Morality in writing stories

[McatholicN]

I’m interested in the genre of fantasy (though I’m not much into the Tolkiennesque style of elves, magic, etc.) and want to try to write some; maybe eventually attempt publishing, but that’s a long way off. I’ve run into some dilemmas, however. What religion do I make the different cultures of my world? How do I maintain a distinct line between good and evil (seems to be a principle I’ve heard before in critiquing a story’s morality)? How can promote the Church, and make sure not to somehow portray it badly?

Could anyone shine some light on morality in writing stories?

 

[edwest2]

As a working editor and Catholic, a few thoughts:

When creating a fantasy world, there could be many religions, but some will be good and some will be bad. You should make that clear. Assuming you are not into the “dark” style of storytelling, your main characters should be obviously good.

Regarding portraying the Church, if it is a part of your fantasy world, it should be presented as doing good and a positive thing. You should just start putting your ideas down and get to doing some actual writing.

Peace,
Ed

 

[John21652]

I’m interested in the genre of fantasy (though I’m not much into the Tolkiennesque style of elves, magic, etc.) and want to try to write some; maybe eventually attempt publishing, but that’s a long way off. I’ve run into some dilemmas, however. What religion do I make the different cultures of my world? How do I maintain a distinct line between good and evil (seems to be a principle I’ve heard before in critiquing a story’s morality)? How can promote the Church, and make sure not to somehow portray it badly?

Could anyone shine some light on morality in writing stories?

Just make sure the goodies win and good triumphs over evil.

I hate it when it doesn’t.

Someone on another thread made a link to an article where the entire Star Wars story was a metaphor for the history of the Church after Vatican II. It was very cleverly done and a fun read. Unfortunately, at this moment, I can not find it, or remember the title. perhaps a Goggle search will dig it out.

 

[Julia_Mae]

How do I maintain a distinct line between good and evil (seems to be a principle I’ve heard before in critiquing a story’s morality)? How can promote the Church, and make sure not to somehow portray it badly?

Could anyone shine some light on morality in writing stories?

You know, the Church used to be classic in fantasy writing. Vampires are repelled with Holy Water and Crucifixes. Maybe it would help you to do a short self-guided study of the Church in fiction.

I think that the Church always ends up represented by the hero, rather than being presented in terms of being an institution. So your hero, who might not be devout but might be seeking like all of us, will have more success if he follows the Light of God he will find in the Church, in symbols, dreams, visitations, conversations with the gravekeeper, or whatever. And he will have less success if he yields to misdirection from the temptations.

You might Google the 7 Virtues. Read the stories of the saints.

There was a three year long discussion on the Leaky Cauldron concerning whether Harry Potter would use avada kedavra to actually kill Voldemort. I knew he would not because he was a Christian hero.

You also might be interested in St Anthony of the desert and reading about the demons sent to kill him and the forms they took and how he finally overcame them. Or the visions of the Popes. We have really really good stuff in the Church for fantasy lit I think.

Pray. Srsly. Let the holy Spirit in-spire.

 

[McatholicN]

As a working editor and Catholic, a few thoughts:

When creating a fantasy world, there could be many religions, but some will be good and some will be bad. You should make that clear. Assuming you are not into the “dark” style of storytelling, your main characters should be obviously good.

Regarding portraying the Church, if it is a part of your fantasy world, it should be presented as doing good and a positive thing. You should just start putting your ideas down and get to doing some actual writing.

I have been putting down some ideas… I just don’t want spend a lot of time on it if it’s not going to be moral writing in some way.

As to dealing with the Church, I see some main options:
The whole world could be Catholic, but that would probably be preachy (and, thus, probably not very effective) and unrealistic.
Some people could be Catholic, but if the story is focused on them, it still may come off as a little preachy. If the heroes are of another religion, it portrays false (incomplete, rather) religion in a positive light.
The whole world could of a different religion, in which case the same problem applies.
Religion could simply be left out, but that would probably give the impression that everyone’s atheist.

How do you develop the bad guys without causing the reader to be judging their soul?

Thanks!

 

[Julia_Mae]

How do you develop the bad guys without causing the reader to be judging their soul?

Thanks!

My advice as a writer is: know your character. If he is a three-dimensional person to you and you understand him and don’t judge his soul but his actions, he will have a better chance of being that way to your reader.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

You may not be into Tolkien, but your answers are here:

On Fairy Stories, an essay by Tolkien which discusses much of what you’re wondering about. Study it. Memorize it. This essay is very hard to find as a matter of fact. I would have directed you to buy a copy if there were a copy to be bought. It pre-dates “The Hobbit.”

I’ve been developing my own novel for years now. The best advice to offer you is to start drafting ANYTHING. You will not know what your story needs until you know what story you are telling. Create a protagonist and put him/her somewhere. Give that person a feeling about where they are, what’s going on. Just…write something.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

I have been putting down some ideas… I just don’t want spend a lot of time on it if it’s not going to be moral writing in some way. !

That is the pitfall. You won’t know if it’s going to be “moral writing” as you say unless you spend a lot of time writing it. The good news is, there is this thing called revision and another called editing. My story, during the rough draft stage, went to moralizing all the time. As I wrote the second draft, I excluded all of that and it worked out (so far). By then, I could see the Big Picture, and so it was easy to spot the cheese, as it were. You need to create material, mounds of it, before you will need a shovel.

Here’s the secret to moralizing in fiction: Each character is allowed to believe in something. Having other characters acting as **dramatic foils **removes/mitigates the element of preaching altogether, while enabling you to spill your moral guts out.

 

[John21652]

You may not be into Tolkien, but your answers are here:

On Fairy Stories, an essay by Tolkien which discusses much of what you’re wondering about. Study it. Memorize it. This essay is very hard to find as a matter of fact. I would have directed you to buy a copy if there were a copy to be bought. It pre-dates “The Hobbit.”

I’ve been developing my own novel for years now. The best advice to offer you is to start drafting ANYTHING. You will not know what your story needs until you know what story you are telling. Create a protagonist and put him/her somewhere. Give that person a feeling about where they are, what’s going on. Just…write something.

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

There, I wrote something. But, alas, it isn’t mine…

How does someone arrive at the originality of a Tolkein, or a Lewis Carroll, or of a Roald Dahl?

Anyone who wishes to even attempt an emulation of them needs to free their mind from this earthly realm and rewrite the universe, or perhaps just the world itself. And if the world, or the universe, is rewritten, does the morality need to reflect our own? A morality woven through a story can be parody, analogy, or even satire. A satirical utilitarianism can be woven through a story and so make a novel seem immoral to the untrained reader. Surely, though, the absurdities should eventuate as the story develops and then concludes? The aim, in writing a story, need not be a simple reworking of good v evil, as even Tolkein did in his Lord of the Rings trilogy.

So, it might be right and true to tell a budding writer to “just write something”, but the budding writer needs to have some idea of what it is they are trying to achieve with their exertions. No?

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

As to dealing with the Church, I see some main options:
The whole world could be Catholic, but that would probably be preachy (and, thus, probably not very effective) and unrealistic.
Some people could be Catholic, but if the story is focused on them, it still may come off as a little preachy. If the heroes are of another religion, it portrays false (incomplete, rather) religion in a positive light.
The whole world could of a different religion, in which case the same problem applies.
Religion could simply be left out, but that would probably give the impression that everyone’s atheist.!

You’re not there yet. Let Church waddle in if/when it presents itself.

The are many ways this could happen: here are some scenarios:

1. You create a long range narrative outline, and then write to fill in the gaps, allowing yourself to make discoveries along the way.
2. You just write from one moment to the next, letting the discoveries provide the momentum for the narrative and building on what you’ve created until a “bigger picture” comes into view, and then develop from there.
3. Write a *blatant *allegory and then try to disguise it
4. Rip-off history and put characters into an historical situation and let them moralize to each other about it.

How do you develop the bad guys without causing the reader to be judging their soul?

What you mean to say is, how do you create “likeable” bad guys; “identifiable” bad guys that won’t be tossed aside by the reader at face value?

**The answer is: you don’t write “bad guys;” you write “people.” **
You create your bad guys with the same care that you create your good guys, and you try very hard not to label them as “good” guys and “bad” guys, especially while you’re writing. You are their God, as it were, and God loves all of his children. You understand why they disagree with each other, why they are who they are, and you want the reader to see their life circumstances so that their actions, while not always agreeable (sometimes downright sinful) are also understandable.

That’s enough for now, but I’ve got more from where that came from.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

So, it might be right and true to tell a budding writer to “just write something”, but the budding writer needs to have some idea of what it is they are trying to achieve with their exertions. No?

No. There is no way to teach imagination. If a writer can’t just write something, create a series of causality that is interesting to a reader, then there is no point. If you can’t get my attention in a page, you will never get it after 1000 pages.

And, by the way, *har-de-har-har *with the Jabberwoky bit.

 

[John21652]

No. There is no way to teach imagination. If a writer can’t just write something, create a series of causality that is interesting to a reader, then there is no point. If you can’t get my attention in a page, you will never get it after 1000 pages.

And, by the way, *har-de-har-har *with the Jabberwoky bit.

Dunno about that. Lady Chatterly’s Lover took a while to really get going!!
I never did work out what the moral of the story was either!

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

I was just asking myself *“Why is this in Moral Theology, and not Popular Media?” *or even in my Creative Writing Workshop (I’m **not **recruiting–I have over 90 members and only a handful even submit work). I realized you put this here because you WANT to write narratives with an appeal to morality. Tsk, tsk, tsk, I can help you, you know. This is the only thing in my life where I am a Master.

People exist. People do things to each other, and some of those things are perceived as “bad.” Philosophers came along and said “this is good, that is bad,” and they called it “morality.” These ideas were then thrust into books which gave rise to reading tours and motivational speaking.

With your initial post, you’re trying to bite off more than *you *can chew (more than you could get *a reader *to chew, and far more than could fit in *any *person’s mouth). You will not heal the world’s hurts with a novel. Pick one or two moral dilemmas that really irk you. I’m talking about those things that just keep you up at night thinking about them. The fire of your anger could be the fuel that gets you to a 100,000 word draft with some steam left over for perhaps a sequel. The institutions should then be allowed to grow *organically *around the characters.

You take these one or two moral dilemmas and create characters that will do this: :slapfight: Then, once you have a bunch of pages, you reread them and then think about things like pacing, what they’re wearing, what season is it, what’s the name of the planet they’re on and how to introduce it without sounding contrived, what’s their favorite hacrathotl team confused, were they sexually molested and how important it is *not *to let the reader know that at least until chapter 7, et. al.

I can help more when you provide more. The mission is now to get as detailed as you can about certain things as fast as possible.

Your assignment: From the moment that you read this post, you have a maximum of 12 hours to get yourself a notebook and produce not less than 250 words. GO!

 

[Julia_Mae]

I’m interested in the genre of fantasy…

Hi. Let’s go back to the beginning. I’m going to give you my best advice as someone who’s written professionally for a few decades. Then I’ll get out of here. I don’t write fantasy fiction. So, I’m clueless about that.

1st, never take writing advice from people on forums. 2nd, take this advice (HAH!) go get a copy of On Writing by Stephen King. Read. Nine times. 3rd, if you don’t want to spend a lot of time writing something you might have to totally scrap and start over, probably writing is not your thing.

Lastly: it’s personal. One guy outlines like crazy, another just let’s it come, another pins scene cards to the wall. I think all stories are driven by character, someone else thinks the opposite.

I used to be on a writing forum way back. No one ever talked about writing unless some newbie showed up. We spent all day writing, who wants to talk about work? Writing is a personal obsession. You do it alone.

Good luck.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Hi. Let’s go back to the beginning. I’m going to give you my best advice as someone who’s written professionally for a few decades. Then I’ll get out of here. I don’t write fantasy fiction. So, I’m clueless about that.

1st, never take writing advice from people on forums. 2nd, take this advice (HAH!) go get a copy of On Writing by Stephen King. Read. Nine times. 3rd, if you don’t want to spend a lot of time writing something you might have to totally scrap and start over, probably writing is not your thing.

Lastly: it’s personal. One guy outlines like crazy, another just let’s it come, another pins scene cards to the wall. I think all stories are driven by character, someone else thinks the opposite.

I used to be on a writing forum way back. No one ever talked about writing unless some newbie showed up. We spent all day writing, who wants to talk about work? Writing is a personal obsession. You do it alone.

Good luck.

 

[John21652]

So, it might be right and true to tell a budding writer to “just write something”, but the budding writer needs to have some idea of what it is they are trying to achieve with their exertions. No?

A great article on writers who wove a moral tale into an original story, set in an invented realm, with an emphasis on Narnia and the Seven Deadly Sins

The article also refers to Edmund Spencer’s the Faery Queen, Lewis’s The Allegory of Love.

Of course, they set the bar very high.

One I’d forgotten about is ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’, by Thomas Hardy. A bit dry by today’s standards, but one of my favourites.
Another is Les Miserables, by Victor Hugo. There are similarities in both stories and both are set in the times of, or close to, their authors.

Hugo and Hardy were both commenting on the societies they lived in without creating new realms, or kingdoms, full of fanciful creatures. Ordinary people, doing ordinary things and victims of ordinary human failings. These are two of my favourites and both explore human morality. Considering how todays entertainment market dishes up the fast paced story lines and books seem to have to have the fanciful woven into he story to get noticed, I’m not sure how this type of novel would be recieved today. Then again, one never knows and perhaps a moral characterisation in the form of parody, or satire, of what goes on in todays world might just be what the doctor ordered?!

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

The are many ways this could happen: here are some scenarios:

1. You create a long range narrative outline, and then write to fill in the gaps, allowing yourself to make discoveries along the way.
2. You just write from one moment to the next, letting the discoveries provide the momentum for the narrative and building on what you’ve created until a “bigger picture” comes into view, and then develop from there.
3. Write a *blatant *allegory and then try to disguise it
4. Rip-off history and put characters into an historical situation and let them moralize to each other about it.

Forgive me for quoting myself, but this is merely a *generalized *list of the ways I’ve seen novels begun, fantasy or no. It’s not meant to be hard and fast rules, just strategies. Sometimes all 4 are in play at the same time in the same work, but every writer tends to develop a strategy in order to generate material. Not all material is preconceived, and sometimes a story can feel *forced *when it is. Tolkien had an idea where the LotR’s might go, and yet he made discoveries along the way; Aragorn, sitting in the Inn at Bree, was a surprise to him. Through development, the character arose and became a major part of the plot.

Despite what others may feel, I do happen to know what I’m talking about. But all the speeches about craft in the world won’t help create a piece; that comes from the imagination. People take writing classes to learn the tools of the trade, and then if it’s a workshop environment, to implent those tools with supervision and guidance. If someone says “I want to paint,” they must be shown which brushes can do what effects, what color combinations are possible, how to use paint thinner safely, et. al. The ability to teach how to get what’s in the mind on to the canvas (or the page) is largely intuitive.

So these works you cite, John21652, are, of course, fabulous. But when you say:

*“Hugo and Hardy were both commenting on the societies they lived in without creating new realms, or kingdoms, full of fanciful creatures. Ordinary people, doing ordinary things and victims of ordinary human failings,” * this is common to all good literature. In “On Fairy Stories” Tolkien talks about this, how to make a fantasy world “real” and “believable.” And no story has succeeded in history, no matter how wild and phantasmagoric the setting, that didn’t speak to the human condition as the readers of the time understood it. I need a break. I’ll be back…

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Being oblivious to one’s own time is one kind of danger for a poet…But being too aware
of the abstract historical and cultural forces that are at work in one’s own time, convincing
one’s self that one actually sees them, is another.
—Christian Wiman
“Fugitive Pieces”
Poetry, May 2001

Christian Wiman is the current editor of Poetry. This statement is applicable to all writers in all disciplines. It is always best to introduce readers to a character that they like. Things will start happening to this character (rise of the antagonist) which is called conflict. **Morality will/should flow organically from this conflict, otherwise you absolutely do run the danger of being preachy. You cannot predict what will strike a chord with readers. You cannot predict that what *you *want to explore will be what a larger readership wants to explore with you.

An argument without refutation of opposition is called a television commercial.
A story without a believable challenge (conflict) is called the works of Dan Brown.

So…just write some stuff. I think Flannery O’Connor said something about a story is a piece of writing in which something happens.

 

[John21652]

Being oblivious to one’s own time is one kind of danger for a poet…But being too aware
of the abstract historical and cultural forces that are at work in one’s own time, convincing
one’s self that one actually sees them, is another.
—Christian Wiman
“Fugitive Pieces”
Poetry, May 2001

Christian Wiman is the current editor of Poetry. This statement is applicable to all writers in all disciplines. It is always best to introduce readers to a character that they like. Things will start happening to this character (rise of the antagonist) which is called conflict. **Morality will/should flow *organically ***from this conflict, otherwise you absolutely do run the danger of being preachy. You cannot predict what will strike a chord with readers. You cannot predict that what *you *want to explore will be what a larger readership wants to explore with you.

An argument without refutation of opposition is called a television commercial.
A story without a believable challenge (conflict) is called the works of Dan Brown.

So…just write some stuff. I think Flannery O’Connor said something about a story is a piece of writing in which something happens.

What do you mean by “Write a *blatant *allegory and then try to disguise it”? Shouldn’t the allegory be fairly obvious for the average reader to percieve?

Another point you might like to comment on is about ‘writing from the heart’. By that, I mean one must feel the story, live the characters and firmly believe in what it is that you as the writer want to convey to a readership. No good just dreaming up an idea to make a few quick bucks, because it will show. To speak to an audience, to connect to their feelings, you need to write accordingly.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

What do you mean by “Write a *blatant *allegory and then try to disguise it”? Shouldn’t the allegory be fairly obvious for the average reader to percieve? .

Allow me to explain…

Spencer’s “Faery Queen” is a lugubrious allegory, with such a detailed list of what-stands-for-what that it is hardly a stand-alone piece of literature (which is why it is overburdened with all of those timelines and explanations which the reader is expected to already know in order to enjoy the piece as intended).
This is what Tolkien identified as the problem with allegory (or at least *his *problem with allegory). Tolkien spoke about the difference between **allegory **and **applicability **in the forward to the LotR’s. He said that with *allegory *the understanding of the story rests in the hands of the author, whereas with *applicability *the understanding of the story rests in the hands of the reader. With allegory, every thing is symbolic of something else. With applicability, you can have a series of events (or ideas, characters) which may be applicable to real life counterparts, and yet the story stands alone and is itself, not a running symbolic commentary (allegory).

The reason I suggested to write an allegory and disguise it is a personal joke for me, because it seems obvious (to many, not just me) that much of LotR’s is allegorical, and yet Tolkien rejected that description, because he didn’t want to be forcing his views and interpretations down his reader’s throats, which is what blatant allegory does/can do.

Another point you might like to comment on is about ‘writing from the heart’. By that, I mean one must feel the story, live the characters and firmly believe in what it is that you as the writer want to convey to a readership. No good just dreaming up an idea to make a few quick bucks, because it will show. To speak to an audience, to connect to their feelings, you need to write accordingly.

All I’ve been talking about this *entire time *is “writing from the heart.” I just didn’t say it, because it’s a **cliche **and meaningless thing to say. All good writers must avoid cliches whenever possible: see George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language.”

With regard to connecting to an audience’s feelings, as I said earlier, no one can predict that. Writing is, like most things, a trial and fail endeavor.