Admittedly, I have not been actively blogging. That’s because I’ve been back to writing. It’s been a pleasure. What with building and planting and gardening, there’s been precious little “writing-headspace” in my life for a couple of years. This winter, the frenzy has diminished enough that I’ve been spending lovely days, in front of the fire, banging away on the laptop. It’s been fun. And I expect that by fall, there’ll be at least one book launch, and that’s fun, too.
Every now and again we look up from our activities and realize that this, this moment, this experience, is why we’ve done all of it, anyway. We’re here, now.
My current book project has something I’ve not done before. It has actual villains. And that’s a different kind of thread for me. But this week, I read an opinion piece in the Washington Post that set me back a bit. It was about laziness in writing about villains. The author is a woman who suffers from a facial deformity. Her complaint is that movies and books frequently use non-standard appearances–disabilities/scars/disfigurement–in a short cut to describe villains. To her, it adds insult to injury, and increases the levels of suspicion she encounters in her day to day.
Nailed. I’d been doing just that. It’s easy in a manuscript of Prohibition Era thugs to make the villain visibly different. That way, one needn’t tediously show, by his actions, just how depraved he is. And it is lazy. It reflects a “lookism” world view that I generally reject. So this week, I’ve been re-writing. My villain is still a thug, but no longer an ugly thug. I appreciate the viewpoint and it’s timely connection to my own project.
I think the comeuppance will result in a better book, one that better reflects my values.
Interesting post. For a while, I was centrally involved in an effort to reduce tobacco use in movies because it was an important factor in encouraging kids to start smoking. It was like pulling teeth with the entertainment industry. Why? Because smoking is such an easy prop to show rebellion and so many other emotions/themes. It was easy, and it was lazy. –Curt
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s exactly the kind of short cut stereotype that I want to avoid. But it takes opening one’s eyes, to not fall into the trap of traditional canon. In the case of smoking–there are financial incentives, too. Sell out and, not only is it lazy, but you find yourself conscripted, doing the guilty marketing that will kill the next generation.
LikeLike
I did a piece for the Tobacco Control Journal in conjunction with UCSF on how the tobacco industry influenced Hollywood after reviewing over a thousand of their internal documents. Product placement yes, but also getting actors hooked, etc. –Curt
LikeLike
I’ll admit that re-writing “scar face” out of my manuscript took some work–but to convey the nuance of evil in more subtle ways–and even to mix it up some, so the villain also has some good traits, has made it a much better read. Same with smoking–sure, I can see how using a cigarette as a device (especially in film) is an easy shortcut, but how much stronger is it to pull issues that actually relate to the story? Rebellious? Fast and reckless driving. Cool? Level-headed under pressure. Sophisticated? Well appointed and appropriate. It can be done, and it doesn’t require addicting a generation to do it.
LikeLike
Plus, how often have you heard it said of the serial offender that: “He always seemed like such a pleasant fellow!” Looks truly can be deceiving:/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rick always likes to quote sayings from his father. On this particular point, his dad would say, “If criminals looked like criminals, the police could just drive around and pick them up.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Write and re-write. And then rewrite again. 🙂
I worked with the Entertainment Industry Council in coming up with options to smoking. We had some success but it is an ongoing battle. Contrariness seems to go along with ease of use. –Curt
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suppose there’s always drinking…..
LikeLiked by 1 person