posted
I hate gore in films. I just hate it. But in fiction it's different, as long as it isn't excessive. If it better portrays the darkness of the scene or give some kind of important emotional response then it's necessary. For example I have a character who is bleeding out of his eye... which does sound lovely doesn't it...
My question is, how to readers respond to gore? Do they drop the book? Do they stomach it? How do you respond, and what limits (if any) to you give yourself when you're describing situations that call for good old blood and guts?
posted
Depends on the reader. Readers of horror come to expect it (in some ways) bfore the book's end. I've seen a bit of it in Fantasy, too. I think that if the gore is not a predominant theme throughtout the story -- or necessary -- most readers can accept it.
Posts: 3687 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) but I believe in Card's Ender's Shadow he has a character "Poke" who gets her eye stabbed out--or "poked" out--if you will. I don't know how gory that is described, but I assume its a tolerable level. And that's what I'm aiming for.
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gore is pretty prevenant in a lot of today's fantasy. Read Wizard's First Rule and tell me it isn't gory, as an example. I think you do need to give a hint fairly early on that it's not going to be all fluffy, but I see no resistance to gore in fantasy today. You see publishers say they don't want sex and gore, but considering how regularly you find it I have my doubts that it isn't lip service to the idea.
Posts: 1588 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no problem with gore in books, nor in films as long as it helps drive the story forward and doesn't hinder the action too much.
ie ... pulled the sword out, blood streaming from the wound...
That example wasn't too gory I know, but that's what a lot of people would expect from a sword wound anyway. I wonder if I can write gorier... I wonder if gorier is even a word o.0
posted
I think the think is how intense things get. I remember in Card's Worthing Saga there were two scenes. In the first scene a "twick" burrows into a man's thigh. In the second scene bereaved parents wake up to find the bodies of the children they had buried have been exhumed by natural forces and are blocking the door of the tent. There was more 'gore' in the twick scene, but I was fundamentally shaken by the understated scene with the children's bodies.
So you can even entirely avoid 'gore' and twist the reader in such knots that they can't continue reading.
posted
Not exactly related to the question, but is related to gore. I was VERY surprised the other day when my son brought his short story home from school (he's fifteen in year 11) and his teacher had written on it: Needs more gore.
Now, I'm not against it in stories, I haven't really come across it that much in my reading, apart from when I went through my horror stage years ago. I hate it too, in movies, I can't watch it, so I wouldn't like it in great detail in writing, but some blood is sometimes needed if it fits the scene, enough to get the picture across without huge detail.
posted
After years of listening to my mother tell me all the trouble she went to have me, I can listen to or read or watch anything gory. (Actually seeing gory stuff in real life is another matter.)
I don't see that it's a requirement---if you want to, have all the murders take place off-stage and deal with the character reactions to it---but there's no need to avoid it.
*****
darklight's comment is surprising. There's a thread or two 'round here dealing with negative classroom reactions to violent stories (and the Virginia Tech shooting in particular). To find a teacher writing "needs more gore" on a student story seems contrary to this trend.
posted
I liken this to the question we've spent eons debating recently about another subject ...
My feeling is, analyze your reasons for it. As another poster said, bad thigns can happen off-stage and your work can focus on the character's reactions to it. That's much more compelling to me. I have a very hard time reading through long descriptions of battles that include a lot of bloodletting and severing of appendages. I skim them, if I continue reading at all.
I think, like most things, used sparingly and when it's really necessary it can be OK, but I strongly prefer my fiction to be light on the gore.
Example from films - I like the star wars and lord of the rings movies in part because the filmmakers made choices about what to include and what to allude to. LOR violence was more intense but still done in a way that I could handle (save for the one image of Sauran falling onto the pokey wheel thingy after wormtail has stabbed him. I close my eyes on that part. Ick.)
quote:(save for the one image of Sauran falling onto the pokey wheel thingy after wormtail has stabbed him.
That was entirely Hollywood. There was no big pokey thing wheel that anyone fell on in the book. Tolkien did write Wormtongue stabbing Sauroman in the back, but it was after Sauroman had taken over Hobbiton and the returning hobbits ousted him in "The Scouring of the Shire."
That said, I don't think gore is necessary at all. I simply don't get why we, as a society, revel in it. I'm fifty-one years old and I've seen the trend to get more and more bloody and gory over the years. It's like no one has the imagination left anymore to write suspense, without flailing weapons and bits of blood and flesh flying everywhere. Look at Hitchcock... he could write a heck of a movie without visual gore. They are still some of the scariest movies out there.
You can convey the emotions of terror without going over the deep end into a blood fest.
posted
Well....reverting back to what I meant, my gore isn't designed to create suspense or horror. It's just there to clarify the intensity of the situation, but not obsess over it. For example I have a character who is shot, I don't feel compelled to explain exactly what kind of puss and organ bits come frothing out his puncture, but I do think it adds (and not detracts) to mention some of the sensory details of the sudden onrush of blood. I want to make it more real, but not overly so. I guess I'm striving for believable without being disgusting, and preferring to err on the side of not believable enough.
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I write about gore, I use the same guidelines as for sex. I don't shy away from it when I think it's necessary either for character development or for scene setting. IE, if I'm describing a battle, there's going to be some gore.
However, I try to describe only what I have to to convey a character's experience, and try to focus as much as possible on that character's growth.
I'm more susceptible to suffering, as opposed to just blood and guts. Torture is something I can't tolerate. The only book that approached my limits for gore and suffering was Steven Pressfield's Gates of Fire, a book depicting (quite vividly, I might add) the battle of Thermopylae. I have to say, he set it up expertly--he made no secret there was going to be gore. And I plowed through it anyway, though at one point I put the book down and just went "Ugh." And for a few days afterwards, I felt numb. At the same time, it was effective, because I think he accurately conveyed the violence of those times, and the brutality of war.
[This message has been edited by annepin (edited September 22, 2007).]
posted
I honestly don't see how you can write battle scenes without at least some degree of gore. War isn't pretty, and I can't say I admire anyone who tries to prettify it. The same with other violence. It shouldn't be cleaned up and sanitized, in my opinion.
Now if you don't need the violence for the plotline then it shouldn't be there. But if the violence is part of the plot, the violence should be--well, violent.
[This message has been edited by JeanneT (edited September 22, 2007).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
