Censoring Your Characters

I have received a review on Amazon for I Stopped Time which I am not sure I quite deserve: “What I like about her (Jane’s) books is that there is no bad or offensive language - something that you cannot say about a lot of books these days.”

This raises an uncomfortable question: should writers allow their characters to swear? My answer would quite simply be, yes - in fact they must, if their writing is to be honest and authentic. As a fellow writer recently blogged: “I work in a factory, and if I was going to depict life in the factory, I couldn't do it without throwing in some foul language. In all honesty, it actually makes me a bit uncomfortable to hear how some of the guys talk sometimes - but my views of decency and propriety don't change the way the world actually is.”

To some, to permanency of the written word means that swearing in print has higher shock value than the spoken word. In 1951, J D Salinger was the first author to use the F-word in The Catcher in the Rye. Over sixty years later, it remains one of America’s most banned books.

We are more familiar with sound of the F-Word. In 1963, Kenneth Peacock Tynan, literary manager for the National Theatre Company briefly became the most notorious man in the country by becoming the first to use it on British television, a move later referred to as a ‘masterpiece of calculated self-publicity.’ Mary Whitehouse only added to the equation when she wrote to the Queen demanding he should be reprimanded by ‘having his bottom spanked.’ How times have changed, Gordon Ramsey (And you, a father of four). This anomaly appears to remain. The opening scene of Four Weddings and a Funeral, which consists almost entirely of the F-Word, manages to remain inoffensive, but it is necessary to be in the right frame of mind to stomach Vernon God Little.

And yet there are alternatives. Ronnie Barker sought authenticity for his 1973 prison-based comedy-drama, Porridge. By introducing the word, ‘Nark’, to the English language he avoided causing offence and gained an enviable family-based audience of 15 million.

I believe that over-use sorely diminishes the impact of good old Anglo Saxon language. I am currently reading Rachel Joyce’s The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry, in which the first swear word appears on page 148. It is so shocking in context, coming from Harold’s imagination as it does, and a damning self-assessment of his failings as a father, that it triggered a real emotional response in me. Joyce follows this up by introducing a truly good character called Martina whose language, in my mother’s often-used phrase, ‘leaves much to be desired’. But not knowing this to begin with, the reader may start to judge the character. Because there is kindness in Martina’s intentions, once we get to know her, just as it is in life, her choice of words ceases to be offensive.

Not all readers, it seems, can distinguish, between the views of the writer and the views of their characters. Stephen King offers this comfort: “Not a week goes by that I don’t receive at least one pissed-off letter (most weeks there are more) accusing me of being foul-mouthed, bigoted, homophobic, murderous, frivolous, or down-right psychopathic.”

And so I continue to allow my characters to swear, when the situation demands it. But not Sir James Hastings who will always, for me, remain an English gentleman. But nineteen-year old Jenny Jones? I allow her to swear once - to really grab his attention.

Jane Davis lives in Carshalton, Surrey with her Formula 1 obsessed, star-gazing, beer-brewing partner, surrounded by growing piles of paperbacks, CDs and general chaos. Her first novel, Half-truths and White Lies, won the Daily Mail First Novel Award and was described by Joanne Harris as ‘A story of secrets, lies, grief and, ultimately, redemption, charmingly handled by this very promising new writer.’

Jane Davis  

                             

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#!/jane.davis.54966
Twitter: https://twitter.com/janerossdale
Pinterest.com: http://pinterest.com/janeeleanordavi/

To prologue or not to prologue….that is the question

 

It seems nothing is guaranteed to start a debate among readers and authors more than the issue of whether a book ought to have a prologue. Does a prologue serve any useful purpose or is it a lazy way of starting into a story?

It appears the jury is still out on this one. Not too long ago, if you are to believe a lot of things written on the subject, the book industry’s top-hitters, namely publishers and agents, were set against the whole concept of prologues. For some reason their minds are changing – and I can see why.

Prologues work best when an author uses them as a platform from which to launch his/her subsequent story. In almost all cases they should be detached in time from the story about to unfold – a means to provide a teasing event, the significance of which will only become clear as the main story unfolds.

The best examples of the use of prologues are to be found in the novels of Clive Cussler. He has made an art out of beginning his yarns with a seemingly unrelated story, usually set in prior decades or centuries, only for the reader to discover that this story (or backdrop) is essential to the understanding and enjoyment of the modern-day tale about to unfold.

Cussler does it so well that often the reader feels a sense of loss at leaving the era of the prologue to begin the main event!

Naturally prologues don’t have to be as separated in time as Cussler often makes them. An event within a year, of even a few months, of the opening main sequence of a story, will serve just as well to grab the attention of readers – provided, of course, the need for a prologue actually enhances the overall reading experience.

The reason why a lot of people aren’t switched on by prologues is that often they are little more than Chapter 1, dressed up in a fancy title that authors somehow think makes their overall product look a bit more sexy. It doesn’t.

It’s plain daft to begin with what is called a prologue if the next chapter (now called Chapter 1) simply follows on from the events told in the prologue. I’ve read a lot of so-called prologues only to discover that the ‘first chapter’ begins with the same characters, talking about the same things a mere few hours later!

As I’ve said, prologues should be ‘teasers’ and used only where there is justification for back-dropping a story in a different context, or providing a related event, which will start to make sense for the reader as the story progresses.

They are often used these days as an early means to get inside the head of the baddie, say a serial killer, to tell the back-story of how he/she came to start their murdering rampage. The main story then opens with the detective assigned to the case, by which stage the reader has a sense of the difficulties that will be involved in tracking down the culprit. In this example, if the writer inserts a lot of graphic detail into the prologue, the reader will also engage immediately with the detective in the desire to catch the killer.

Generally, extreme care must be taken with the use of prologues. Not only should they have a proper context but authors need to be wary of the fact that these are the first views readers have of the style and pace of the writer. They are the shop window and if they’re not dressed properly the reader is unlikely to go much further.

Is there a simple rule on the use of prologues? Unfortunately not. Bearing in mind what’s already been said there is usually little need for a prologue – and so it’s not a question that should vex authors as much as it appears to.

A story should always be told with the reader in mind. I always like the philosophy of getting a story started in an interesting way, keep it flowing, and end it with as much drama, pathos and fanfare as you can muster. Nothing else matters.

But – and it’s a big but – if the end product can be enhanced by the use of a well-scripted and properly thought-out prologue then not only should the author go for it, but he/she has an imperative to do so.

Joe McCoubrey

http://joemccoubrey.com/

Joe McCoubrey’s Blogsite: http://joemccoubrey.com/

Joe McCoubrey on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/joe.mccoubrey

Joe McCoubrey on Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/JoeMcCoubrey1