Yes, indeed.<br />
But I think that an earlier comment about realism (or verisimilitude) being more common in literary fiction is interesting. It should be the other way around, but as you say, Brian, some genre fiction authors may take their subject so far over the top that it becomes unreal. That has nothing to do with fantasy fiction or the supernatural, or science fiction. These simply operate under their own rules of believability. Crime fiction should be based on stories that could happen (or…
Yes, indeed.<br />
But I think that an earlier comment about realism (or verisimilitude) being more common in literary fiction is interesting. It should be the other way around, but as you say, Brian, some genre fiction authors may take their subject so far over the top that it becomes unreal. That has nothing to do with fantasy fiction or the supernatural, or science fiction. These simply operate under their own rules of believability. Crime fiction should be based on stories that could happen (or could have happened) and on motivations that are believable. Dennis-
Some interesting poi…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:525702007-07-04T17:40:35.565ZBrian Thorntonhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/BrianThornton
Dennis-<br />
<br />
Some interesting points, however, as I understand them in their context as literary terms, "realism," and "realistic" do not necessarily equate to "real." However, for clarity's sake, let me take a slightly different tack.<br />
<br />
I like escapist fiction quite a lot (otherwise I'd be reading stuff like John Cheever's work). Where it sometimes falls down for me is when it strains the bonds of credulity. In other words, I'm ready to go just about anywhere with the writer as long as they can…
Dennis-<br />
<br />
Some interesting points, however, as I understand them in their context as literary terms, "realism," and "realistic" do not necessarily equate to "real." However, for clarity's sake, let me take a slightly different tack.<br />
<br />
I like escapist fiction quite a lot (otherwise I'd be reading stuff like John Cheever's work). Where it sometimes falls down for me is when it strains the bonds of credulity. In other words, I'm ready to go just about anywhere with the writer as long as they can sell their story to me.<br />
<br />
I'll further state that this sort of thing is largely a visceral response on my part: I read a scene and react, thinking, "Ahhhhh that would *never* happen." And when that happens, it takes me out of the scene, out of the book, and so on.<br />
<br />
That's what I'm talking about when I mention "realism." I know it's fiction, but if you can make me believe it, or at least that it's possible, then I'll probably finish it.<br />
<br />
Take Jess Walter's CITIZEN VINCE, a terrific book with an ending that, had you told me what it would be before I read all the way through the novel to get to it, I would have likely thought utterly incredible (in the original sense of the word). BUT I read the book, and Walter made me believe it as I was reading it.<br />
<br />
How? He wrote the hell out of that book. I mean it. Talk about a deserving Edgar win.<br />
<br />
Years ago I read a Michael Connelly book (CITY OF BONES) with a plot twist in the middle of it that I thought was just absolutely bunk, that I thought he didn't set up well, that when he tried to pull it off, I went, "Ahhh that would never happen." I did finish the book, but with some difficulty. This is no slam on Connelly. I just didn't buy what he was selling in that case (and for the record, I enjoyed his new book THE OVERLOOK more than I've enjoyed anything else of his that I've ever read. Nice, quick read, action, good pacing, believable characters, good dialogue, really enjoyable).<br />
<br />
So your points are well taken, but everyone has that little, unsquelchable voice inside them that will occasionally go, "Ahhhh that would never happen!" and it's tough not to just listen to it, at least it is for me.<br />
<br />
Lastly, really my main point of the original post in this thread is that I find it ironic that hb/noir writing, which was born out of an impulse to take murder out of the drawing room and into the alley, where it belonged, seemed to be currently trending toward action/violence so over-the-top that it had the perhaps intentional, perhaps unintentional effect of making the work product of said authors just as unbelievable as having a little Belgian sleuth with his little grey cells gather a list of likely suspects in the drawing room of that remote English mansion somewhere near the moors/seaside/hill country. I don't think objective of wr…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:525362007-07-04T16:04:09.558ZJohn Dishonhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/whiteskwirl
I don't think objective of writing fiction is to reach a larger audience. For me, that is. But I agree that it doesn't have to be realistic. I prefer more realism, most of the time, which is why I don't read much genre fiction. I feel that literary fiction, on the whole, has more realistic characters who have more realistic emotional responses to a given situation, and so I like literary fiction best. But that's just me. There's plenty of people who don't care about realism at all. It would be…
I don't think objective of writing fiction is to reach a larger audience. For me, that is. But I agree that it doesn't have to be realistic. I prefer more realism, most of the time, which is why I don't read much genre fiction. I feel that literary fiction, on the whole, has more realistic characters who have more realistic emotional responses to a given situation, and so I like literary fiction best. But that's just me. There's plenty of people who don't care about realism at all. It would be pretty boring if books were all the same and everyone liked the same things. Personally, I get and appreci…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:524782007-07-04T09:27:38.688ZDennis Venterhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/DVenter
Personally, I get and appreciate noir (even though I’m still a little fuzzy on the exact definition thereof). I’ve read and loved books by Bruen and Starr and Guthrie and Swierczynski and Gishler (perhaps on the more cartoonish side of the spectrum?) and so forth. My wife just can’t get into them. She’d far rather read mainstream thrillers than the aforementioned and I see no problem with that. I read mainstream too. Probably more than the noir stuff. So what if it’s not realistic? For many…
Personally, I get and appreciate noir (even though I’m still a little fuzzy on the exact definition thereof). I’ve read and loved books by Bruen and Starr and Guthrie and Swierczynski and Gishler (perhaps on the more cartoonish side of the spectrum?) and so forth. My wife just can’t get into them. She’d far rather read mainstream thrillers than the aforementioned and I see no problem with that. I read mainstream too. Probably more than the noir stuff. So what if it’s not realistic? For many people, realism is best left to reality. Entertainment is another beast completely. Entertainment doesn’t need to be realistic to entertain. Entertainment can be mindless. Hell, many people actively seek this out. And what exactly is realism? How many fiction writers actually know the realities of killing someone? How many have even thrown a fist in anger? Isn’t it all made-up? And isn’t that the opposite of real? Isn’t the so-called realism of the noir sub-genre more a patina of realism, a researched interpretation of someone else’s realism at best? And isn’t realism overrated? When you get right down to it, as an example, Jack Reacher is an unrealistic character. He’s hugely invincible, he gets beaten down but always comes back kicking ass harder. And I’m right there cheering him on. I don’t care if he’s unrealistic. I love the character and will buy every Child book as soon as it’s released. And it seems the reader majority are in accord, which is why Lee Child features so prominently in the bestseller lists.<br />
<br />
Which brings me to the comment that noir is such a hot sub-genre now. Well, is it? Sure, there’s been an increase of published noir novels, but how many of these reach a wider reading public? Isn’t it safe to say that most authors of this sub-genre are firmly in the mid-list? Which there’s absolutely nothing wrong with – hell I’d happily fill that slot. But I’d suggest very few of these authors feature in bestseller lists because the general public prefers “entertainment” over realism (which is why tent pole movies like Pirates of the Caribbean or Die Hard continue to be big box office earners, and why shows such as 24 or Prison Break attract such large viewer bases). And in the end, is writing fiction not about reaching as wide an audience as possible? Because isn’t that why (the majority) of writers write? And isn’t that what the authors of this so-called “torture porn” are trying to do? Or does that raise the ugly spectre of art versus commercialism, an entirely different debate? Jeri- first off, from one wri…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-04:537324:Comment:524632007-07-04T07:22:12.923ZBrian Thorntonhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/BrianThornton
Jeri- first off, from one writer of historicals to another, congratulations on the book contract. Secondly, I can't wait to read it!
Jeri- first off, from one writer of historicals to another, congratulations on the book contract. Secondly, I can't wait to read it! So okay. I'm probably that my…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-03:537324:Comment:523252007-07-03T19:51:24.381ZJeri Westersonhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/westerson
So okay. I'm probably that mysterious gal on the historical list touting her "medieval noir". And I've been in many discussions about this, that is, the definition of noir vs. hard-boiled. I suppose I tend to use them rather interchangeably, and for those purists, that is incorrect. I look at it as "bleak, desolate, gloomy, fatalistic in character, urban, morally ambiguous, anti-heroic." (from the OED). But as per our ever-transforming English language, with the passage of time and usage,…
So okay. I'm probably that mysterious gal on the historical list touting her "medieval noir". And I've been in many discussions about this, that is, the definition of noir vs. hard-boiled. I suppose I tend to use them rather interchangeably, and for those purists, that is incorrect. I look at it as "bleak, desolate, gloomy, fatalistic in character, urban, morally ambiguous, anti-heroic." (from the OED). But as per our ever-transforming English language, with the passage of time and usage, definitions do change, expand, encompass. I don't think we should be afraid of that or of such unfamiliar territory as "medieval noir". Did I write my "medieval noir" to catch a passing fad? No such luck. Is it "cartoony"? Absolutely not! I wrote what I wanted to write and how I wanted to write it and perhaps I'm lucky enough to have slipped aboard a fast-moving train. Do I apologize for it? No way. My medieval mystery <i>is</i> noir with a smattering of hard-boiled. In a year, you can read it for yourself and see. Everybody is really gentle wi…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2007-07-03:537324:Comment:522942007-07-03T18:21:58.987ZI. J. Parkerhttp://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
Everybody is really gentle with those authors. Why? In case, it is simply inspired writing that mere earthlings cannot understand? Or blaming it on a muse who has had a mental breakdown after centuries of overwork? Or admitting that we cannot possibly grasp the creative urge that produces books but must honor it at all costs?<br />
<br />
Is it at all conceivable that some of these men and women decided that this stuff sells and proceeded to outdo the latest best seller? Because you must outdo it, of…
Everybody is really gentle with those authors. Why? In case, it is simply inspired writing that mere earthlings cannot understand? Or blaming it on a muse who has had a mental breakdown after centuries of overwork? Or admitting that we cannot possibly grasp the creative urge that produces books but must honor it at all costs?<br />
<br />
Is it at all conceivable that some of these men and women decided that this stuff sells and proceeded to outdo the latest best seller? Because you must outdo it, of course, and so the violence always becomes more graphic, more detailed, more eccentric, and ultimately less realistic. (Actually, that's probably easier to do than to come up with a new sex scene).<br />
<br />
We should wonder about the reading public and the power it has over the books that are written.