Writing about controversial topics

The best villains are the ones who have been well humanized. The more you can make them appear to be doing what they feel is right, based on their skewed world view. Many actors enjoy playing villains, because a well crafted villain gives them more range to play the character.

I use some of the methods for developing character back story, from Lisa Cron's Story Genius. A deep dive into the villains backstop, let's us explore how and why the character developed their world view.

 

To w. bogart: I know what you mean. Look at Jeff Bridges' character in Iron Man.

 

Even Thanos thought he was doing some great humanitarian service. Often the worst ones are those who claim to be doing it "For the greater good."

 

I've gone through the first page and coming into this conversation late. Here is my impression so far.

Not really a goal, but I would be honored to have someone try to ban what I write. I often write stuff on social media that incites trolls.

Nuance seems to be lost on the most easily offended.

There have been attempts to ban Huckleberry Finn because of the use of the N word. It is uttered by characters in character and doesn't really describe Clemens' views.

I like to expose truths. In my case it is largely about science literacy. I would like to do the kind of journalism you describe, but will agree with you it is daunting to get everything right. I stick to science because it is what I understand in a world where there is too little understanding of it. There is also a lot of antipathy from people who believe a large variety of misconceptions about science who take offense at being corrected. "If the earth were round wouldn't all the Chinese fall off?"

Ron Howard made movies about people going to the moon. Not controversial to me, and I do not believe to you, but it set some people off.

One of my favorite books is A People's History of the United States, 1492 to Present by Howard Zinn. A very well researched book written by a legitimate historian that is reviled in certain quarters. In the first chapter he states his bias, which is countering the "history as told by the victors" model taught in this country before the era when a book like his could be published. There is strong sentiment among many today for returning to the model of teaching the glorious history of America and ignoring the warts.

 

I get the sterile part in terms of addressing 'the human condition,' but am the kind of nerd that didn't find it boring. Much of the grief I have been dealt in life comes from my fascination with the kind of technical details in a movie like Apollo 13 in spite of a few technical flaws I could notice. Perhaps it is my ability to spot those flaws that's part of what draws me to it. I was frequently bullied as the "nerd who knew too much about 'boring shit.'" Now I write quite a bit about climate change that gets me attacked by those who deny it is a problem based on what people on their side tell them is real about science that is total BS. (bad science.) If you want to get flamed on social media talk in an informed manner intended to convey the laws of thermodynamics to lay people who get their 'science education' entirely on social media.

 

Hi,

Actually I've been starting to pull back on getting into certain controversial subjects - specifically racism. It has been in my work now for a year or two, though hopefully not in your face stuff. Mostly I've been using a meme of race swapping my MC's - both in sci fi and detective works - where it's a valuable plot device for people trying to survive their enemies by changing their most visually apparent characteristics. (And it, the science of gene therapy just to shove in one or two genes for skin colour, is so close to reality now, that it scarcely qualifies as science fiction any more. It won't be long before you can just go to your doctor and say - I want to be this colour.) But if you put that into a book as a central plot device, you can't help but get buried in questions about racism - ie what's it like to suddenly live as a person of this ethnicity rather than that? (Which ironically enough is much less about skin colour or ethnicity, than it is about the lived experience of people of that skin colour and ethnic background in my view.)

Anyway I've had a few comments here and there, and I've been thinking that it's time to move on before I really do get clobbered! Anyone else feeling the need to pull back a little in the current environment?

Cheers, Greg.

 

No. If they have superficial preoccupations like that, then they probably don't read a lot anyway, or even touch the fabled grass all that often.

 

Hopefully every writer finds the courage to say what they want to say. And if you can, make it funny. This morning, I read a quote from Oscar Wilde:

"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you."

 

Who exactly are these people who are burying you in questions?

Art is supposed to challenge society's status quo. A strong case can be made that if your writing isn't offending someone, you're doing it wrong.

 

Hi Earp,

No I meant as a writer I bury myself in those questions if I use that plot device - because how can I write a story chasing that scenario and not include it? It would be like using a plot device of say a spouse dying and not be instantly buried writing matters of grief. It wouldn't be real if that didn't happen - unless someones a sociopath of course!

And no, I don't think that art is supposed to challenge society's status quo. Some art is of course. But a lot is just meant to be enjoyed for what it is. Just my opinion.

LL, thanks for the quote. It made me smile.

And NTT, not sure but maybe.

Cheers, Greg.

 

I was about to suggest you change beta readers, Moose. I had to laugh at my editor, once when he thought i was putting a racism theme in my book. I explained that it was speciesism in a fantasy world, and it was a single villain. Done just to make the character more unlikable

 

So, on the topic of controversy, would describing someone with blond hair and blue eyes as "Nordic-looking" be considered innocent enough, or is the term too closely linked to Nazism and racism? I'm divided here because, on one hand, when I hear the term, the first thought in my mind is Ragnar Lothbrok and Lagertha of Vikings fame. But, understandably, the term's obvious link to Nordicism could for someone else undoubtedly bring to mind Adolf Hitler. I really want to avoid coming off as racist or unintentionally linking my MC with Nazis or Neo-Nazis, so thoughts?

Granted, I'm no stranger to using so-called offensive or "outdated" terms as one can see here https://www.writingforums.org/threads/the-division-redemption.175993/ that I repeatedly refer to a character as a "midget," but I'm wondering if, in this particular case, I could be going too far into political incorrectness.

I Googled the question itself ("Is "Nordic-looking" a racist term?") and nothing of real use came up. Even an online list of slurs didn't include "Nordic" or "Nordic-looking".

 

Why don't you just say they have blond hair and blue eyes? That describes well enough without categorizing. Just a thought.

 

I've never heard of any link between Nordic and Nazi. Just don't say Aryan and you should be fine. To me Nordic recalls Vikings, not Nazis.

 

Half my husband's family is Nordic. Nordic refers to Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and various smaller areas like parts of the Faroe Islands. My husband is tall, blond, and blue-eyed. Referring to his appearance as Nordic should not bring Nazism or racism to mind any faster than referring to someone's appearance as Slavic or Asian.

 

"Nordic-looking" can also denote common facial features like high cheekbones in addition to hair and eye color. Plus, I feel it sounds more stylistic and frames the character as a fighter.

Nordicism is an ideology that views the Nordic race as superior to all others and was claimed by the Nazis to be the most superior branch of the Aryan race and thus constituting a master race.

And yeah, I definitely know not to use Aryan. lol

 

I understand. You want your POV to see this other character this way? Well, if it is a thought your POV had, it fits.

 

Hi,

Perhaps you could try describing them as viking?

Cheers, Greg.

 

Just adding to the pool that Nordic as a descriptor is totally fine. The -ism is what begets the concept of superiority. Like how being white is fine, but being a white supremist is not.

At most you'll trigger pre-medieval coastal villagers.

 

I haven't read your other posts, so I don't know if you're taking the piss or not. Lots of comments on this one, I see.

If this is a serious question, Nordic is (kind of obviously) an acceptable term to use. Everyone knows what Nordic people look like.