Is Escapism becoming defiled?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Retro_Ace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, that’s a good sign. Someone where I work said, “I want heroes who are heroic.”

Not digging down into the dark belly of the beast to see if he can find more darkness. More dysfunctionality. More love of killing because, hey, I love killing. I love killing with cruel, vicious intent.

Fun? No. We need fun. The antidote to the dark.

Ed

I want stories about heroic heroes.
 
Well, that’s a good sign. Someone where I work said, “I want heroes who are heroic.”

Not digging down into the dark belly of the beast to see if he can find more darkness. More dysfunctionality. More love of killing because, hey, I love killing. I love killing with cruel, vicious intent.

Fun? No. We need fun. The antidote to the dark.

Ed

I want stories about heroic heroes.
Thanks for the support, it means a lot.
 
Heroes are essential.If we can’t find them, we must become them.

As Raymond Chandler said of the detective hero:
Down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. The detective must be a complete man and a common man and yet an unusual man. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor.

.
 
What REALLY bugs me. is that characters like Pyrrha, Madoka, etc can never get the happy ending, characters like them are only sacrificial lambs to progress and world safety as if its some virgin sacrifice to a dark pagan god, otherwise would ‘contaminate’ them.

Like there’s no story about a hero trying to save the heroes

Like nobody tries to fix the world so the people who live in it, civilians AND those who protect them can have happy endings, just one or the other

As if statues and tombstones of heroes are more important than their lives

I mean Rouge One I understood, because it made the happy endings of the main cast feel more valuable, and feel more for the rebel soldiers who aided them. Though personally I thought if anyone should have lived it should have been K2SO like a ‘living relic’ of sorts kinda like R2 is a relic of the the Clone Wars that remembered everything

I mean, people want heroes to return and be live themselves because they know heroes are people as well. These heroes don’t just protect us, they are us.

Look at Justice League Unlimted: Patriot Act

Civilians gathered around Shining Knight and Vigilante when General Elis was on his paranoid blind crusading with an old woman calling him out on his obsessions of a ‘greater good’

“Just how many of us do you have to kill to keep us safe?”

In Spider Man 2

Corny as the movie was the citizens on the train reached out our exhausted hero and tried to help him, even risked their own lives against Doc Ock, there is a sense of community here, interconnection

Harry Potter

Harry is no more different than Madoka, Ruby, Luke, anybody else and because he lives to be a writer and a dad along with his friends, his practical brother and sister figures. Makes him him contaminated? No.

I mean thats what saving the world in stories have come to, throwing Heroes to into the jaws of Ceberus the second they risk their lives,

a friend of mine on another website kinda stated the problem which is a fault in modern audiences and writers

“They know they don’t have to develop characters when the popular trend is to treat their cast as cattle to the slaughter, they KNOW they don’t have to try any harder to keep an already hooked audience. And admittedly, part of it is blowback from the idea that no character deaths takes out all dramatic tension, that death has become cheap in certain genres, and that character resurrection is always a bad thing. Thing is, death and revival as literary tools are BOTH “handle with care” concepts, but we’ve over-corrected to the idea that cast is expendable, doling out death in greater quantities than Glenn Quagmire’s DNA.”

"The other big problem is that the audience, as part of the blowback I mentioned, is all to ready to accept TOO MUCH reality subtext, to the point where writers don’t bother resolving character arcs to satisfaction before killing them, because “reality is cruel like that sometimes” (I have actually been responded to with this). I find that disagreeable to the point of genuine offense. My objective points on that are above in detail. As for the subjective, I understand that fiction, by its very nature, is NOT real life. As such, I have several basic expectations of any work of fiction, one of those being the satisfactory conclusion of a character arc (and Pyrrha’s most certainly wasn’t). In addition, I see examples of people’s “stories” being cut off without satisfactory conclusion every day. All I have to do is tune into my Facebook news feed to get that reality text (not really subtext if it’s actually real life), and we’ve had some VICIOUS examples of that lately. This is not a level of reality subtext I am willing to accept, and if I was, I wouldn’t be reading fiction, I’d be reading things like autobiographies and historical texts…or just going outside. In general, there is ALWAYS a degree of escapism, no matter how small, and regardless of the reader’s awareness of it.

In short, we are asking for the effective de-fictionalization of fiction writing, and authors are well aware of that. Since part of an author’s job is to appeal to their audience (although that shouldn’t come at the expense of the story they intend to write), they should be aware of what will keep an audience hooked. "

I don’t want to get in to Pyrrha’s fate but it seems to apply to most characters today
 
Let’s look at storytelling in general, especially Hollywood and TV. The decline was gradual, like slowly walking down the steps into the dark. Audiences did not get used to this overnight. It’s called ‘get used to this,’ followed by ‘get used to something a little worse’ until we come to today. The problems?

Too much immoral sexual activity.
Too much graphic gore and violence.
Too little of a moral compass. Heroes that are not bigger than life or courageous in fighting a good cause. Commitment.
Characters that you can’t relate to because they portray behaviors that are immoral, inappropriate or just plain wrong.
The idea of no standards or limits means young writers imitate what they see and hear or try to do worse and make the darkness, blood and gore and sexual situations even worse.

That nose dive is driving too many readers/viewers into a kind of corner: Do I take what’s being offered me as all I can get or do I reject most of it because other stories, good stories, can be told?

So tell them. Ignore the “tame by today’s standards” comments because tomorrow’s “standards” or ‘what is coming next’ is likely to be even worse.

So, as a working editor and writer, a few things:

All stories are based on the same basic framework. There is a conflict(s) that needs to be resolved. No matter what genre you write in. The conflict could be small or big or a series of conflicts/hurdles. But, the characters all have to be good and either work together or have a leader that leads them.

For example, all superhero movies follow the same basic formula:

Bad guy does something.

Hero (or hero team) reacts.

First encounter with the bad guy (and minions) does not go well.

It is how the characters react and interact that brings them to life. To take us into their world and feel like they are engaging to you, the reader. You have to care about these characters.

Second encounter goes a little better but is usually more violent. The hero (and his team) need to think, plan and prepare. Again we get to know their cleverness, their fears, and their commitment to ‘not seeing the bad guy falling to his death or killed by them’ but brought to “justice.” Real justice. No revenge.

Third and final encounter. Now, the bad guy is not stupid. He should have his own twisted ‘code of honor’ which he follows. He’s not a total lunatic - psychotic. He should be clever and cunning but the body count he leaves behind should be low. And he may have a weakness or two.

In the end, the hero or hero team wins. No gratuitous or suggestive sex scenes or profanity or ‘I won’t kill him but I won’t help him’ thinking. The bad guy is a human being. Something turned him into the way he is now.

In order to make things interesting, the bad guy may escape somehow or escape at a later date, so he can reappear as an ongoing villain.

I urge everyone reading to realize that you are not bound by what is popular today. That in the past, a lot of great stories were told (not just Tolkien or C.S. Lewis) that were engaging and interesting and that left you with a good feeling when you were done. You felt like you had just visited someplace else and you enjoyed your stay. You felt that things you believe are true and right were affirmed. That whatever the characters went through, whatever hardships, that they did the best they could to overcome. And they did overcome, even if the story was set on another planet. That they weathered the storm and you were glad for them. The story was inspiring or uplifting or just enjoyable.

People deserve those kinds of stories. An alternative to what is so heavily promoted today. The audience needs to be sensitized again. To realize watching endless killing and shooting is not the be all and end all. By giving them a healthy alternative with heroes that are truly heroes that know right from wrong, you remind them or introduce them to a version of fiction that says: No, you don’t have to accept what is popular now. If that is kept in mind, the stories should reflect that.

Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top