Someone told me I was mentally disturbed yesterday. Or at least implied it.
I'm doing a course on Historical Fiction and had written briefly in one of my assignments that there was some torture in the Prologue of my novel. I feel this is completely justified because Rachel is accused of witchcraft therefore she is subjected to some of the tests they used at the time - ducking, sleep deprivation, use of a witch-pricker to see if there was an area of her body that did not feel pain or bleed.
The person posted in her first feedback that she would never read a book again with torture in it, which is completely understandable. She said she wanted the books she reads to be heart-warming and uplifting, and I can totally understand that. She also said that they should be inspiring. I replied back saying I agreed but I felt that or a book to be inspiring then the protagonist needs to work through various trials and tribulations and come through the other side.
I said that I hoped my book would have an inspiring ending but the Prologue wouldn't as it ends with Rachel's death. I gave a very brief description of the things Rachel would go through first and asked if (but only if she felt able to) she would give me her feelings on whether the actions were too disturbing, but not a problem if she would rather not read it.
I think it's a valid thing to know if what I write disturbs people because I don't want that to happen, but I don't want to disturb someone in the process.
She replied back that she wouldn't read it (fair enough) and that she felt that to put stuff like that out there was pathological. I checked the definition on Dictionary.com and it says:
Pathological - caused by or evidencing a mentally disturbed condition
I've posted back that I didn't feel that I was mentally disturbed but not had a reply yet.
I know she's completely entitled to her point of view, and not everybody wants to read that type of thing, or gory murders, or soppy romances. I don't think some of the people in my church would be that impressed that the book I'm writing has ghosts and witchcraft in it.
I'm surprised how much it actually upset me that she said that. I don't have a problem with someone saying they don't like my style, my ability, or the subject matter.
But to say I was mentally disturbed for writing about it felt hurtful. I even cried, which is pathetic.
I'd better get used to it, I guess. Time to start growing a thicker skin.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Ouch. Sorry to hear about that. =:-(
I'm always very cautious when it comes to talking about a story I'm working on. I've killed stories in the past either by talking too much about them or hearing too much in the way of feedback before I was ready for it.
This lady sounds rather presumptuous to me. Of course she's entitled to her own opinions about what she does and doesn't like to read, but that's no excuse to go around labelling people as "pathological." You could just as easily call her "pathological" if the only things she wants to read are full of nothing but sunshine and puppies.
The thing about Historical Fiction is that if you want to be accurate, chances are that you're going to have a certain amount of ugliness somewhere in your story. History is full of some very ugly things - and I think one of the purposes of Historical Fiction is to point out what those ugly things were, so that maybe we won't repeat them in our own times.
I've made Jane Yolen's book, The Devil's Arithmetic, my plumb line for Historical Fiction. If she can write a book for middle schoolers where she puts her 13-year-old heroine into a Nazi death camp, then I figure that gives me a lot of maneuvering room for what I want to do in my own books. And the same goes for you.
Thanks Bob :-)
I've thought about it a lot, especially what you said about history sometimes being ugly. I know that I'm right to write it.
I ordered that book from Amazon, it came today so I'll give it a read. It sounds really interesting :-)
I think that there are people who prefer to read only happy stories, people who read romance, people who read about murder, people who read about history...the list goes on.
Just because one person does not want to read something which does not leave them with a warm cuddly feeling does not mean that there is something mentally or emotionally wrong with the person writing it. If that were the case then we would have no Schindler's List, no Godfather, no American Psycho, no Mist over Pendle and absolutely no crime/ thriller stories. Even Harry Potter would have to be censored in parts (and poor old Stephen King would be in an institution!)
There will always be people who do not want to read a book with torture in it but it is a fact that the torture of witches did happen (and far worse has happened throughout history and been written about).
When writing historical fiction it is a huge talent to be able to take history (and gory istory at that) and write it in a fictional manner which creates empathy and makes the reader emotionally connect with history.
Take it as a compliment that this person was disgusted. At leats your story is provoking emotion which is far better than boredom and apathy.
Good luck
Dulcie
www.dulcinea.weebly.com
Thanks Dulcie, I really appreciate your post.
You're right, I should see it as a compliment, and be encouraged by it. I think it might be partly why I've come to a bit of a halt on it. I can't believe I originally wrote this post eighteen months ago!
I need to start writing again, I think you've encouraged me to do that. Thanks :-)
Feena
-x-
Post a Comment