On death and writing

[codemer]

Sometimes characters die. Sometimes those characters are close to the main character. My question is, how far do you go to describe your main character's grief without depressing the reader? I think some books gloss over grief, distancing the reader from the main character. At the same time, I don't want to linger on it.

 

How do you guys find a balance?

 

IF

[Steve E]

Sometimes characters die. Sometimes those characters are close to the main character. My question is, how far do you go to describe your main character's grief without depressing the reader? I think some books gloss over grief, distancing the reader from the main character. At the same time, I don't want to linger on it.

 

How do you guys find a balance?

The balance between describing the protagonist's depression and actually depressing the reader? I'm not sure I want a balance. Part of writing, as I see it, is manipulating the readers emotions. Subtly, if possibly. But there has to be a reason for it. You can, IMHO, depress the reader as much as you want, short of getting the book dumped in the garbage, as long as there is a commensurate payoff.

 

So go ahead. Reduce your reader to a blubbering blob of tears. So long as they finish the book feeling that it was worth the ride.

-Thoth.

[marguerite]

The balance between describing the protagonist's depression and actually depressing the reader? I'm not sure I want a balance. Part of writing, as I see it, is manipulating the readers emotions. Subtly, if possibly. But there has to be a reason for it. You can, IMHO, depress the reader as much as you want, short of getting the book dumped in the garbage, as long as there is a commensurate payoff.

 

So go ahead. Reduce your reader to a blubbering blob of tears. So long as they finish the book feeling that it was worth the ride.

-Thoth.

You might check out Brian Jacques's Redwall series, if you don't know them already. He kills off important characters in almost every book, and he seemed to me to strike a good balance.

 

They're fun to read, too. Sometimes bookstores file them as SF, sometimes as young adult. But they're pretty sophisticated, so don't be put off by the YA listing.

 

Redwall is an alternate world without people, in which the good forest creatures (mice, badgers, hares) are at war with the evil ones (weasels, stoats, rats, and ferrets, mostly). The first one is called simply Redwall (Martin the Warrior is a prequel). Look for the early books in the series; they become pretty repetitive after a while.

 

You're not killing off the guy with car trouble, I hope.

Marguerite

[codemer]

You're not killing off the guy with car trouble, I hope.

 

This question is not in reference to So, Do, but I guess I should probably crank out the next chapter in that book. I am suspicious of one of the characters. I have an insane ending concocted in my head, but I haven't bothered to write anything down.

 

Thanks for the reference. I'll have to hit the library and see what they have.

 

IF

[Steve E]

Thanks for the reference. I'll have to hit the library and see what they have.

Before you do you might want to hit the Redwall web site here.

-Thoth.

[codemer]

Before you do you might want to hit the Redwall web site here.

 

Looks like children's books. Don't know if my kids are old enough for these yet, though.

 

IF

[marguerite]

Looks like children's books. Don't know if my kids are old enough for these yet, though.

 

IF

From the look of that website, Jacques is now marketing them as children's books, and in a sense they are. My son read them when he was nine, ten, eleven, even twelve. The language is pretty complex for nine and ten year olds, and so is the subject matter, which is why (I'm guessing) they used to be shelved as adult SF. It's true that characters the reader has come to care about die in almost every book, and Jacques has to handle it carefully to convey the other character's sadness and avoid demeaning the heroic sacrifice without freaking out his readers, especially younger readers. That's why I suggested you might find them useful (I intended no slur on your writing!).

 

One thing to keep in mind for your kids is that boys, at least, love the stories. My son and I started most of them as bedtime stories, with me providing a dozen different accents (the hares, moles, mice, etc., all have their unique regional English speech). After the first two, I never got to find out how any of them ended. Even though the vocabulary was advanced for his age, my son would sit and read them through, desperate to know what would happen. So at a certain age they're a great way to promote independent reading, the love of reading, etc.

 

This was more than 10 years ago. It looks as though Jacques has been expanding his readership range downward now that the books have caught on, so they may not be as appropriate to your question as I originally thought. The earliest books in the series may still be worth a look, though.

 

And if not, no problem.

 

My first novel did deal with major grief: the heroine's parents had been wiped out by the local equivalent of Klingons and Romulans, and her coping with that was the main plot driver. That book needs a major overhaul to make it print-worthy, though, so I'm not sure I can recommend it as an example—or even how much would survive the rewrite, as I've moved on since then. But on the whole, I think Thoth is right. Set up a strong enough net of character, setting, and plot, and the reader will follow you. What people hate is to feel that you're jerking their emotions around, not whether you ask them to feel happy or sad.

M

[codemer]

(I intended no slur on your writing!).

 

I was merely making a statement. My girls are still too young for a lot of these kinds of books (they love Magic Treehouse). My three year old will tell me when to stop ("Too scary, daddy.").

 

My first novel did deal with major grief: the heroine's parents had been wiped out by the local equivalent of Klingons and Romulans, and her coping with that was the main plot driver. That book needs a major overhaul to make it print-worthy, though, so I'm not sure I can recommend it as an example—or even how much would survive the rewrite, as I've moved on since then. But on the whole, I think Thoth is right. Set up a strong enough net of character, setting, and plot, and the reader will follow you. What people hate is to feel that you're jerking their emotions around, not whether you ask them to feel happy or sad.

 

I think death in conflict is easier to deal with than what I'm facing: Untimely death due to a foolish accident. When someone dies due to a fight, it's easy for the main character to focus on remote responsibility. The MC grieves, but does not necessarily feel the same guilt as when someone dies due to an accident. Could I have prevented it? Is there more I could have done? Why them and not me? I think those kinds of emotions can draw out longer, though, I've read stories where it just sort of got old.

 

Maybe it just has to due with how often the reader is reminded of the MC's feelings. I'll try to strike a balance. Last night, I tried experimenting with different ways to express the MC's grief to see which one was more intrusive.

 

"Looking at so-n-so lying on the stretcher, MC felt an overwhelming surge of guilt and grief."

 

vs.

 

"MC could not look at so-n-so lying on the stretcher."

 

I think both convey the same emotion, but the second one may imply different things to different readers, where the first one just sort of lays it all out.

 

I guess I'm looking for a magic pill. I just need more practice.

 

IF

[marguerite]

I was merely making a statement. My girls are still too young for a lot of these kinds of books (they love Magic Treehouse). My three year old will tell me when to stop ("Too scary, daddy.").

 

 

 

I think death in conflict is easier to deal with than what I'm facing: Untimely death due to a foolish accident. When someone dies due to a fight, it's easy for the main character to focus on remote responsibility. The MC grieves, but does not necessarily feel the same guilt as when someone dies due to an accident. Could I have prevented it? Is there more I could have done? Why them and not me? I think those kinds of emotions can draw out longer, though, I've read stories where it just sort of got old.

 

Maybe it just has to due with how often the reader is reminded of the MC's feelings. I'll try to strike a balance. Last night, I tried experimenting with different ways to express the MC's grief to see which one was more intrusive.

 

"Looking at so-n-so lying on the stretcher, MC felt an overwhelming surge of guilt and grief."

 

vs.

 

"MC could not look at so-n-so lying on the stretcher."

 

I think both convey the same emotion, but the second one may imply different things to different readers, where the first one just sort of lays it all out.

 

I guess I'm looking for a magic pill. I just need more practice.

 

IF

Have you considered taking a look at Joan Didion's The Year of Magical Thinking? She lost her husband and her daughter to illness within a short time. Sounds closer to what you're struggling with.

 

My heroine had survivor guilt, as well as guilt over believing she'd betrayed her brother to the invaders, but I agree that those are different from losing someone to an accident, especially if your MC was or could reasonably believe he was responsible for the accident.

 

One point to keep in mind is that many people do focus on surface details as a means of dealing with grief, so "MC could not look at so-n-so lying on the stretcher" actually comes closer to many people's experience. When my mother-in-law died last year, for example, my father-in-law became obsessed with planning the funeral, then visiting the cemetery. Only months later could he start to face his loss.

 

Callista recently lost a friend to an accident, but whether she wants to talk about how she felt, only she can say.

Good luck!

Marguerite