Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Fake outrage is making writers change lines in their books as petulant readers can't distinguish authors' opinions from those of their characters. "The submitter nodded knowingly at this sentiment, before musing at length on the amazingness of Duke"   (slate.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Novel, Twitter, Fiction, United States, Elin Hilderbrand, Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl, Antisemitism  
•       •       •

745 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 09 Jun 2021 at 1:50 PM (11 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



39 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-06-09 12:17:46 PM  
I had a coworker years ago, tell me he refused to watch the show "Nurse Jackie" because she uses drugs, and he doesn't like drugs. It was one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said to me.
 
2021-06-09 12:41:36 PM  
Robert Heinlein is all too familiar with the idea that a character speaks for the author as people constantly apply the opinions of people in his books to him (and usually even bollocks that up to begin with - eg. Starship Troopers).
 
2021-06-09 1:26:50 PM  
It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.
 
2021-06-09 1:31:39 PM  
Ideas that are not your own can only be discussed if you allow everyone to attribute them to you.
 
2021-06-09 1:52:42 PM  

Pocket Ninja: It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.


Hey smart guy,

Everybody is a nobody until they are a somebody.
 
2021-06-09 1:56:31 PM  
Is the outrage really fake if they actually believe what they're outraged about, however stupidly?
 
2021-06-09 2:02:59 PM  
Good. It's about time we got rid of "free expression" and "art".

These are outdated concepts that have no place in today's society.
 
2021-06-09 2:10:27 PM  
We had a Heinlein thread just the other day where people insisted that the author saying that he wasn't urging people to believe anything in particular, but just wanted to people to reconsider their deeply held beliefs couldn't possibly be true.
 
2021-06-09 2:15:49 PM  
The extent to which some people will attach themselves to fiction is bizarre. Fictional characters in books aren't real. Fictional characters in movies, tv shows and music aren't real. Yet, there people out there whose lives seem to revolve around them. I remember thinking of Misery as a bit outlandish, but yipes.
 
2021-06-09 2:23:03 PM  

Pocket Ninja: It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.


Dear god, get to your local Woke Center to have your privilege checked immediately!

And get your gender fluid topped off while you're at it.
 
2021-06-09 2:39:39 PM  
All writers have to consider how the audience is going to perceive and receive the authorial intent, writing is communication and if the audience is seeing intent the writer didn't mean it's possible that the writing was just poor and it can be a learning experience for the writer.

The example in the article was a flippant joke made by a character that is planning on hiding in an attic and the reference to Anne Frank because they also hid in an attic isn't so far out there to think teens might say but I'm not sure why an author would write that their protagonist really thinks the comparison isn't far off.

Much like the rest of the complaints about cancel culture, it's just more recently people have to deal with an audience that can vocally and immediately respond and criticize the content someone put out publicly. Authors have always taken criticism for their works, they've always had to consider what's constructive and what to do with that advice, and there's always a risk that intent is not going to be received as intended. It's just much more immediate and more visible than ever before.
 
2021-06-09 2:51:56 PM  

Wesdog: Pocket Ninja: It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.

Hey smart guy,

Everybody is a nobody until they are a somebody.


You just proved his point.
 
2021-06-09 2:52:36 PM  

Pocket Ninja: It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.


I breathed in deeply. My eyes stayed fixed to the words on the laptop screen I had just read. Then, I glanced upward and beyond the screen, out the window, and through the sky into the clouds traipsing along the distant horizon, I exhaled, my gaze staying fixed on that distant melding of earth and sky.

Another Pocket Ninja post, I mused. What will it be this time? An elaborately-woven description of some unspoken but obvious truth? A farcical novelty whose cleverness density index exceeds the median Fark post by an order of magnitude?

Unable to resist, I returned my eyes to the screen and read in full. Like consuming squares of chocolate, I consumed each sentence, growing more amused with each bite, and I had soon consumed the whole bar.

"Or perhaps," I said aloud to myself, as there was no one else around, "A meta-commentary not on the art of writing, but on the business of the art of writing, with notes of the jaded weariness of one who has been down this path before."
 
kab
2021-06-09 3:12:26 PM  
Slate, of all sites, is starting to call social media types out on the poutrage schtick?

Jesus.
 
2021-06-09 3:12:50 PM  
Outrage is extremely selective on Fark as well with the vast majority of it being performance art made for the purposes of impressing others who are also selectively outraged.

Fark user imageView Full Size


/feels your pain
 
2021-06-09 3:18:11 PM  

Lambskincoat: I had a coworker years ago, tell me he refused to watch the show "Nurse Jackie" because she uses drugs, and he doesn't like drugs.

It was one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said to me.


You live a blessed life.
 
2021-06-09 3:31:41 PM  

vygramul: Robert Heinlein is all too familiar with the idea that a character speaks for the author as people constantly apply the opinions of people in his books to him (and usually even bollocks that up to begin with - eg. Starship Troopers).


Heinlein is kind of the poster child for this.  If you take his characters' views as his own, he's a radical progressive fascist libertarian communist polygamist transhumanist luddite
 
2021-06-09 4:02:08 PM  

Pocket Ninja: It's not all fake outrage, subby. Some of it is carefully constructed bullshiat that C- and D-list writers use to insert themselves into discussions by essentially attaching themselves, like lampreys, to their more distinguished peers. In their minds, establishing themselves as the nexus for the latest burgeoning scandal in which yet another inadequately woke writer has crossed yet another imaginary line of outrage is a meal ticket toward their next bullshiat AWP panel proposal getting accepted, and all the potential publishing glory that such panel will then inevitably lead to.


Hence the "fake" in fake outrage.
 
2021-06-09 4:12:42 PM  
I've been assured self-censorship doesn't exist.
 
2021-06-09 4:26:26 PM  
Whatever you write, you can be sure that somebody somewhere will read something into it that you never intended. Or completely miss the one point you were trying to make. Or come away with the complete opposite of what you clearly said. And then that person will try to beat you senseless with it.
 
2021-06-09 5:13:01 PM  
I thought Slate would be in favor of such behavior.  Is sanity coming back into vogue?
 
2021-06-09 5:50:31 PM  

WoodyHayes: Outrage is extremely selective on Fark as well with the vast majority of it being performance art made for the purposes of impressing others who are also selectively outraged.

[Fark user image 311x162]

/feels your pain


Is that his own hair?
 
2021-06-09 6:06:20 PM  
You cannot win when it comes to writing a novel, you are going to upset someone, that is the nature of art.  But if you cave in, you are just going to give the go ahead for every reader to become your copy editor.
So an author whose story had a teen girl comparing herself to Amelia Earhart simply because she was going to hide in someone else's attic for one line made her antisemetic simply because of the mention of Helen Keller?  Had she compared herself to the kids in Flowers in the Attic, people would complain because Kristy Swanson played the girl she was being compared to in the movie adaptation and Kristy is a Trump supporter.  Think Taika Waitita has an apology written in case anyone saw the resemblance of his Jojo Rabbit movie and what happened in the Diary of...whatever that girls name was.  Sometimes you just have to let people be upset.
 
2021-06-09 8:12:41 PM  
I am really not liking this trend of white Jews calling anything and everything they want antisemitism and then using that to demand the world bend to their will. It's a weird, creepy weaponization of victimhood that dilutes the pool of legitimate acts of antisemitism and makes it harder for others to believe them when they happen.
 
2021-06-09 9:12:17 PM  

austerity101: I am really not liking this trend of white Jews calling anything and everything they want antisemitism and then using that to demand the world bend to their will. It's a weird, creepy weaponization of victimhood that dilutes the pool of legitimate acts of antisemitism and makes it harder for others to believe them when they happen.


Um...

You're not wrong, but devote some time down the road to how that is more than applicable to other areas of Fark in terms of idiotic and self-defeating hyperbole. I refuse to accept that adults do not understand the lesson of The Boy Who Cried Wolf which subsequently dictates that people want attention for appearing to care about the cause more than they care about the cause itself. Anti-semitic should not be the ground floor default charge, the same as other charges should not hold that status as well.
 
2021-06-09 9:42:00 PM  

Fireproof: Is the outrage really fake if they actually believe what they're outraged about, however stupidly?


If a dog chases his tail, is the dog chasing the tail or is the tail running away?
 
2021-06-09 9:57:08 PM  

Lumbar Puncture: All writers have to consider how the audience is going to perceive and receive the authorial intent, writing is communication and if the audience is seeing intent the writer didn't mean it's possible that the writing was just poor and it can be a learning experience for the writer.

The example in the article was a flippant joke made by a character that is planning on hiding in an attic and the reference to Anne Frank because they also hid in an attic isn't so far out there to think teens might say but I'm not sure why an author would write that their protagonist really thinks the comparison isn't far off.

Much like the rest of the complaints about cancel culture, it's just more recently people have to deal with an audience that can vocally and immediately respond and criticize the content someone put out publicly. Authors have always taken criticism for their works, they've always had to consider what's constructive and what to do with that advice, and there's always a risk that intent is not going to be received as intended. It's just much more immediate and more visible than ever before.


So what you are saying is authors should have to first submit their books to a test group and change anything that a member of the group finds potentially questionable.
 
2021-06-09 10:18:49 PM  

Noah_Tall: Lumbar Puncture: All writers have to consider how the audience is going to perceive and receive the authorial intent, writing is communication and if the audience is seeing intent the writer didn't mean it's possible that the writing was just poor and it can be a learning experience for the writer.

The example in the article was a flippant joke made by a character that is planning on hiding in an attic and the reference to Anne Frank because they also hid in an attic isn't so far out there to think teens might say but I'm not sure why an author would write that their protagonist really thinks the comparison isn't far off.

Much like the rest of the complaints about cancel culture, it's just more recently people have to deal with an audience that can vocally and immediately respond and criticize the content someone put out publicly. Authors have always taken criticism for their works, they've always had to consider what's constructive and what to do with that advice, and there's always a risk that intent is not going to be received as intended. It's just much more immediate and more visible than ever before.

So what you are saying is authors should have to first submit their books to a test group and change anything that a member of the group finds potentially questionable.


Sensitivity Critique Groups are a thing in some genres.
 
2021-06-09 10:43:12 PM  
Book Twitter is absolutely psychotic and to be avoided at all costs.
 
2021-06-09 10:56:39 PM  

Noah_Tall: Lumbar Puncture: All writers have to consider how the audience is going to perceive and receive the authorial intent, writing is communication and if the audience is seeing intent the writer didn't mean it's possible that the writing was just poor and it can be a learning experience for the writer.

The example in the article was a flippant joke made by a character that is planning on hiding in an attic and the reference to Anne Frank because they also hid in an attic isn't so far out there to think teens might say but I'm not sure why an author would write that their protagonist really thinks the comparison isn't far off.

Much like the rest of the complaints about cancel culture, it's just more recently people have to deal with an audience that can vocally and immediately respond and criticize the content someone put out publicly. Authors have always taken criticism for their works, they've always had to consider what's constructive and what to do with that advice, and there's always a risk that intent is not going to be received as intended. It's just much more immediate and more visible than ever before.

So what you are saying is authors should have to first submit their books to a test group and change anything that a member of the group finds potentially questionable.


Meh, authors should just ignore most of the criticism.

I can't for the life of me understand why people act like random schmucks on Twitter (and other social media) have any valuable criticism to offer.

Then again, since any idiot with a blog can be a "critic" now, we've severely devalued the entire concept.
 
JD [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2021-06-09 11:32:55 PM  
Quick, somebody resurrect Nabokov.  He's got a few edits to make for Lolita.
 
2021-06-10 1:09:58 AM  

Russell_Secord: Whatever you write, you can be sure that somebody somewhere will read something into it that you never intended. Or completely miss the one point you were trying to make. Or come away with the complete opposite of what you clearly said. And then that person will try to beat you senseless with it.


AKA welcometoFark.jpg
 
2021-06-10 1:51:03 AM  

JD: Quick, somebody resurrect Nabokov.  He's got a few edits to make for Lolita.


The funny thing is that the movies do a bad job of making the main character the villain like he is in Nabokov's book.
 
2021-06-10 3:42:33 AM  

JD: Quick, somebody resurrect Nabokov.  He's got a few edits to make for Lolita.


I can't wait for the outrage when people read his other stuff.

Anyone here read "Ada, or Ardour"? Great book. Really strange look into the man's psyche, though. Something that should upset a lot more people.....
 
2021-06-10 5:49:09 AM  
It reminds me of the commentary track on the SnuSnu episode of Futurama, where the male characters say sexist jokes after jokes, and get beat up each time immediately.
The authors say that you HAVE to have consequences for the characters, because otherwise, yeah, the audience will just assume the author share their views. If you do not counterbalance in some way the nasty things that your characters say (unless it's so over the top that it's unmistakable, or the character has been plenty established as a bad guy), then yeah, your readers will make assumtions, and that's on you.
 
2021-06-10 6:45:30 AM  

WoodyHayes: Outrage is extremely selective on Fark as well with the vast majority of it being performance art made for the purposes of impressing others who are also selectively outraged.

[Fark user image image 311x162]

/feels your pain


What a timely reference, grandpa.
 
2021-06-10 8:30:44 AM  

padraig: It reminds me of the commentary track on the SnuSnu episode of Futurama, where the male characters say sexist jokes after jokes, and get beat up each time immediately.
The authors say that you HAVE to have consequences for the characters, because otherwise, yeah, the audience will just assume the author share their views. If you do not counterbalance in some way the nasty things that your characters say (unless it's so over the top that it's unmistakable, or the character has been plenty established as a bad guy), then yeah, your readers will make assumtions, and that's on you.


But their punishment is *more* snu-snu. I'm not sure the message is working as intended.
 
2021-06-10 8:32:13 AM  

BafflerMeal: padraig: It reminds me of the commentary track on the SnuSnu episode of Futurama, where the male characters say sexist jokes after jokes, and get beat up each time immediately.
The authors say that you HAVE to have consequences for the characters, because otherwise, yeah, the audience will just assume the author share their views. If you do not counterbalance in some way the nasty things that your characters say (unless it's so over the top that it's unmistakable, or the character has been plenty established as a bad guy), then yeah, your readers will make assumtions, and that's on you.

But their punishment is *more* snu-snu. I'm not sure the message is working as intended.


Also, the women are keeping them as sexual slaves until they die so not exactly the "men bad" message here.
 
2021-06-10 9:24:50 AM  

Noah_Tall: So what you are saying is authors should have to first submit their books to a test group and change anything that a member of the group finds potentially questionable


Prime example of someone finding intent not present in the text, as you'll notice I didn't say anything like that.

I'm not saying authors should do anything. I'm saying authors have always and will always receive criticism on what they wrote from their audience and it's up to them to determine what's constructive and what's not with the major difference now is that the audience can immediately, directly and publicly give that feedback to the author. The method of receiving the criticism has changed but public criticism itself has always existed and is part of releasing anything you do to the public.

But go to the back of any book and you'll probably find an acknowledgements section where most authors do in fact submit their book to a test group for feedback to get suggestions and catch mistakes. They don't always make changes (unless it's something technical or a glaring error, John Sanford mentioned how a SCUBA pro got back to him with edits and he was making changes the day before it was due to submit to his publisher). Hell you might've also heard of a thing known as an editor whose whole job is to make and suggest changes.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.