Last week:
http://www.aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/01/research-plot-integration-in-historical.html
we looked at a trilogy of historical romance stories about Rashi's Daughters.
I'm discussing how Maggie Anton's trilogy of historical romance novels with paranormal, supernatural, and spiritual elements blended in, fails because of a failure of orchestration of advanced writing techniques, namely the technique of integrating techniques.
Anton's trilogy does not fail because of a failure of either research technique or plotting technique by itself, though her plotting technique is not one that I respond to or use. But the two techniques applied separately produce an "oil and water" layered effect rather than an emulsion or a new chemical compound with unique properties (i.e. a Romance Novel).
I hope you have had time to consider these novels. Here's a link to them on amazon:
Maggie Anton
I don't know Maggie Anton personally, and have no idea what went on with the writing of these novels other than what it says in the books.
Here is a reader response on Anton's first novel from Amazon to consider indicating that the author's imaginary Jewish Culture of the Middle Ages stood out from, made an oil slick on top of, and obliterated all the rest of the romance novel stories in the books:
---------QUOTE-----------
3.0 out of 5 stars Good in general but Jewish life lacks authenticity, May 10, 2009
By
D. L. Lederman "leahiniowa" (Iowa USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Rashi's Daughters, Book 1: Joheved (Paperback)
I am an Orthodox Jew who happens to deeply enjoy history and well-written historic fiction. I have strongly mixed feelings about this book. I am deeply impressed with the research that went into this book as well as Anton's ability to compile an enjoyable story from her research.
Unfortunately, it is clear that Anton does not know enough about living the type of authentically observant life that Rashi and his family enjoyed to write about these people without over-laying them with a 21st century mentality.
Those of us who follow the traditions given down from parent to child over the generations know that Rashi's daughters did not wear tefillin and learn Talmud because they were rebels. On the contrary, they were very holy women who followed the law to the letter. Judaism is, at its authentic pure level, NOT a sexist religion.
Further, those of us who live the observant lifestyle are aware at a bone-deep level the benefits of abstaining from prohibited activities. E.g., the prohibition against mature, unmarried men and women touching at all (not to mention "making out" or "snogging" or what have you), along with the observance of the laws of married life, create an intense, passionate bond between husband and wife. No intelligent woman (or man) who has lived this lifestyle and learned significant amounts of Torah (the term Torah is often used to include the Talmud, Mishnah, Midrashim, etc. - basically all of the accumulated studies) would be foolish enough to put themselves in a position such as the female characters in this book found themselves with their "beaux."
To clarify what one of the other reviewers stated, yes, Jewish women at that time were mostly illiterate - especially as regards to Judaic studies. But so were most of the Jewish men. Only the special few - those with outstanding mental abilities or those with the finances to pay for an education - were able to learn enough to read and/or write Hebrew. And learning more than that was even harder to accomplish.
On the other hand, Anton's portrayal of Rashi's mother as an active, educated intelligent woman who ran her own business is strikingly accurate. Plus, I enjoyed learning about the lifestyle and history of Jews living during the time of Rashi.
I really would have preferred to give the book 3 1/2 stars or even 3.75 stars, because I do think it is very well-written and interesting. Unfortunately, books which do not portray Torah true Judaism accurately tend to do more harm than good. From the other reviews I have read, this already seems to be the case.
------------END QUOTE----------
And here is a reader response posted on Amazon on one of my novels, House of Zeor, which indicates that applying the integration technique I'm discussing causes readers to be able to absorb the imaginary culture of imaginary characters even when it differs starkly from anything familiar:
------QUOTE------------
5.0 out of 5 stars Only the beginning . . . of a great series, November 4, 2011
By J. A. Davis "firedrake54" (Ontario, CA)
This review is from: House of Zeor (Sime~Gen, Book 1) (Kindle Edition)
I can't tell you when I first read "House of Zeor", but it was back when I was thin and my hair wasn't. I found it amazing, when, last month, after not reading it for perhaps 20 years, I picked it up and was immediately transported back into a fondly (and well) remembered world. This book is one of the most complex, painfully realistic and memorable psycho-sociological thrillers I've ever read, and the foundation for an entire universe of stories, the complexity and beauty of which would definitely win awards at Arentsi (and you'll have to read it to find out what that means).
Ms. Lichtenberg, her eventual co-author for later books, Jean Lorrah, and the entire community of Sime-Gen worldbuilders have imagined characters, societies and situations that embed themselves on your brain and don't let go. I suppose it's indicative of something that I remembered many of the terms used in House of Zeor for decades -- mostly Sime-specific curse words, I confess, but they're used in context so clearly you have no problem knowing exactly what they mean.
I've been reading science fiction for nearly 50 years (yes, really). I can count the number of authors and series that have stuck with me this well easily on two hands, and I've read a LOT of SF in those years. The Sime-Gen books make you want to KNOW these people, and make you CARE about what happens to them . . . and their society, which comes painfully to the brink of collapse and ultimate calamity.
I've heard them called "vampire-analog" stories, "chick books" and more, but at base, what they are is good stories, well told, about characters you can get into.
READ THEM!
-----------END QUOTE-------------
House of Zeor illustrates how readers respond to a "new chemical compound" and how that response differs from the response to "oil and water."
There are also comments on Anton's novels from non-Jews and from Jews who know less about Judaism than most readers of this blog know about Simes.
In the comments on Anton's novels, notice how the Medieval Jewish culture - the truly "alien" culture - of a small town in France leaps out and dominates the reader commentary.
Most of the reader comments on Sime~Gen focus on trying to explain the background to prospective readers because that background is the compelling force that shapes the characters. Readers feel you won't understand why the characters do what they do without that background, but it's the characters and their effect on their civilization that the reader wants to tell you about.
That's what I feel the effect the Rashi's Daughters trilogy ought to have because all the characters were shaped by Torah and Talmud study an even smaller minority interest in those days than now, and much less accessible then than now.
But the comments on amazon are not explaining points of Talmud that you need to understand the character motivation, or what the reader learned from the novel that they applied to life with some success.
On the SimeGen Group on facebook, fans are always talking about whether they "identify" with Sime or Gen. Non-Jewish readers of this trilogy are not saying that for the time it took to read Anton's books they knew what it felt like to be a Jew in Medieval France. They got a glimpse of life in Medieval France, they didn't live there for a time.
Fans of Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover novels often relate how they "grew up on Darkover."
Note how Robert A. Heinlein's fans talk about how his novels inspired them to learn math and science. Or Isaac Asimov's fans. Fans of Star Trek talk about how Roddenberry's creation led them into career tracks.
The comments on Rashi's Daughters are not relating how people are dashing off to learn the real Torah and Talmud after becoming enchanted with her fantasy version of Torah and Talmud. How many are reporting they enrolled their kids in Yeshiva? But science fiction fans who grew up on Heinlein have kids on track to become famous astronomers, N.A.S.A. engineers, etc.
Keep in mind, it's my opinion that Anton wrote these novels as a polemic in modern feminism touting feminism to young Jewish women, hoping they would become feminists not Torah scholars. Oil and water. Some readers react to the oil and some to the water.
There are technical, writer-craft, reasons for that contrast in response between Heinlein/Roddenberry and Anton.
It is not a difference in the basic material or the story. No place or time could be more alien to the modern reader than a Jewish Quarter in a small French town during the Crusades and the fall of Rome -- Darkover was easier to relate to.
Anton's historical Jews are alien to the modern Jew, and the dangers of Medieval France are just the same as in any Historical Romance with knights in shining armor, damsels in distress, and arranged marriages.
It is a difference in the application of writing craft techniques. It's not that Science is more interesting than Torah. It's simply a difference in how the "researched" (or factual) material is used to generate the fictional structure.
Being a professional writer means being able to get the reader-response you aim to get by using the tool that triggers that response.
Maggie Anton has probably gotten the reader response she was aiming for -- but not the response I would have aimed for had I decided to write about Rashi's Daughters.
And I'm only guessing, but I think she may not have known that the material about the Medieval Talmud Academies she had become enchanted with could be incorporated into a historical romance novel using the exact techniques perfected by science fiction writers decades ago.
The "technique" I'm referring to here is the "integration" of two (and sometimes more) of the basic techniques I've discussed on this blog in previous posts. The integration tool that's most useful is "theme" which we've discussed at length.
Anton has a theme. I suspect it might best be stated as "Feminism is not new."
To illustrate that theme, she's created an alternate universe fantasy history. Since she failed to use the Science Fiction techniques I'm discussing (she may know them and just didn't use them) her readers are calling her down for inaccurate or bad history -- possibly because her readers haven't read a lot of alternate-history fantasy such as Katherine Kurtz pioneered.
Her readers are miffed at the historical errors because Anton didn't lull them into a "suspension of disbelief" by telegraphing that she knows the "real" history that the reader already knows, but will now play a fun game re-arranging that history to tell a story that will pose interesting questions.
She could have created Rashi as a cross between Spock and Sherlock Holmes that would have rocked this nation. She didn't. Rashi himself hardly gets a word in edgewise, and when he does, it isn't the word "Logical" which would have been the author's wink at the reader soliciting the suspension of disbelief.
The readers who don't know enough to spot her historical errors believe her version of history and like it, maybe prefer it. Other readers are distressed by ignorant readers being taught inaccuracies, with never a clue that this is actually fantasy.
And then there are the real nuggets of historical fact Anton has uncovered which contradict what people in the modern world think they know about Rashi's time and lifestyle!
The knowledgeable reader rejects those nuggets along with the warped facts, not being able to distinguish one from the other -- all for the lack of writing techniques, most especially Research-Plot integration.
All that could have been avoided by treating the hard facts, the warped-facts, and the imaginary facts with a science fiction writer's techniques. Poul Anderson comes to mind. Vernor Vinge.
The readers who are calling her down for her historical inaccuracies have completely missed enjoying the Romance stories in this trilogy because their attention was distracted from the foreground story to the background setting.
Please note that the number of reviews Amazon has posted on Anton's novels far exceeds those on my novels. There are a lot of technical (internet world related) reasons for that (Amazon has erased lots of reviews posted on my titles as they upgraded their computers).
But there is also the fact that Anton's work hits a far more popular topic than I have ever tackled, and was very well published to its exact audience at precisely the time Amazon was growing fastest.
One would conclude I have no business dissecting her product, but should rather be emulating it.
But I have read Marion Zimmer Bradley's SF/Fantasy novels, especially the hottest Alien Romance novel I've ever read, her Planet Wreckers. I have read the Lensman Series (oh, did I have a crush on Kimball Kinnison and a case of envy for his red headed Soul Mate). I have read C. J. Cherryh's Foreigner and Chanur series. I have read Ursula LeGuinn's Left Hand of Darkness. I have read all of Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's St. Germain novels, and a lot of her historical horror novels. I've read a lot of historical novels (a certain Scotland based historical time travel series pops to mind.) I used to be a Western Romance fan! I have read dozens of Vampire Romance novels with varying "rules" for the Vampire species. And I've read all of Robert A. Heinlein, and dozens of others who blend real science, imaginary science, and a special "take" on human personality seamlessly into their plots.
I somehow don't "hear" an echo of that kind of reading exposure behind the reviews of Maggie Anton's novels by those who liked them.
If you don't know what can be done with the Research-Plot integration technique, you won't miss it at all, and you'll think Anton's novels are really fine novels.
If you read the novels that are there, it's true that they are good. But I'm a writer. I read the novel that could have been there and compare it to the novel that is there -- if they're not the same, I try to figure out what to change to make them the same.
In this case it's the Integration techniques that are missing.
As I said above, the plotting technique choice didn't work as well as other choices might have.
Anton's books aren't actually "novels" in the structural and technical sense. They are strings of anecdotes lightly glued together. That's what produces many reader comments about "couldn't put it down." The reader will race through the anecdotes with the feeling that the beginning of the story is imminent, and then find themselves at the last page of the volume thinking they've read a novel. They didn't. They read a book, yes, but not a novel.
Perhaps I just have higher standards in Romance Novels than the readers who loved this trilogy because I found the structural and technique omissions glaring and jarring.
None of the writers I admire who have written novels blending facts you can get out of an encyclopedia with imaginary characters, real historical characters, and a specific idea of how the world's affairs have been managed, are being managed, and might become managed, would ever have failed to make this integration of plot and research smooth and in-detectible.
As far as I can tell just from reading, Anton made no attempt to blend research and plot, nevermind create a smooth emulsion.
I learned how to do that integration by hatching an ambition to write like those writers I listed above. I dissected their work to find out how they did it, then applied that technique to what I had to say, and according to the responses I've been getting on the SIMEGEN Group on Facebook, I succeeded.
Most of you who have read this far must be very frustrated because I'm not laying out exactly how to do this Integration yet. I'm going to try to explain it, but I am pretty sure many busy readers of this column need time to read at least one of the Anton novels and possibly to explore Sime~Gen.
Meanwhile here is an example from Rashi's Daughters Book III, Rachel -- of a bit of Anton's research which sits like "oil" on top of the emotional waters of her story. And don't yell. Last week I did promise you a spoiler and a connection to House of Zeor, and here it is.
---------QUOTE FROM BOOK III RACHEL p353 of the Trade paperback --The main character is talking to a trading partner who deals in dye and wool.-------------
..."But why are some black?"
"The abbess at Notre-Dame-aux-Nonnains was inquiring after fabric so I asked Simon to prepare some for her," Rachel explained. Nuns took a vow of poverty, but the local abbess came from a noble family and refused to wear anything but the highest quality fabrics.
Simon turned to Pesach. "True black is one of the most difficult shades to obtain. Each dyer has his secret formula; mine involves lamp soot." He motioned the pair back indoors, where he slowly unrolled a small bolt of brilliant purple.
Rachel gasped. "This is exquisite." She couldn't resist stroking the material. "I thought Eliezer couldn't find any Tyrian purple, or did you mix scarlet and indigo?"
Simon allowed Pesach to answer. "I found some, although Eliezer judged it too expensive. But the other dye merchants in Toledo said Tyrian purple was particularly scarce this year, so I gambled and bought some on credit."
-----------END QUOTE-------
Now there are some obscure facts about the beginnings of the dye industry that few people know, and it's inherently interesting. It is related to the world of this novel because Rachel is in business with another of her sisters who raises sheep for wool and had to import rams from England to get the kind of wool that can take the expensive dyes of the time. I know this stuff is true from other sources.
This snatch of dialogue advances the plot element of the side-business of cloth merchanting the lead character is in. It's not wholly extraneous, and it reveals a lot about the trade-world around this little village. Worse, all the characters in the scene already know all this and have no business talking as if they don't. Maybe the scarcity and trade details might be discussed in dialogue - but there's really no dramatic reason for this dialogue.
If you examine the scene this dialogue is in, and compare it to the discussions we've had here about scene structure and dialogue, you'll see that the scene isn't actually a "scene" -- there's no conflict driving the scene, no rising action, no emotional change, and no climax to the scene, leading to a hook onto the next scene. The author may believe that all these elements are in the scene, because she tags the end of the scene with a worded thought about her husband who is neglecting the cloth business for his studies in astronomy.
See my blog post of DECEMBER 27, 2011 - Dialogue Part 2 - On And Off The Nose
Anton's Rachel character's husband (the son-in-law of Rashi) is, in this fantasy, involved in the studies in Spain where astronomers may have figured out that the Earth revolves around the Sun centuries before Galileo -- and very possibly those Moorish inspired Spanish Jews may be the source of Galileo's inspiration, or he might have originated the idea on his own. You can see why I love this trilogy!
There's no reason for this scene, though, except to showcase some of the research the writer did. You could cut this exchange about dyes and you wouldn't lose anything except that "window" into the "world" of Medieval France. It's decoration. It's nice. But it's not essential. It says to me that the writer just couldn't bear to leave out all that hard work she did, so she couched it in dialogue and used Rachel's business venture as an excuse to include it. If I were the editor, I'd have cut it with a big red X through it. (my editors did that to me a lot; I learned)
To me, personally, though, this bit of dialogue is the best thing in the whole trilogy!
This obscure bit about black dye being difficult, proprietary secret, and very easy to spot against the kinds of colors cloth had been able to hold in those days was, I thought, common knowledge for at least 10 years before I wrote House of Zeor and invented "Farris Black" as a special color. I learned it so long before writing House of Zeor that I have no memory of learning it, I just know it.
Jean Lorrah, who joined me writing Sime~Gen after Unto Zeor, Forever was written, did not know this historical fact about black cloth dye and I had forgotten how I knew it and couldn't prove it when she challenged me.
My fictional House of Zeor is famous in the textile business, in the crude bathtub chemistry of dye manufacture and wool dying. They do all kinds of small-batch chemistry that's related to textiles, agrochemistry, and medicinals. Nowhere in any of the 12 volumes in this Universe is there any dialogue even vaguely resembling this snatch I've quoted for you.
When the Zeor Householding members are faced with the problem of identifying a particular genetic line of people who are medically vulnerable, Zeor does that by clothing them in this very special black -- it's used on edging, fringes, belts, emblems, medical case file flags and chevron stripes, and on entire clothing ensembles at different points in the several thousand years of Zeor's history.
It's always referred to as Farris Black -- not just any black. This is a special color, a shade that leaps right out at you. You can't miss it. Over the centuries of the Sime~Gen saga, it becomes the custom and eventually a rule with the force of law that ONLY those of the Farris genetic strain may wear this color. Nobody else would want to -- it could be a life or death issue if you were treated medically as if you were Farris. Later, when it's not so special, special shapes and items become the label.
Nowhere in the Sime~Gen novels do two characters who already know all about the dye business discuss the sources or applications of dyes.
So there's the Sime~Gen/Rashi connection I promised you last week. Farris Black.
Eventually here, we'll probably talk about the second published Sime~Gen Novel (a novel I modeled on the typical "Doctor Novel") Unto Zeor, Forever, (my first award winner) and the medical profession research I did for that one -- and what Robert A. Heinlein said about it after he read it. Of all the novels I've written, that was the only one I deliberately did research for with the specific intent of crafting that particular novel from the research.
All other research I've used in my novels has been like that Farris Black example, something I've known so long I don't know where I learned it. Many times, though, I have had to go look up details that I wanted to include to fact-check before including. In some instances, I've used astronomical calculators and programs that help predict the orbit of a world around another sun. But Unto Zeor, Forever is a specifically researched-to-write novel. I hope you won't find any evidence of research in that novel, though.
So you might want to read Unto Zeor, Forever first and compare it to Rashi's Daughters.
Rashi's Daughters also has a whole lot of medical research into medieval and Jewish Medieval medicine and especially midwifery larded into the text. Some of that medical research is well integrated, and some is not. Many times whole birthing incidents are incorporated simply to illustrate the midwifery techniques. The birth of a child who will become a significant influence on the course of history makes it seem that the birthing scene advances the plot -- but often that Integration technique just isn't there.
Perhaps you want to find pair of Historical Romance novels to compare. You want to find a novel that has obviously been researched for decades, that the writer is so very proud of their research and the publisher is selling it on the authenticity of the research. And then find one which has even more information in it but you can't tell it's been researched at all -- you can only see that some of the things in it are real facts, and some things obviously made up just for fun.
Your personal library may already have two really good examples to work on.
Once you've tried to figure out what one writer did that the other writer did not do (and which you'd rather emulate) -- then move on to the next Part in this blog series "Research-Plot Integration in Historical Romance."
By the way, I learned this method of deconstruction, dissection, and distillation of techniques to discover and apply writing techniques to my own work from a correspondence course on writing from The Famous Writer School (which I do not recommend at all!).
I've seen how Blake Snyder applied this dissection method to create his SAVE THE CAT! film genres -- and I don't think he got it from the Famous Writer's School.
You don't need a teacher to learn this. But you do need a pair of books you didn't write, one of which represents the kind of book you want to write. Find and study two such novels, and come back next week for more thoughts on how to learn and apply Research-Plot Integration to your own work.
Live Long and Prosper,
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Showing posts with label Romance Novels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Romance Novels. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Research-Plot Integration in Historical Romance Part 2
Labels:
craft of fiction writing,
Historical Romance,
Maggie Anton,
Medieval Romance,
Novel structure,
Research,
Romance Novels,
Tuesday
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Sizing Up The Competition: Part 1 The Tigress And The Canary
Picking up on the previous topic of weaving deep, rich, complex themes for Romance Novels, I want to talk about the evolution of our fiction delivery system -- in particular, at the moment, the evolution of the e-book and web-tv (or podcasting).
It's all about cost, price, and competition. It's all about the tiny spot where the hard rubber of economics meets the even harder road of consumer demand.
This is where the business model of fiction writing and publishing actually becomes indistinguishable from the thematic substance of the work of fiction.
Consumers want their fiction-fix, but how much are they willing to pay for it? And how does a Romance writer make their fiction worth the price the Romance reader is willing to pay?
My answer: the monetary value of a piece of fiction lies inside the deep, rich complexity of the thematic structure -- of what the fiction says and shows, illustrates and iconisizes, about the meaning of life.
Here's a "show don't tell" from a famous commercial for financial services.
An elegantly dressed woman considers a china cabinet full of expensive looking pottery. She takes down a dish, turns to a table, picks up a hammer, and smashes the dish. She thoughtfully inspects the pieces, picks one out in the middle and takes off. Next scene, she's inserting the piece she extracted into a mosaic on the wall in another building. She admires the completed mosaic and the voice over tries to sell you their service.
Of all the nonsensical commercials I've seen lately, this one resonates. I can't recall what company it's for, and it didn't convince me to call their offices immediately. It just made me admire the writer for finding a show-don't-tell that is cheap to film and captivates the eye at least the first time you see it.
It's for financial services, and it's about completing your portfolio, making it make sense, making it strong and without a hole in it.
But the illustration could just as easily apply to a dating service offering a chance to complete your life.
Which is more fundamental, financial stability or a good marriage?
This commercial illustrates how the very simplest, clean, clear, short, penetrating IMAGE can open doorways into vast, dim, complex, roiling depths of philosophical muddles where the best high drama lurks.
A good novel opens with that sort of image, and ends with that sort of image. The image tells the story.
There's an adage in stagecraft that applies (remember: writing is a performing art) and that adage is "Don't speak for the moment, let the moment speak for itself."
Don't explain, don't tell, don't muddle the image or the moment with dialogue. Let the reader absorb the impact and ask themselves the question.
Does life have any meaning without Love? Without at least one experience of Romance?
I doubt it. But some people need a bit more convincing.
So we've recently been talking about sources for complex, multi-layered themes that lend themselves to Romance requirements.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/09/verisimilitude-vs-reality-part-2-master.html
And the 4 posts on Believing In Happily Ever After Plus the 3 posts on Poetic Justice.
Here's a post with the links to these prior posts in this discussion:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/10/believing-in-happily-ever-after-part-4.html
It's all about handling theme at a level that makes novels last for centuries, makes them be re-printable, re-readable, and something you would save to hand down to your children and grandchildren.
So let's consider the Tigress and the Canary.
I found this canary on talkstandards.com on an article about competing e-book formats.
http://www.talkstandards.com/canary-in-a-coal-mine-competing-e-reader-standards-herald-the-arrival-of-a-market/
We've been talking about e-books for a long time, of course, and in 2010, with Amazon's second Christmas push of the Kindle, it became clear that the e-book was a marketable commodity. In 2011 e-book sales are meeting and even topping tree-book sales. And here comes the big Christmas commerce-push again now with Kindle Fire etc etc.
Here's a blog post highlighting the kind of thinking Amazon is putting into fiction delivery:
http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/amazon-considers-ebook-rental-service_b37942
This is what all readers have been telling e-book publishers for at least 10 years. One of the most important things about buying a book is being able to lend it. Another, so far not addressed, is being able to trade it on the used book market for other used books. A third is the ability to collect the autograph of the author on the book, to increase its sales or sentimental value. They're working on all these problems, too! And the traditional publishers know that.
Here's a blog entry by a writer who's run into the teeth of the raging combat between tree publishers and e-publishers erupting into a lawyered-up contract dispute:
http://kianadavenportdialogues.blogspot.com/2011/08/sleeping-with-enemy-cautionary-tale.html
As with the beta vs vhs standards wars, and blu-ray vs dvd, and onwards into future proprietary rights wars, we have marketplace competition.
Most tigers wouldn't necessarily bother eating something as small as a canary, but your house cat might consider it fun to play with for a while. *CHOMP*
But consider the tiger personality and the canary personality. We worry about tigers being an endagered species while we breed canaries for fun (cage birds) and profit (coal miner's warning).
Tigers would eat our babies (i.e. compete with us), but we worry about a world without tigers.
Canaries might not be good to eat for humans -- mostly because they're too small. But their cousins, the chicken, we eat fried on a stick.
Canaries are a food source for other things that tigers might eat.
The tiger is an icon of violence, slow, smarmy, sudden violence.
The canary is an icon of sensitivity and beauty.
A woman of a certain age, aggressively after a man (or men, really) is often called a tigress. Or maybe cougar.
Can sensitivity and beauty be agressive? Can sensitivity hunt and pounce?
The canary's food doesn't tend to fight back - though it can be hard to find.
I'm talking plot/conflict here as it integrates with theme.
If the relational structure of life on this planet that Darwin revealed is looked at from a Romance writer's point of view, (with maybe some astrology tossed in) we can see how humans, who sit on top of this evolutionary ladder, contain all the attributes of the animals lower down that ladder. That's physical and psychological attributes.
However we got this way, we contain all life on this planet within us.
Every human is a walking habitat of microbes at war with each other for living space within us.
Many psychologists argue that such economic competition as we now see with e-book vs. tree-book is innate in humans and actually arises from or is based on sexual competition for a mate.
It can be argued that the whole animal kingdom is at war, and it's all based on sexuality. OK, it's a stretch to blame microbe-wars on sexuality since they don't have any, but still they eat each other.
The thesis is that violence is inherent in primate nature. Violence is necessary to ensure that the strongest among us mate and proliferate the most.
This is exactly the sort of science-philosophy that science fiction (and by extension science fiction romance) exists to challenge, dissect, discuss, and speculate about.
More about that in Part 2 next week. The fiction delivery system of this rapidly changing world is adapting, and in the process providing extraordinary opportunities for Romance writers to present the inspiration and vision of the Happily Ever After lifestyle to those who simply can not imagine it in any kind of reality.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
It's all about cost, price, and competition. It's all about the tiny spot where the hard rubber of economics meets the even harder road of consumer demand.
This is where the business model of fiction writing and publishing actually becomes indistinguishable from the thematic substance of the work of fiction.
Consumers want their fiction-fix, but how much are they willing to pay for it? And how does a Romance writer make their fiction worth the price the Romance reader is willing to pay?
My answer: the monetary value of a piece of fiction lies inside the deep, rich complexity of the thematic structure -- of what the fiction says and shows, illustrates and iconisizes, about the meaning of life.
Here's a "show don't tell" from a famous commercial for financial services.
An elegantly dressed woman considers a china cabinet full of expensive looking pottery. She takes down a dish, turns to a table, picks up a hammer, and smashes the dish. She thoughtfully inspects the pieces, picks one out in the middle and takes off. Next scene, she's inserting the piece she extracted into a mosaic on the wall in another building. She admires the completed mosaic and the voice over tries to sell you their service.
Of all the nonsensical commercials I've seen lately, this one resonates. I can't recall what company it's for, and it didn't convince me to call their offices immediately. It just made me admire the writer for finding a show-don't-tell that is cheap to film and captivates the eye at least the first time you see it.
It's for financial services, and it's about completing your portfolio, making it make sense, making it strong and without a hole in it.
But the illustration could just as easily apply to a dating service offering a chance to complete your life.
Which is more fundamental, financial stability or a good marriage?
This commercial illustrates how the very simplest, clean, clear, short, penetrating IMAGE can open doorways into vast, dim, complex, roiling depths of philosophical muddles where the best high drama lurks.
A good novel opens with that sort of image, and ends with that sort of image. The image tells the story.
There's an adage in stagecraft that applies (remember: writing is a performing art) and that adage is "Don't speak for the moment, let the moment speak for itself."
Don't explain, don't tell, don't muddle the image or the moment with dialogue. Let the reader absorb the impact and ask themselves the question.
Does life have any meaning without Love? Without at least one experience of Romance?
I doubt it. But some people need a bit more convincing.
So we've recently been talking about sources for complex, multi-layered themes that lend themselves to Romance requirements.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/09/verisimilitude-vs-reality-part-2-master.html
And the 4 posts on Believing In Happily Ever After Plus the 3 posts on Poetic Justice.
Here's a post with the links to these prior posts in this discussion:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/10/believing-in-happily-ever-after-part-4.html
It's all about handling theme at a level that makes novels last for centuries, makes them be re-printable, re-readable, and something you would save to hand down to your children and grandchildren.
So let's consider the Tigress and the Canary.
I found this canary on talkstandards.com on an article about competing e-book formats.
http://www.talkstandards.com/canary-in-a-coal-mine-competing-e-reader-standards-herald-the-arrival-of-a-market/
We've been talking about e-books for a long time, of course, and in 2010, with Amazon's second Christmas push of the Kindle, it became clear that the e-book was a marketable commodity. In 2011 e-book sales are meeting and even topping tree-book sales. And here comes the big Christmas commerce-push again now with Kindle Fire etc etc.
Here's a blog post highlighting the kind of thinking Amazon is putting into fiction delivery:
http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/amazon-considers-ebook-rental-service_b37942
This is what all readers have been telling e-book publishers for at least 10 years. One of the most important things about buying a book is being able to lend it. Another, so far not addressed, is being able to trade it on the used book market for other used books. A third is the ability to collect the autograph of the author on the book, to increase its sales or sentimental value. They're working on all these problems, too! And the traditional publishers know that.
Here's a blog entry by a writer who's run into the teeth of the raging combat between tree publishers and e-publishers erupting into a lawyered-up contract dispute:
http://kianadavenportdialogues.blogspot.com/2011/08/sleeping-with-enemy-cautionary-tale.html
As with the beta vs vhs standards wars, and blu-ray vs dvd, and onwards into future proprietary rights wars, we have marketplace competition.
http://www.free-extras.com/images/bengal_tiger-8893.htm |
Most tigers wouldn't necessarily bother eating something as small as a canary, but your house cat might consider it fun to play with for a while. *CHOMP*
But consider the tiger personality and the canary personality. We worry about tigers being an endagered species while we breed canaries for fun (cage birds) and profit (coal miner's warning).
Tigers would eat our babies (i.e. compete with us), but we worry about a world without tigers.
Canaries might not be good to eat for humans -- mostly because they're too small. But their cousins, the chicken, we eat fried on a stick.
Canaries are a food source for other things that tigers might eat.
The tiger is an icon of violence, slow, smarmy, sudden violence.
The canary is an icon of sensitivity and beauty.
A woman of a certain age, aggressively after a man (or men, really) is often called a tigress. Or maybe cougar.
Can sensitivity and beauty be agressive? Can sensitivity hunt and pounce?
The canary's food doesn't tend to fight back - though it can be hard to find.
I'm talking plot/conflict here as it integrates with theme.
If the relational structure of life on this planet that Darwin revealed is looked at from a Romance writer's point of view, (with maybe some astrology tossed in) we can see how humans, who sit on top of this evolutionary ladder, contain all the attributes of the animals lower down that ladder. That's physical and psychological attributes.
However we got this way, we contain all life on this planet within us.
Every human is a walking habitat of microbes at war with each other for living space within us.
Many psychologists argue that such economic competition as we now see with e-book vs. tree-book is innate in humans and actually arises from or is based on sexual competition for a mate.
It can be argued that the whole animal kingdom is at war, and it's all based on sexuality. OK, it's a stretch to blame microbe-wars on sexuality since they don't have any, but still they eat each other.
The thesis is that violence is inherent in primate nature. Violence is necessary to ensure that the strongest among us mate and proliferate the most.
This is exactly the sort of science-philosophy that science fiction (and by extension science fiction romance) exists to challenge, dissect, discuss, and speculate about.
More about that in Part 2 next week. The fiction delivery system of this rapidly changing world is adapting, and in the process providing extraordinary opportunities for Romance writers to present the inspiration and vision of the Happily Ever After lifestyle to those who simply can not imagine it in any kind of reality.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Labels:
Canary,
Complex Themes,
ebook,
romance,
Romance Novels,
Tiger,
tree-book,
Tuesday
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
Believing in Happily Ever After: Part 1, Stephen King on Potter VS Twilight
In July, I was invited to Google+ by one of the Chat moderators on Twitter who runs #Litchat (which I recommend to readers and writers -- find times by following http://twitter.com/#!/LitChat ) Today, Google+ is open to anyone. Back then you needed an invitation to beta-testing.
Immediately, I had a whole raft of writer friends turning up on google+ via the #Litchat connection so I made a circle for those folks, and before I knew it, here came a marvelous post with a quote from Stephen King -- this was just before the weekend when the last Harry Potter film was released.
So I'm trying to learn how to construct links that will lead you to elements on Google+. So far, no dice.
So here's a link that might lead you to the jpg with the quoted words on it. It works for me.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-z_XZoXQ5ugw/Th8BjOHXwdI/AAAAAAAABlw/DlYX2rScJEo/w402/tumblr_llhraiIQ4v1qbqtzko1_500.jpg
This quote jpg of text is posted on:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/115660915549619552182/posts/fpQjLS9Rfy8
Brandon Withrow, who got this interesting post from someone else on google+ known as Adm Chrysler, posted that image linked above, which had apparently already "gone viral" and which is a quote attributed to Stephen King. It says:
"Harry Potter is all about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend." -- Stephen King
I commented on Brandon's post, saying:
------quote---------
I admire Stephen King for his true professionalism. I met him once and learned he does what he does on purpose! However, I disagree with his summation here only because it leaves out some important words.
Twilight is about how "confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of diversity is necessary in order to have and maintain normal Relationships, even if you or your boyfriend aren't exactly normal people."
Potter is about dealing with the situation you are in through no fault of your own; Twilight is about choosing your situation and committing to see it through no matter what happens as a result of your choice."
---------end quote--------
Kate Shellnutt commented with another reference to what Stephen King has said, and Brandon Withrow answered:
------------quote----------
I suppose being a big HP fan skews his objectivity, where Jacqueline is giving a more even-handed take on the two. Not to geek out on it, but fan intensity for one or the other reminds me a bit of the Star Trek vs. Star Wars type of thing.
------------end quote---------
So of course I had to say:
--------quote---------
Oh, but I love my geeks! And of course you know I'm a very emphatic Trekker, having been primary author on the Bantam paperback STAR TREK LIVES! which outed ST fanfic (which I contributed to by creating the Kraith alternate universe for Trek fanfic). But actually, you're right, there's two takes on this, and I think it might be worth a blog post. I'll copy your quote and see what comes of it -- that would be late Sept/ early Oct for the topic on aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com where I post on Tuesdays on writing craft, and THIS quote is definitely a "craft" and "romance genre" related quote!
-------end quote-----------
Kraith is, as you know, posted for free reading on http://www.simegen.com/fandom/startrek/
Both Harry Potter and Twilight are Romance based.
Potter's parents were obviously deeply in love, and battling toward a Happily Ever After and didn't make it.
Potter then recapitulates their battle, and becomes involved at the teenage romance level with admirable women, and then "notices" such an admirable girl his own age. And presumably things will go to the HEA for Potter.
Twilight is more star-crossed-lovers, possibly more like the story of Potter's parents in the no-win situation where only their descendents make it to the HEA.
As a matter of "taste" - I think your concept of Evil and where that fits in the overall universe you live in - determines which you like better, Potter or Twilight. They're both seminal discussions of the plight of good swamped by Evil.
I suspect King seems to prefer Potter simply because Potter is battling Evil head-to-head, and in his world Evil is an accepted social element (studied in school as a magical discipline).
I don't "buy into" that concept, so I have to work to suspend my disbelief to 'get into' the Potterverse -- which I have no problem doing because that's what being a Science Fiction fan, reader, and writer is all about.
I can buy into the Twilight universe a little more easily simply because it extends my own view of the whole Vampire mythos that I've been a devotee of since my teen years.
Both universes are rooted in the discussion of whether the HEA is "plausible" in real life. Both have the HEA as "the stakes" in the plot, as King pointed out.
But the Potterverse says graphically that HEA isn't a given. Potter's parents got killed by Evil, and that proves the HEA is not a real element in that universe. Yet Harry is set up to go for another try at it.
King's assessment of Twilight is correct, too, because in the Twilight universe, the HEA is at least plausible, reachable, imaginable, and the most "Evil" creatures strive for it because it is apparently there.
So King has nailed (I'm not surprised) the philosophical nexus of the entire discussion you and I have been having on aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com for a few years now.
The reason the Romance genre isn't widely respected as a genre is that the HEA is not seen by the general public as realistically plausible.
The plausibility of the HEA is based on the philosophical concept that Love Conquers All - an absolute axiom of my existence for a huge variety of reasons.
When you believe (not "those who believe" but "when" you believe because it's mood-based for many) that Love Conquers All, then the HEA seems the inevitable if hard-won and high-priced result of the battle between "Good" and "Evil."
When you don't - the HFN (Happily For Now) is the best you can hope for, and that's what Potter's parents had.
So the question becomes, "Why does it seem plausible that Love can't conquer Evil permanently?"
Oh, this is a deep topic, and the richest source material for Romance writers looking for "conflict" building themes.
This is the main study of writers in all genres, but especially Science Fiction and Romance, PNR, writers.
Science Fiction is "The Literature of Ideas" and so requires a deep study of philosophy, and a system of relating that abstract subject to today's reality.
Romance is maybe "The Literature of Love" and so requires a very deep study of philosophy, and a system of relating that abstract subject to LIFE in today's world.
These two, not at all disparate, subjects naturally crystallize into the thematic base of Science Fiction Romance, where as all good SF does, the story poses knotty questions about the value of "having a boyfriend/girlfriend" and how to acquire the character traits required to achieve a Happily Ever After union.
SF has long written of the process of acquiring those traits, as King points out -- though Potter is ostensibly Urban Fantasy. King nails the process: Harry Potter is all about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity.
And that's what every good Horror, SF, or Romance novel is always about, isn't it?
Ah, but what is fearful? Where does strength come from? Which way or action is "right" and which "wrong?" What really does adversity consist of, and what is just an annoyance?
We have a lot of work to do on the process of tossing all previous Romance genre work onto "the Potter's Wheel" and shaping it like wet clay into Science Fiction.
That work is what leads to the skill sets needed to handle Theme.
See Part 2 of this BELIEVING IN HAPPILY EVER AFTER series here next Tuesday when we'll look at the power of Theme-Plot Integration.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Immediately, I had a whole raft of writer friends turning up on google+ via the #Litchat connection so I made a circle for those folks, and before I knew it, here came a marvelous post with a quote from Stephen King -- this was just before the weekend when the last Harry Potter film was released.
So I'm trying to learn how to construct links that will lead you to elements on Google+. So far, no dice.
So here's a link that might lead you to the jpg with the quoted words on it. It works for me.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-z_XZoXQ5ugw/Th8BjOHXwdI/AAAAAAAABlw/DlYX2rScJEo/w402/tumblr_llhraiIQ4v1qbqtzko1_500.jpg
This quote jpg of text is posted on:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/115660915549619552182/posts/fpQjLS9Rfy8
Brandon Withrow, who got this interesting post from someone else on google+ known as Adm Chrysler, posted that image linked above, which had apparently already "gone viral" and which is a quote attributed to Stephen King. It says:
"Harry Potter is all about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend." -- Stephen King
I commented on Brandon's post, saying:
------quote---------
I admire Stephen King for his true professionalism. I met him once and learned he does what he does on purpose! However, I disagree with his summation here only because it leaves out some important words.
Twilight is about how "confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of diversity is necessary in order to have and maintain normal Relationships, even if you or your boyfriend aren't exactly normal people."
Potter is about dealing with the situation you are in through no fault of your own; Twilight is about choosing your situation and committing to see it through no matter what happens as a result of your choice."
---------end quote--------
Kate Shellnutt commented with another reference to what Stephen King has said, and Brandon Withrow answered:
------------quote----------
I suppose being a big HP fan skews his objectivity, where Jacqueline is giving a more even-handed take on the two. Not to geek out on it, but fan intensity for one or the other reminds me a bit of the Star Trek vs. Star Wars type of thing.
------------end quote---------
So of course I had to say:
--------quote---------
Oh, but I love my geeks! And of course you know I'm a very emphatic Trekker, having been primary author on the Bantam paperback STAR TREK LIVES! which outed ST fanfic (which I contributed to by creating the Kraith alternate universe for Trek fanfic). But actually, you're right, there's two takes on this, and I think it might be worth a blog post. I'll copy your quote and see what comes of it -- that would be late Sept/ early Oct for the topic on aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com where I post on Tuesdays on writing craft, and THIS quote is definitely a "craft" and "romance genre" related quote!
-------end quote-----------
Kraith is, as you know, posted for free reading on http://www.simegen.com/fandom/startrek/
Both Harry Potter and Twilight are Romance based.
Potter's parents were obviously deeply in love, and battling toward a Happily Ever After and didn't make it.
Potter then recapitulates their battle, and becomes involved at the teenage romance level with admirable women, and then "notices" such an admirable girl his own age. And presumably things will go to the HEA for Potter.
Twilight is more star-crossed-lovers, possibly more like the story of Potter's parents in the no-win situation where only their descendents make it to the HEA.
As a matter of "taste" - I think your concept of Evil and where that fits in the overall universe you live in - determines which you like better, Potter or Twilight. They're both seminal discussions of the plight of good swamped by Evil.
I suspect King seems to prefer Potter simply because Potter is battling Evil head-to-head, and in his world Evil is an accepted social element (studied in school as a magical discipline).
I don't "buy into" that concept, so I have to work to suspend my disbelief to 'get into' the Potterverse -- which I have no problem doing because that's what being a Science Fiction fan, reader, and writer is all about.
I can buy into the Twilight universe a little more easily simply because it extends my own view of the whole Vampire mythos that I've been a devotee of since my teen years.
Both universes are rooted in the discussion of whether the HEA is "plausible" in real life. Both have the HEA as "the stakes" in the plot, as King pointed out.
But the Potterverse says graphically that HEA isn't a given. Potter's parents got killed by Evil, and that proves the HEA is not a real element in that universe. Yet Harry is set up to go for another try at it.
King's assessment of Twilight is correct, too, because in the Twilight universe, the HEA is at least plausible, reachable, imaginable, and the most "Evil" creatures strive for it because it is apparently there.
So King has nailed (I'm not surprised) the philosophical nexus of the entire discussion you and I have been having on aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com for a few years now.
The reason the Romance genre isn't widely respected as a genre is that the HEA is not seen by the general public as realistically plausible.
The plausibility of the HEA is based on the philosophical concept that Love Conquers All - an absolute axiom of my existence for a huge variety of reasons.
When you believe (not "those who believe" but "when" you believe because it's mood-based for many) that Love Conquers All, then the HEA seems the inevitable if hard-won and high-priced result of the battle between "Good" and "Evil."
When you don't - the HFN (Happily For Now) is the best you can hope for, and that's what Potter's parents had.
So the question becomes, "Why does it seem plausible that Love can't conquer Evil permanently?"
Oh, this is a deep topic, and the richest source material for Romance writers looking for "conflict" building themes.
This is the main study of writers in all genres, but especially Science Fiction and Romance, PNR, writers.
Science Fiction is "The Literature of Ideas" and so requires a deep study of philosophy, and a system of relating that abstract subject to today's reality.
Romance is maybe "The Literature of Love" and so requires a very deep study of philosophy, and a system of relating that abstract subject to LIFE in today's world.
These two, not at all disparate, subjects naturally crystallize into the thematic base of Science Fiction Romance, where as all good SF does, the story poses knotty questions about the value of "having a boyfriend/girlfriend" and how to acquire the character traits required to achieve a Happily Ever After union.
SF has long written of the process of acquiring those traits, as King points out -- though Potter is ostensibly Urban Fantasy. King nails the process: Harry Potter is all about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity.
And that's what every good Horror, SF, or Romance novel is always about, isn't it?
Ah, but what is fearful? Where does strength come from? Which way or action is "right" and which "wrong?" What really does adversity consist of, and what is just an annoyance?
We have a lot of work to do on the process of tossing all previous Romance genre work onto "the Potter's Wheel" and shaping it like wet clay into Science Fiction.
That work is what leads to the skill sets needed to handle Theme.
See Part 2 of this BELIEVING IN HAPPILY EVER AFTER series here next Tuesday when we'll look at the power of Theme-Plot Integration.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Labels:
Google+,
Harry Potter,
HEA,
Love Conquers All,
Magic,
Romance Novels,
Romance Writing Craft,
Stephen King,
Theme,
Tuesday,
Twilight,
Vampires
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Big Love Sci-Fi Part V: Modesty, The Scrimmage Line of Big Love
This series started with Part I Sex Without Borders and continued each Tuesday concluding with Part VIII on August 9th, though we may be back to this subject for additional entries later.
Here's the first post in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-i-sex-without.html
And here's Part II in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-2-drama-of-illness.html
Part III in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-love-sci-fi-part-iii-how-big-can.html
Part IV in the series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-love-sci-fi-part-iv-mystery.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-i-sex-without.html
This Big Love Sci-Fi series is about how a Romance writer (any sub-genre) can create suspense, both romantic-suspense and action-suspense.
The Love Story is an ingredient I've used in almost every bit of fiction that I've sold so far. Romance isn't always my focus, but it's always there driving the personal issues of my characters whether they know it or not (yeah, past life karma adds "depth" to characters.)
The Love Story is my personal favorite thing, before, during or after the Romance, because in my life Love is what Makes The World Go Round.
I'm pretty much sure that "Love" is central to all human cultures, even those currently obsessing on teaching their children "Hate."
Reading Romance is virtually a degree-course in human Psychology, especially modern Romance, because the modern culture is furiously erasing the border between public and private. So we're watching characters suffering through the problems that confusion creates. That two-sides-of-the-coin relationship between Love and Hate is something I don't have to explain to Romance readers. And today's Romance readers have an in-depth grasp of the relationship between Sex and Violence, too. So no explanations needed.
But, ah, "Modesty!" -- that became a political football (scrimmage line; get it?) in the 1970's. Today it's almost a dirty word, a codeword for repression of women by men (well, as a matter of pure fact, it was!).
We're seeing an actual, violent, scrimmage line developing as more Muslim women adopt the veil for reasons most Western women either can't understand or actively despise. Isn't that curious?
Yeah, in this blog, I will tread where most would fear to go, and all of it in the name of Love.
There's a thesis here for this "Big Love Sci-Fi" series of posts. It could be (maybe) that the general public has little respect for Romance because the general public has no idea what Love is.
Now there's an unthinkable concept! Unthinkable concepts are what it takes to create SF! We're onto something Big here.
It's going to take a Romance writer, probably SFR writer, to explain that in a blockbuster feature film. So we need to train up Romance writers to regard "Love" and "Romance" as the "science" in the SFR.
The first thing a scientist needs to learn in order to become a scientist is to DOUBT EVERYTHING. Question everything.
You don't know anything you have not proved yourself. Other people's proofs don't count. You can't use a fact in your thinking until you, yourself, have proved it. That's what you learn in your first Geometry course.
To lead a readership on a Quest for facts that they can prove in their own lives, an SF writer must ask the kinds of questions the readership would never, ever, be able to pose. Those are the questions that confound, confuse, mystify, disconcert, challenge the foundations of reality, and ultimately cause the reader to question all their own innermost unconscious assumptions. The name of this process is "Philosophy" and it enters into fiction writing at the level of "Theme." Philosophy can be the "science" in the "science fiction" of an SFR novel. (I've done that many times.) Philosophy is the source of all the best Themes writers use because Philosophy poses unanswerable questions, or questions that are unanswerable within the confines of the reader's culture.
Our question today is, "What exactly is the place of Modesty in Love and Romance?" (if any)
Maybe before we get into the examination of "Modesty" we should agree on a working definition of "Love" vs. "Romance." (I figure we all know what "scrimmage" means, though we may disagree on what "Love" is.)
For definitions, let's hark back to my Astrology series here -- and assign the word "Love" to Venus and "Romance" to Neptune.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_30.html is an index to the Astrology series.
And here are my accompanying posts integrating Tarot and Astrology, all focused just on what a writer can learn from these disciplines (to create this dynamic suspense line for a Love story with or without hot Romance).
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_23.html
Venus forms bonds; Neptune dissolves them.
Venus rules Taurus, the Natural Second House of material possessions (OK money). It also rules the Natural 7th House, Libra, of Relationships and the public sphere of functioning (i.e. not private -- the OTHER SIDE of that barrier we've been working with.) Venus thus straddles the line between private (your personal possessions and philosophical Values) and public (your spouse, Others that you bond with. )
Neptune rules Pisces, the 12th House of Matters of Ultimate Concern (heaven, idealism here on Earth). When you die, your ties to Earth and all the people living here dissolve (often gradually, but when not so gradual we find our beloved Paranormal Ghost Romances!)
Neptune blurs your sense of connectedness to "the world" so that your attention can drift to "higher matters" (i.e. Philosophy).
In a Romance, both "lovers" are in a mental state ruled by Neptune (disconnected from "reality").
That mental state is usually caused by a Neptune transit to a sensitive and significant point in the Natal Charts of both members of the couple.
Our prevailing, science hammered culture, regards that state of being "in the clouds" as, if not unhealthy at least unrealistic.
Very typically, a shared Neptune transit effect becomes an "Affair." It can even trigger such an affair in a person who is married, because Neptune dissolves existing bonds and sets you free to drift through a world criss-crossed with anchoring bonds but not notice them.
That is Neptune alters your perception of your own "reality" -- it dissolves your perception of that "barrier" we've been talking about. Thus in an affair situation, a person may blurt out all kinds of private things about their spouse that they'd never mention to a stranger ordinarily.
Neptune alters your perception of reality and sometimes replaces your personal Ideals or gives you a vision of new Ideals you will then lust after (for a time.)
The odd thing to consider here is that many world-class Engineers and research scientists are Pisces dominated. Neptune is art and inspiration, and that's the basis of good science. Neptune is creativity, the visionary.
Which way Neptune manifests may have something to do with the individual's spiritual development as a Soul. It is said more advanced Souls manifest Neptune in a useful and positive way.
The idea is that Neptune alters your perception of "reality" -- and the Question the writer must ask is, "Does this character see reality more clearly under this transit, or less clearly? Does this other character wax psychic enough to penetrate the illusion of reality and come back with actual knowledge that is really true, despite it defying all common sense?"
Saturn is "common sense." Neptune is "idealism."
Which reality is true? That's the kind of barrier-line across which a writer can draw a suspense-line and generate a plot based on a theme rooted in Neptune vs. Venus.
As an aside, President Obama was elected with Pluto transiting opposition his Venus and Neptune transiting his Ascendant (according to one guess at his natal chart).
OK so now Venus.
One can bond with one's possessions, become a hoarder, a collector, a curator, or just filthy rich.
One can bond with one's "Significant Other" -- that's the 7th House relationship. It's social networking, too.
If ordinarily people don't like you, chances are under the right Venus transit (happens every year for a day or so) you might be elected to office, given an award, sell a novel, or get invited to a party (or have one thrown in your honor).
People born with Venus positioned just so are people who are just plain liked, who are popular, make friends easily, and everyone says they're "nice."
So, in today's world, girls who want to be the most popular girl in school (at least with the boys) adopt tight clothing, exposed cleavage (if they have one yet), and show as much skin as possible. In fact, it's a competition among the girls to see how much they can get away with. (not like this is new)
They're on the market, telegraphing they're ready to put out (sometimes this starts so young they don't even know that's what they're doing.)
Now, fast-forward to her mid-Thirties and two or three kids later, and what do you see? Assume she's married, has two or three kids, and still has a husband.
You look at a High School girl or college girl and you know what they're doing. So? What else would you expect? It's not immodest for a 16 year old to put the goods out there. It is, however, for a 10 year old, or at least I think so, while other mothers might not. (oh, yeah, domestic dispute scenes over teen dressing have a place in second-time-around Romance novels, where you can get in a lot of characterizing while moving the plot forward at blazing speed).
You look at this mother of 3, and you judge her by how she's dressed.
If she dresses like a High School girl on the prowl, it's distasteful, and maybe the word hooker comes to mind. Dressing twenty-years too young is not age-appropriate and invites assumptions. You might have doubts about her character, intentions, maturity, trustworthiness, values, maybe suspect a mental handicap.
But if she's 30-something in tight jeans, a low cut tight sweater, or sleeveless shirt, it's just battle-gear for kid-raising. If she's in a short skirted business suit, it's battle-gear for feeding her kids. In a business suit she might actually be showing cleavage and today's haircuts might be loose-hair seductively cupping the face. But that wouldn't be considered "immodest" in the Western world. Battle-gear is never immodest.
Notice how News Anchors (now almost 50% women!!!) covering hard news show cleavage and hips while men delivering the same information wear suit and tie securely closed? For a while, female News Anchors wore business suits - started with pants suits, then skirts were a necessity -- now it's slinky-sexy dress. Sex sells. But the public perception is that such clothing is not immodest or demeaning of the Anchor's womanhood. (well the female perception - not at all sure about the men)
If your thirty-year old mother of 3 is going out to a formal dinner, cleavage, sleeveless, clingy satin around the hips, heels to die in, would not be immodest. If she dresses like that to mow the lawn or hit the supermarket, take the kids to soccer practice, you've telegraphed something totally else about this character.
So how you dress your characters relative to their age and activity causes readers to judge the character's modesty, according to the customs of the segment of our culture they belong to.
But is "modesty" really about CLOTHING? Isn't too much cloaking actually immodest because it draws attention, shouts "Look at me! I'm modest!"
In fact, does modesty have anything at all to do with clothing, or is that a smokescreen to divert attention from the actual issue of "modest?" (A good Romance theme might be "Modesty is not a Virtue.")
Or maybe clothing just a symbol for the dimension of modesty?
Previously in this Big Love Sci-Fi series of posts, I mentioned that our culture suffers from a blurring of the line between private&public which has led to a loss of definition (Neptune, idealism) of the difference between Private and Secret. This makes the Romance writer's job much more difficult when developing Romantic Suspense.
Private is something that's nobody else's business.
Secret is something that is everybody else's business but you are preventing them from knowing it.
Today, the TSA has had to revise their standards for body-searching 6 year olds. There was a case of a child of that age group who moved during the scan, and was immediately sent for intrusive personal pat-down, which traumatized the child. This tidbit of news may signal a renewed debate over the difference between private (as in body parts) and secret (as in carrying something harmful to others.)
Secrets make dandy plot devices, and create automatic suspense (when will they find out?)
In today's fiction market, "Private" is much harder to handle because the readers have no actual, concrete idea of what Private really is.
A society which did still have the notion of "Private" would never have allowed the TSA to come into existence, no matter the risk.
It isn't about government intrusion into private space. It's about any intrusion into private space.
The entire notion of "Privacy" has become political, and equated with "Secrecy" and thus "Dirty Secrecy." (Yes, I'm thinking of Wiener and such similar revelations.)
If there's anything in your life that you wish nobody but you to know about BECAUSE it's not relevant to them, then in today's world you are basically taking an asocial stand!
The public has a right to know (even if Google and Microsoft don't).
Even if the public doesn't have a "right" to know, your reluctance to reveal is paranoid.
Now you can argue against that statement. The software companies, especially "security" companies, go through all kinds of gyrations to "protect" your privacy.
But notice the choice of words. Security. Protect.
Implicit in that is the notion of external hostility (yes, I know there really are hostile hackers doing harm; this is about social philosophy useful to ROMANCE WRITERS, not about politics or reality.)
So why is the "exterior" world hostile? Because you are keeping secrets. Anything "private" is now considered "secret."
Here's another TSA anecdote taken from real life.
From this you might conclude that modesty is now illegal in the U.S.A. (wonderful worldbuilding premise)
I know a family that made an international vacation trip recently.
They are a middle-aged couple with a 12 year old son. The husband is diabetic (diabetes I, really problematic on trips, very much life-threatening and developing heart disease which the wife knows about). For traveling, the wife wore a long skirt and loose blouse, comfortable for sleeping on a long plane trip.
On the way home, they went through "Security" and passed the screening machine. But because the woman was not wearing tight jeans and a tight sweater, form fitting clothing, they were delayed for a physical pat-down of the wife, right in front of the eyes of the adolescent boy and the husband who was in distress from the diabetes. They were racing to make a connection.
The woman made an issue of the pat-down and demanded a private pat-down, which was provided, but by a man. She then delayed things further by asking that her husband be present. A big argument ensued with the TSA worker. But there was nobody to watch the son. So he was there while his mother was essentially violated (whether the TSA worker saw it that way or not, the mother experienced it that way. She had recently encountered a TSA worker via her job who was not fired after being convicted of sex crimes.)
With all the delay, they missed their connecting flight, a dire problem for a diabetic since food isn't served and with all kinds of food restrictions, there was nothing eatable available to buy on the concourse. Stress like this takes years off a diabetic's life by deteriorating the organs.
All travelers have seen this kind of thing happen, had it happen to them, and now a huge segment of the US population has "adjusted." It's the price of security. *shrug*
See last week's post about how Big can Love be in Science Fiction? It was about the sensitivity level going down in our society.
Subjecting such a wide swath of our society to this kind of intrusive search (and I'm not addressing the Constitutional angles here because that doesn't matter in this subject area) hits and hits on those sensitive areas of our collective psyche and forces us to adapt by become insensitive, coarsened, calloused to sexual intrusion.
Science Fiction writers have long accepted that humans are extremely adaptable. Many build worlds where humans are altered to be able to live on other worlds where they must adapt or die. And humans adapt.
We are adapting to this social fabric shift that erases the barrier between public and private, between privacy and secrecy.
But it's a scrimmage line. Those who want "safety at all costs" are pushing the resisting and desperate line of those who wish to live a life where there exists such a thing as privacy which is not secrecy.
Eventually, it will come to a vote, and Public (Venus) Ideals (Neptune) will be established, probably permanently. We bond with our Ideals.
But while it is a battleground, Romance writers weaving Science into their fiction can exploit the tensions across that Public/Private barrier using philosophy as the science. Just watch the headlines and read between the lines!
This public debate over privacy may affect the generally accepted definition of "Love" because one of the essential elements of "Love" is Intimacy. You can't have intimacy without private space that isn't secret. Intimacy is the exploration (adventure into) the private space of another, sharing private space, melding two private spaces into one. That which happens in the family stays in the family.
If we give up personal body privacy, we in essence destroy the "family" which is the group that shares private space. Re-read my posts on astrology, then go learn more about "The Houses" in astrology, which divide the human psyche into 4 quadrants. It's a graphic depiction of the definition of Privacy. There's a whopping big Romance novel in this.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Here's the first post in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-i-sex-without.html
And here's Part II in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-2-drama-of-illness.html
Part III in this series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-love-sci-fi-part-iii-how-big-can.html
Part IV in the series:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-love-sci-fi-part-iv-mystery.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/06/big-love-sci-fi-part-i-sex-without.html
This Big Love Sci-Fi series is about how a Romance writer (any sub-genre) can create suspense, both romantic-suspense and action-suspense.
The Love Story is an ingredient I've used in almost every bit of fiction that I've sold so far. Romance isn't always my focus, but it's always there driving the personal issues of my characters whether they know it or not (yeah, past life karma adds "depth" to characters.)
The Love Story is my personal favorite thing, before, during or after the Romance, because in my life Love is what Makes The World Go Round.
I'm pretty much sure that "Love" is central to all human cultures, even those currently obsessing on teaching their children "Hate."
Reading Romance is virtually a degree-course in human Psychology, especially modern Romance, because the modern culture is furiously erasing the border between public and private. So we're watching characters suffering through the problems that confusion creates. That two-sides-of-the-coin relationship between Love and Hate is something I don't have to explain to Romance readers. And today's Romance readers have an in-depth grasp of the relationship between Sex and Violence, too. So no explanations needed.
But, ah, "Modesty!" -- that became a political football (scrimmage line; get it?) in the 1970's. Today it's almost a dirty word, a codeword for repression of women by men (well, as a matter of pure fact, it was!).
We're seeing an actual, violent, scrimmage line developing as more Muslim women adopt the veil for reasons most Western women either can't understand or actively despise. Isn't that curious?
Yeah, in this blog, I will tread where most would fear to go, and all of it in the name of Love.
There's a thesis here for this "Big Love Sci-Fi" series of posts. It could be (maybe) that the general public has little respect for Romance because the general public has no idea what Love is.
Now there's an unthinkable concept! Unthinkable concepts are what it takes to create SF! We're onto something Big here.
It's going to take a Romance writer, probably SFR writer, to explain that in a blockbuster feature film. So we need to train up Romance writers to regard "Love" and "Romance" as the "science" in the SFR.
The first thing a scientist needs to learn in order to become a scientist is to DOUBT EVERYTHING. Question everything.
You don't know anything you have not proved yourself. Other people's proofs don't count. You can't use a fact in your thinking until you, yourself, have proved it. That's what you learn in your first Geometry course.
To lead a readership on a Quest for facts that they can prove in their own lives, an SF writer must ask the kinds of questions the readership would never, ever, be able to pose. Those are the questions that confound, confuse, mystify, disconcert, challenge the foundations of reality, and ultimately cause the reader to question all their own innermost unconscious assumptions. The name of this process is "Philosophy" and it enters into fiction writing at the level of "Theme." Philosophy can be the "science" in the "science fiction" of an SFR novel. (I've done that many times.) Philosophy is the source of all the best Themes writers use because Philosophy poses unanswerable questions, or questions that are unanswerable within the confines of the reader's culture.
Our question today is, "What exactly is the place of Modesty in Love and Romance?" (if any)
Maybe before we get into the examination of "Modesty" we should agree on a working definition of "Love" vs. "Romance." (I figure we all know what "scrimmage" means, though we may disagree on what "Love" is.)
For definitions, let's hark back to my Astrology series here -- and assign the word "Love" to Venus and "Romance" to Neptune.
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_30.html is an index to the Astrology series.
And here are my accompanying posts integrating Tarot and Astrology, all focused just on what a writer can learn from these disciplines (to create this dynamic suspense line for a Love story with or without hot Romance).
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_23.html
Venus forms bonds; Neptune dissolves them.
Venus rules Taurus, the Natural Second House of material possessions (OK money). It also rules the Natural 7th House, Libra, of Relationships and the public sphere of functioning (i.e. not private -- the OTHER SIDE of that barrier we've been working with.) Venus thus straddles the line between private (your personal possessions and philosophical Values) and public (your spouse, Others that you bond with. )
Neptune rules Pisces, the 12th House of Matters of Ultimate Concern (heaven, idealism here on Earth). When you die, your ties to Earth and all the people living here dissolve (often gradually, but when not so gradual we find our beloved Paranormal Ghost Romances!)
Neptune blurs your sense of connectedness to "the world" so that your attention can drift to "higher matters" (i.e. Philosophy).
In a Romance, both "lovers" are in a mental state ruled by Neptune (disconnected from "reality").
That mental state is usually caused by a Neptune transit to a sensitive and significant point in the Natal Charts of both members of the couple.
Our prevailing, science hammered culture, regards that state of being "in the clouds" as, if not unhealthy at least unrealistic.
Very typically, a shared Neptune transit effect becomes an "Affair." It can even trigger such an affair in a person who is married, because Neptune dissolves existing bonds and sets you free to drift through a world criss-crossed with anchoring bonds but not notice them.
That is Neptune alters your perception of your own "reality" -- it dissolves your perception of that "barrier" we've been talking about. Thus in an affair situation, a person may blurt out all kinds of private things about their spouse that they'd never mention to a stranger ordinarily.
Neptune alters your perception of reality and sometimes replaces your personal Ideals or gives you a vision of new Ideals you will then lust after (for a time.)
The odd thing to consider here is that many world-class Engineers and research scientists are Pisces dominated. Neptune is art and inspiration, and that's the basis of good science. Neptune is creativity, the visionary.
Which way Neptune manifests may have something to do with the individual's spiritual development as a Soul. It is said more advanced Souls manifest Neptune in a useful and positive way.
The idea is that Neptune alters your perception of "reality" -- and the Question the writer must ask is, "Does this character see reality more clearly under this transit, or less clearly? Does this other character wax psychic enough to penetrate the illusion of reality and come back with actual knowledge that is really true, despite it defying all common sense?"
Saturn is "common sense." Neptune is "idealism."
Which reality is true? That's the kind of barrier-line across which a writer can draw a suspense-line and generate a plot based on a theme rooted in Neptune vs. Venus.
As an aside, President Obama was elected with Pluto transiting opposition his Venus and Neptune transiting his Ascendant (according to one guess at his natal chart).
OK so now Venus.
One can bond with one's possessions, become a hoarder, a collector, a curator, or just filthy rich.
One can bond with one's "Significant Other" -- that's the 7th House relationship. It's social networking, too.
If ordinarily people don't like you, chances are under the right Venus transit (happens every year for a day or so) you might be elected to office, given an award, sell a novel, or get invited to a party (or have one thrown in your honor).
People born with Venus positioned just so are people who are just plain liked, who are popular, make friends easily, and everyone says they're "nice."
So, in today's world, girls who want to be the most popular girl in school (at least with the boys) adopt tight clothing, exposed cleavage (if they have one yet), and show as much skin as possible. In fact, it's a competition among the girls to see how much they can get away with. (not like this is new)
They're on the market, telegraphing they're ready to put out (sometimes this starts so young they don't even know that's what they're doing.)
Now, fast-forward to her mid-Thirties and two or three kids later, and what do you see? Assume she's married, has two or three kids, and still has a husband.
You look at a High School girl or college girl and you know what they're doing. So? What else would you expect? It's not immodest for a 16 year old to put the goods out there. It is, however, for a 10 year old, or at least I think so, while other mothers might not. (oh, yeah, domestic dispute scenes over teen dressing have a place in second-time-around Romance novels, where you can get in a lot of characterizing while moving the plot forward at blazing speed).
You look at this mother of 3, and you judge her by how she's dressed.
If she dresses like a High School girl on the prowl, it's distasteful, and maybe the word hooker comes to mind. Dressing twenty-years too young is not age-appropriate and invites assumptions. You might have doubts about her character, intentions, maturity, trustworthiness, values, maybe suspect a mental handicap.
But if she's 30-something in tight jeans, a low cut tight sweater, or sleeveless shirt, it's just battle-gear for kid-raising. If she's in a short skirted business suit, it's battle-gear for feeding her kids. In a business suit she might actually be showing cleavage and today's haircuts might be loose-hair seductively cupping the face. But that wouldn't be considered "immodest" in the Western world. Battle-gear is never immodest.
Notice how News Anchors (now almost 50% women!!!) covering hard news show cleavage and hips while men delivering the same information wear suit and tie securely closed? For a while, female News Anchors wore business suits - started with pants suits, then skirts were a necessity -- now it's slinky-sexy dress. Sex sells. But the public perception is that such clothing is not immodest or demeaning of the Anchor's womanhood. (well the female perception - not at all sure about the men)
If your thirty-year old mother of 3 is going out to a formal dinner, cleavage, sleeveless, clingy satin around the hips, heels to die in, would not be immodest. If she dresses like that to mow the lawn or hit the supermarket, take the kids to soccer practice, you've telegraphed something totally else about this character.
So how you dress your characters relative to their age and activity causes readers to judge the character's modesty, according to the customs of the segment of our culture they belong to.
But is "modesty" really about CLOTHING? Isn't too much cloaking actually immodest because it draws attention, shouts "Look at me! I'm modest!"
In fact, does modesty have anything at all to do with clothing, or is that a smokescreen to divert attention from the actual issue of "modest?" (A good Romance theme might be "Modesty is not a Virtue.")
Or maybe clothing just a symbol for the dimension of modesty?
Previously in this Big Love Sci-Fi series of posts, I mentioned that our culture suffers from a blurring of the line between private&public which has led to a loss of definition (Neptune, idealism) of the difference between Private and Secret. This makes the Romance writer's job much more difficult when developing Romantic Suspense.
Private is something that's nobody else's business.
Secret is something that is everybody else's business but you are preventing them from knowing it.
Today, the TSA has had to revise their standards for body-searching 6 year olds. There was a case of a child of that age group who moved during the scan, and was immediately sent for intrusive personal pat-down, which traumatized the child. This tidbit of news may signal a renewed debate over the difference between private (as in body parts) and secret (as in carrying something harmful to others.)
Secrets make dandy plot devices, and create automatic suspense (when will they find out?)
In today's fiction market, "Private" is much harder to handle because the readers have no actual, concrete idea of what Private really is.
A society which did still have the notion of "Private" would never have allowed the TSA to come into existence, no matter the risk.
It isn't about government intrusion into private space. It's about any intrusion into private space.
The entire notion of "Privacy" has become political, and equated with "Secrecy" and thus "Dirty Secrecy." (Yes, I'm thinking of Wiener and such similar revelations.)
If there's anything in your life that you wish nobody but you to know about BECAUSE it's not relevant to them, then in today's world you are basically taking an asocial stand!
The public has a right to know (even if Google and Microsoft don't).
Even if the public doesn't have a "right" to know, your reluctance to reveal is paranoid.
Now you can argue against that statement. The software companies, especially "security" companies, go through all kinds of gyrations to "protect" your privacy.
But notice the choice of words. Security. Protect.
Implicit in that is the notion of external hostility (yes, I know there really are hostile hackers doing harm; this is about social philosophy useful to ROMANCE WRITERS, not about politics or reality.)
So why is the "exterior" world hostile? Because you are keeping secrets. Anything "private" is now considered "secret."
Here's another TSA anecdote taken from real life.
From this you might conclude that modesty is now illegal in the U.S.A. (wonderful worldbuilding premise)
I know a family that made an international vacation trip recently.
They are a middle-aged couple with a 12 year old son. The husband is diabetic (diabetes I, really problematic on trips, very much life-threatening and developing heart disease which the wife knows about). For traveling, the wife wore a long skirt and loose blouse, comfortable for sleeping on a long plane trip.
On the way home, they went through "Security" and passed the screening machine. But because the woman was not wearing tight jeans and a tight sweater, form fitting clothing, they were delayed for a physical pat-down of the wife, right in front of the eyes of the adolescent boy and the husband who was in distress from the diabetes. They were racing to make a connection.
The woman made an issue of the pat-down and demanded a private pat-down, which was provided, but by a man. She then delayed things further by asking that her husband be present. A big argument ensued with the TSA worker. But there was nobody to watch the son. So he was there while his mother was essentially violated (whether the TSA worker saw it that way or not, the mother experienced it that way. She had recently encountered a TSA worker via her job who was not fired after being convicted of sex crimes.)
With all the delay, they missed their connecting flight, a dire problem for a diabetic since food isn't served and with all kinds of food restrictions, there was nothing eatable available to buy on the concourse. Stress like this takes years off a diabetic's life by deteriorating the organs.
All travelers have seen this kind of thing happen, had it happen to them, and now a huge segment of the US population has "adjusted." It's the price of security. *shrug*
See last week's post about how Big can Love be in Science Fiction? It was about the sensitivity level going down in our society.
Subjecting such a wide swath of our society to this kind of intrusive search (and I'm not addressing the Constitutional angles here because that doesn't matter in this subject area) hits and hits on those sensitive areas of our collective psyche and forces us to adapt by become insensitive, coarsened, calloused to sexual intrusion.
Science Fiction writers have long accepted that humans are extremely adaptable. Many build worlds where humans are altered to be able to live on other worlds where they must adapt or die. And humans adapt.
We are adapting to this social fabric shift that erases the barrier between public and private, between privacy and secrecy.
But it's a scrimmage line. Those who want "safety at all costs" are pushing the resisting and desperate line of those who wish to live a life where there exists such a thing as privacy which is not secrecy.
Eventually, it will come to a vote, and Public (Venus) Ideals (Neptune) will be established, probably permanently. We bond with our Ideals.
But while it is a battleground, Romance writers weaving Science into their fiction can exploit the tensions across that Public/Private barrier using philosophy as the science. Just watch the headlines and read between the lines!
This public debate over privacy may affect the generally accepted definition of "Love" because one of the essential elements of "Love" is Intimacy. You can't have intimacy without private space that isn't secret. Intimacy is the exploration (adventure into) the private space of another, sharing private space, melding two private spaces into one. That which happens in the family stays in the family.
If we give up personal body privacy, we in essence destroy the "family" which is the group that shares private space. Re-read my posts on astrology, then go learn more about "The Houses" in astrology, which divide the human psyche into 4 quadrants. It's a graphic depiction of the definition of Privacy. There's a whopping big Romance novel in this.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Labels:
Creating Suspense,
Romance Novels,
Romantic Suspense,
Suspense,
TSA,
Tuesday
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)