sholio | Moral dilemmas (of the fictitious kind)

Entry tags:

Moral dilemmas (of the fictitious kind)

I wrote, posted, and then deleted a woe-is-me post about a family issue that I was struggling with today -- I feel that the decision I made was the morally correct one, but also the one most likely to cause a rift in the family.

To deal with my own emotional upset over it, I considered applying it to fiction (as one does), and this got me thinking about the fact that I don't often deal with that kind of moral dilemma in my stories: the sort in which there are good and bad points on both sides, and any choice is likely to lead to unfortunate consequences. Real life is full of it. Some writers deal with it a lot. But I hadn't really thought before about the fact that I rarely do.

I've read that most writers have a preferred theme or themes that they deal with in most of their fiction. I think it's probably true, but had never been able to identify what my recurring themes are. Thinking about it from this perspective, though, I think it's generally true that most of my stories don't spend much time struggling with moral quandaries. Even when there are good people on both sides of the issue, it's usually pretty obvious to the reader what the characters ought to do -- the central "problem" tends to be more that a character doesn't know whether they're physically or emotionally capable of doing it.

To put it in the simplest possible terms, my stories generally ask the question "Can I do this?", not "Should I do this?"

I don't think this is necessarily a deficiency in my writing, but it's making me think that I might use this as a platform for branching out a bit and giving my characters some moral dilemmas to work through.

What about you? Do you seem to have a clear preference for writing "Can I...?" or "Should I...?" stories? If you tackle complex issues with a lot of shades of gray, I would love to hear how you go about it. How do you avoid painting the issue in terms of an obvious right and wrong? How do you approach it from a character perspective? I would love to hear any advice that you have for writing that kind of story, or for incorporating complex issues into a longer story. (It's not that I've never done it, but it doesn't seem to come naturally to me.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Hmm. I don't do shades of gray that often...well, not moral grays, at least; I do seem to have a fondness for writing about relationships that fail not because of the fault of either people involved, and a lot of those are no-win situations. Some of my Clex fic was morally ambiguous but I tended to, hmm, skirt the issues...they'd do questionable things that would work out in the short-term and the long-term wouldn't be explored.

I figured out my own preferred theme a while ago - especially in my original fic, nearly everything I write explores issues of identity - not labels particularly so much as what makes a person who they are, and not someone else. So I tend to be fascinated with clones, people meeting alternate universe/timeline versions of themselves, nature vs nurture stories...it's not really intentional on my part; it's just what I end up writing.

Interesting! I don't think I would've pegged that as a key characteristic of your writing -- though admittedly I'm not that familiar with your original stuff. On the other hand, I know that I tend to be fairly unobservant about theme -- in both my own writing and other people's. ^^;; Which is probably why I have so much trouble figuring out my own themes ...

I do think my original writing tends to be more morally complicated than my fanfic. Actually, after posting the above, I realized that I do often tackle more complicated issues in my original writing. However, even in those cases, I think I tend to sidestep the characters' moral culpability by making them somewhat helpless in the face of events pushing them around -- it's a lot more about "How do we survive this?" than "What do we do to fix this?"

Now I really want to figure out my own themes, dammitall! :D I know I write a lot about friendship and chosen family -- even creating it in cases where it doesn't really exist in canon (like Trigun).

Hmmm ...

Yeah, it tends to show up a lot more in my original stuff. In my fanfic it mainly manifests in a love of multiverses, or in weird things like "Seat of Talents". But most of my fanfic tends to be more about OTPing/OTTeaming (my orig-novel plots tend to be along those lines as well; the identity stuff is more common in my shorter work.)

Friendship and chosen families are definitely common themes in your work. Maybe more generally, the idea of people finding their place - the quest for, hmm, not happiness exactly, but contentment?

I think you handle more moral dilemmas than you think, even in your fic - less in the action/adventure/h/c-oriented stories, but then that's not the sort of story that's suited to exploring morality. Your darker-themed fic does explore more complex situations...

Maybe more generally, the idea of people finding their place - the quest for, hmm, not happiness exactly, but contentment?

I think you may be absolutely right. :D Especially looking at my original writing ... all four of my major original projects have that as a major theme -- lonely, displaced people finding "home" and inner peace. (And in one case, rather spectacularly *not* find it, but there was going to be a "fix" in later books, if I'd ever finished them ...)

Innnnnteresting. I do think you're correct! It's certainly what I feel drawn to most of all.

I think you handle more moral dilemmas than you think, even in your fic - less in the action/adventure/h/c-oriented stories, but then that's not the sort of story that's suited to exploring morality. Your darker-themed fic does explore more complex situations...

Yeah ... I think I do but not really as much as I like. Or, at least, I seem to load the decks so that the characters' choice is relatively easy to make. Something to consider in future writing ...

I know I've seen people lamenting recently that so little fic does that, In this case claiming that SGA regularly tackled such questions. I'm not persuaded that's the case; sure, they presented dilemmas, but they pretty much always positioned the plot to advocate for the "right" side, with rewards and success eventually falling to one side, or "I told you so" consequences if the other side prevailed. (To hear the show tell it, for example, genetic manipulation can never, ever resolve a biological conflict, no matter how well-intentioned or decreased-scope the manipulation; we saw this theme repeatedly over the seasons.)

Constructing a real dilemma with good points on either side is hard. We're conditioned to see that questions have right and wrong answers, conflicts right and wrong sides.

I don't tend to approach either "can" or "should"; I prefer to present characters with a situation to see how they'll react. The closest I've come has been in the original fiction I used to toy with. (Should the unexpectedly pregnant detective terminate her pregnancy or not? Should her partner offer his spare room to the slowly recovering and soon-to-be-homeless crime victim, as an act of both growing friendship and Christian charity, or should he say nothing because he's unwillingly falling in love and fears ruining the friendship? Should he and his journalist friends help the teenagers take down the girl's father quietly, or should they follow proper procedures they can all see are doomed to fail? Shame that work is so fatally flawed, really.)

One of the LFWS stories just posted had what could have been such a question, except it was constructed with Ronon refusing and the others suggesting why he perhaps should; he simply refused throughout. Would that satisfy the "should I?" category, to you, or would there need to have been the possibility that someone's mind might change?

In this case claiming that SGA regularly tackled such questions.

... wait, what, people are saying that it did? I'd say SGA is an excellent example of a show that raised such questions and then utterly failed to deal with them (or did it clumsily if at all). The dilemmas were definitely there, but it always felt to me that they were presented in such a way that we were supposed to sympathize with the heroes no matter what they did ...

I did read the LFWS story and I dunno ... I was unhappy with how the dilemma in the story was handled because it felt to me like the ramifications weren't worked through (like with the way the show itself handled morally sticky issues), but now that you bring it up, I think part of my problem with the story was that there was never any question in the viewpoint character's mind as to how he was going to handle it, and little risk of consequences to him for making the decision that he'd already decided to make. Which makes it less compelling ... I mean, I did appreciate that he didn't approach it in the same way that the Atlanteans did, but I think it would've been a stronger story if he'd faced obstacles (like, say, the fear of losing Sheppard's respect, or Jennifer's) for the decision that he made.

But anyway, yes, the sort of morally sticky issue that was brought up in the story was exactly what I was thinking about -- a difficult situation where there isn't a clear right and wrong, and someone is hurt (or likely to be hurt) no matter what happens. Or

wildcat88's recent story about Carson and Ronon clashing over whether to give medical care to a Wraith sympathizer would be another example. It's not that there aren't decisions in most stories, or even that there aren't stories that present sticky dilemmas, but I do think that writers in general -- in fandom -- tend towards scenarios in which the "right" answer is usually fairly obvious to the reader (yes, you shoot the bad guy; yes, he loves you and ignoring him is making you both unhappy, idiot). I suppose one reason for that is because it's virtually impossible to have a happy ending with the other sort of decision; someone's going to be hurt no matter what.

I don't recall the full conversation, but SGA canon was definitely raised, whether that was for full exploration of the sides of such questions or merely for bothering to raise them. (I think it was the former, though.) But yeah, I always thought the Stargate canon 'verse always had a huge, patently visible thumb resting on the scale.

I think the LFWS story does raise what could be that sort of question but didn't approach it as one; maybe that's why I wasn't sure about using it as an example here.

The

wildcat88 story, though — that one drove me crazy, because Carson was clearly wrong ... but. I claim to be a humanist, and I absolutely believe his character would choose that path. So what he's doing is right for him, and maybe "right" in general. But. In other words, I'd say that story tackled the "should we?" perfectly, because neither side's solution is perfect or absolutely right. The fact that it drove me crazy is testament to how well it challenged my binary, standardized-test-trained mental landscape.

You make a very good point about the possibility of happy endings. A lot of fic is fairly short, too, and while some writers are good enough to tackle complex dilemmas in short form, I know I never could.

Thinking about my own work, I'd say I tend to underplay the question itself even when it's valid, jumping ahead to their making a choice and watching how the choice plays out. I don't know how much of that is my dislike for "we get it already!" passages; I get frustrated having to plow through restatements of what the characters already know, and that would seem to be at least partly necessary for a consideration of the positive and negative aspects of a fraught choice. I'm also somewhat conflict-averse, and having characters I like disagree makes me uncomfortable. That avoidance is certainly something I need to keep a closer eye on in my own writing.

First of all, I want to say how much I love reading your lj because your make me think about things, and that is always a good thing. As for your questions, I guess personally I'm more of the kind not to overthink things in regards to right or wrong.

Maybe it's where I was raised, but I'm always of the mind that *they should string that bastard up by his hindparts for what he did* then later, maybe consider whether something is right or not. I'm more of the school of whether I would be able to do it myself or not. If someone were to break into my house and try to kill my mother, would I be able to kill him to stop him? Or, since where I live the laws about hit and runs are so different from other places, would I stay if I ran someone over even if it meant that I would go to jail no matter if it's my fault or not? Or be responsible for that person for the rest of their lives.

In my stories, well, the one that I'm currently writing, my character's mother hates the kid's father. She's afraid that he will turn into his father and that in turn makes her immerse herself in religion in all the extreme and bad ways. One day a friend of kid's is killed and he takes off and joins his father who believes that "their kind" will be persecuted. His father is going to do something that's very, very bad for a lot of people. The kid eventually chooses to betray his dad and "save the day". The story is all about him coming to terms with himself, what happened and who his parents really are. It's a difficult piece for all the emotional journey the main character has to take. I used my own personal journey with my own parents and understanding that they were only human and did the best they could.

I guess I like to write stories about personal journeys. And to read. Just people growing and becoming something more, or rather the people they were meant to be. One of the reasons your stories are so compelling is because of that. It's about friendships and how that affects people, good or bad.

Thank you very much. :)

Your story sounds very interesting! I think that to some extent, having complex characters with complex lives leads to interesting and complicated drama -- the characters' personalities and situations suggest the plots that are built around them. My original fiction seems to have more shades of gray than my fanfic, usually, and perhaps that's one reason why -- because I know the characters inside and out, and the story is all about having them change and grow. Fanfic isn't so much that way -- at least most fanfic isn't -- because the characters are already who they'll be; having them change into something else runs the risk of alienating their fans. (Not that I'm saying it can't be done, or that good fanfic doesn't do exactly that! But it's a great deal more challenging than having them shoot at something or sleep with someone.)

Well, one of the things I have seen you do is show several facets of the characters. They're still who they are, just a different version, thus why I love your particular AUs so much. It's intersting to be able to take a particlar character and shift them around, and say, what if this and how would that affect who they are. It's impressive that you are able to know the characters you write so well and to be able to do that, especially considering they're not your own creations (the characters).

Fanfic is such a different animal from what I've been. Writing fanfiction is both the easiest and hardest thing to do. Easiest because you don't have do to worry about world building so much and the dynamic of the group or situation is already established, you just get to play with it. It's harder because they aren't your characters or world to play with. You have to figure out not only who they are but who the author/creator intends them to be. Their pasts, their futures (this is especially hard is the show is in the early seasons or it ended in their early seasons).

The intersting thing about fanfiction is how everyone interprets the characters/situations in differet ways. No two writers will write the same story even if the plot is basically the same. The understanding about the show/world will be subjective and not objective, so that makes for either great fanfiction or not so great fanfiction.

I so didn't see te whole John is a rich kid in SGA. I really expected him to be a military brat tue way he seems to have problems forming long lasting interpersonal connections. Letting people in is not one of his strong suits. He tends to run from the emotional attachments when the person doesn't live up to expectations. Case in point Rodney and Doranda. Or he shuts out the people around him when he's hurting. We saw that all the beginning of season 2 and how cold he was toward people after losing Ford.

I didn't know how much of my story to explain. I was a bit afraid that I would bore you with all the details, I'm glad I didn't. This story really is a scary challenge for me since I've never written such a complex story before. Here's hoping it'll turn out right.

Hmmm.. I've definitely venture into the "Should I?" Realm more than once and definitely into the "there is no perfect ending here" realm where both sides make mistakes and whatever outcome, even the best one, is far from perfect. For me, its a challenging thing and I can never resist a good challenge. ;)

I think I write both. It really depends on what I'm trying to do, though I have had RL bleed into stories and themes before, I think we all have.

However, when I tackle a story with lots of shades of gray in it, I put myself into characters on both sides of the "argument". I have to think like they do, which is very challenging when you don't share the perspective of someone on one side or the other.

For me, when I wrote Autumn in our Hearts, which is undeniably the most morally ambiguous story I've ever written, I started with the characters I knew and was comfortable writing, like John Sheppard. I know his character, how he would view a morally ambiguous situation and what he would believe. I outline his character and even write dialog. Then I stepped back and looked at the story I was creating and literally said "Ok, if I didn't think like John Sheppard, what would I think of this situation?" For me, that's where Elizabeth came in, and I think she was the first one on "the other side" that I tackled. I was fortunate to have a character that I was comfortable writing that fit into the other side of my argument and it was very canon for her.

You have to think of it, like you think of anything you feel strongly about. At least for me, when I truly believe in something, its because I've asked myself so many questions and questioned my own beliefs that I know I firmly believe them. THOSE are the questions I pose to the storyline and lend the voice to different opinions (either canon characters or OCs if necessary). The interesting thing is that I usually end up with characters on each side of the argument and then one or a few right in the middle of the road (in Autumn, that was Elizabeth and to some extent Teyla, with a bunch of fanatics on one side, and people like John, Ronon and McKay on the other.) If you ask those questions of your story and your characters, you end up with true "technicolor" opinions that don't paint the issue in an absolute right or wrong, but keeps it in the gray with each side having legitimate points that are true to their beliefs.

Start with the canon characters though, its a good way to establish 2 sides because, at least IMHO, there is a lot of diversity in perspective in the Atlantis characters (even if the show never really explored it to any extent) even within John's team.

Playing "Devils Advocate" also can be a great way to flesh out a "Should I?" story. ;)

Hope that helps some. Really had to sit back and think about how I fleshed that story out. ;)

Thank you! :D That's actually very useful advice and precisely the sort of thing I'm struggling with. :) (I don't remember that specific story -- I've read so much fic in this fandom that my memory for specific stories sucks like a sucking thing -- but I'll go take a look!)

One thing I like about writing SGA -- and should probably take advantage of more than I do -- is that the characters represent such a variety of viewpoints; it's plausible that they would end up on different sides in many kinds of situations, with the potential for major rifts in the team as well.

Glad to help, I was wondering if I was making any sense. ;)

I do love the diverse viewpoints of the characters, even within John's team. Its a very interesting aspect that I wish the show explored more (they did a little) but I love exploring it in fics.

I don't remember that specific story -- I've read so much fic in this fandom that my memory for specific stories sucks like a sucking thing -- but I'll go take a look!

LOL I totally get that. I'm always trying to remember what story was what. ;)

I don't have this one up on LJ yet, (I keep meaning to get my stories on LJ but RL keeps getting in the way along with other fandom projects... *sigh*)

but it is up on ff.net, if you're interested :)
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/4910842/1/Autumn_in_our_Hearts

Heh, way ahead of you - I actually went and found a link to the fic on your ff.net account this morning. :)

I do think you do an excellent job of handling the morally ambiguous situations in the story! Especially with Nasse -- I'm cutting story spoilers here, but I think one thing that really *makes* the story for me is that you didn't give her (and Sheppard) an artificially happy ending but still had her display her anger and bitterness, her desire to live by the rules and moral compass that she'd grown up with -- I really appreciated the story integrity that it took not to give them an easy "out" in that situation. It would have felt like a cheat and I'm glad you didn't. And, yeah, it's hard to do, especially when the characters' viewpoints are different from the ones that the author would take in that situation.

heh, well that was an aspect that I struggled with and wondered how it would be received by readers because it was imperfect. ;) But as you noted, the story integrity demanded it.

Let me know if I can help you any, even just bouncing around ideas or viewpoints. Be happy to. :)

(and thanks! :D )

What about you? Do you seem to have a clear preference for writing "Can I...?" or "Should I...?" stories?

I love writing "should I?" situations. I find they provide for the most wrenching character dynamics, because (if I do it right...) the reader will feel an emotional impact no matter which way the decision goes. As will I, as the writer.

Plus (and I guess this is unusual; I never thought about it), I very much like writing consequences. My characters rarely get off easy after a difficult decision -- even if their side prevails. For some reason I always enjoy exploring that.

If you tackle complex issues with a lot of shades of gray, I would love to hear how you go about it. How do you avoid painting the issue in terms of an obvious right and wrong? How do you approach it from a character perspective?

I think that's exactly how I keep from painting it as right and wrong -- BY shaping it from a character perspective. What works well for me is to develop an issue that, naturally (i.e., given their established characterizations), several of the characters will have deep-seated, and sometimes violently opposed, opinions about. As they approach the moment of decision (whatever that may be) the various characters' views will present the different shades of grey by some characters being very polar in their own directions and some other characters stuck in the middle and unhappily trying to decide where they stand. This (again, if I do it right) allows the reader to see the different sides through the different characters' eyes. (Incidentally, as a reader, I like it when an author can make me sympathize with several different characters with opposing interests -- cf. George RR Martin.)

Obviously, this works best if the characters have very strong opinions and views that have a possibility of opposing each other, but my fiction usually has that. And if all of the characters have rich but diverse backgrounds, usually there will be some deep-seated idea that to one would seem obvious and to another would seem obvious in an opposite way.

I should also note that it helps if it's an issue I myself can see both sides of. Though that isn't strictly necessary if I can see through my characters' eyes empathetically enough, I do find it helps, because I like being able to write the characters' opposing views convincingly enough on both (or all) sides that the reader feels a loss even if the party s/he agrees with happens to win in the end. And of course that's easier if it's not an issue that I myself have an extremely polar bias about! There are a few topics that I would find it very hard to portray both sides of convincingly because they have had such a negative xor positive effect on my own life.

I would love to hear any advice that you have for writing that kind of story, or for incorporating complex issues into a longer story. (It's not that I've never done it, but it doesn't seem to come naturally to me.)

The above is just how I do it...YMMV, of course. It's rare that I'll set out to create a specific conflict about a specific topic; usually I'll create the characters and the situation first with some sparse plot idea, and then the "shades of grey" conflict will come out of the "aha, but what if THAT happened?" brainstorming/writing process, and I'll find myself gravitating toward difficult situations that will make the characters I've created react in conflicting ways.

Sorry to hear about your family situation. As much as I enjoy them in fiction writing, running into these difficult situations in real life is horrible.

... the reader will feel an emotional impact no matter which way the decision goes. As will I, as the writer.

*nods* I agree! And also about consequences, and dealing with them. I think all of this discussion is giving me good ideas for how to develop more plausible conflict in my own stories!

And thank you for the sympathy. :)

I'm still trying to figure out my own themes, as well :P You always hear about the importance of themes, of discovering the theme of your story, of writing around a theme, of needing a theme. And it drives me crazy because I'll end up wasting precious writing time trying to figure out what the dang theme of the story is, only to realize that the theme will come when it's ready to come (but, then, that's how I write - story first, then theme). I'm still not sure what theme I lean toward, though I often suspect it's finding hope no matter the adversity.

I love the idea of writing in shades of gray, but actually writing it is a whole other animal. There are so many ideas I want to explore but, knowing me, there's too much of a risk of me taking sides and favoring certain viewpoints or results. When a story ends up presenting a moral dilemma, I try my best to approach it equally, to see both sides of the situation. Can't say that I succeed, but then neither have I really written anything that has explored a major moral dilemma (though my upcoming SGA fic has presented an interesting situation in which Sheppard may be darned if he does, darned if he doesn't. But... yeah... we'll see:P).

The characters' sense of right and wrong also have a bad habit of getting in the way:P

I love exploring emotional dilemmas, which I do feel is good practice for when moral dilemmas come along. I feel emotional issues tend to get treated in the black and white just as much as the moral issues - force him/her to open up or send in the voice-of-reason character to fix everything and everyone lives happily ever after. Which, of course, that isn't exactly real life, either. My frustration with emotional quick fixes and trying to avoid them has helped me quite a bit in viewing a situation beyond aiming for the happy ending.

xparrot pointed out, above, that one of my recurring themes is finding home, finding contentment, and I think she's very right about that -- maybe more so in my older fic and original work than in my SGA fic specifically.

But, see, I'm terrible at spotting theme. *g* I can't even figure out what my own themes are, let alone notice it in other people's work. In fact, I didn't even know for a very long time what people actually meant by theme. I think I'm starting to figure it out ... I think it was this post on theme (http://synecdochic.dreamwidth.org/116539.html) -- if not that one specifically, than definitely one of these (http://synecdochic.dreamwidth.org/282057.html?style=mine) -- that made me finally "get" theme, but I still kinda suck at applying it. Like you, I'm very much a "story first, then theme" writer ... though I can see how theme could be very useful at the rewriting stage (if I ever get that far again ... SIGH).

I love exploring emotional dilemmas, which I do feel is good practice for when moral dilemmas come along. I feel emotional issues tend to get treated in the black and white just as much as the moral issues - force him/her to open up or send in the voice-of-reason character to fix everything and everyone lives happily ever after. Which, of course, that isn't exactly real life, either. My frustration with emotional quick fixes and trying to avoid them has helped me quite a bit in viewing a situation beyond aiming for the happy ending.

*nods* The emotional and the moral are definitely intertwined, perhaps inseparable in a lot of situations.

One of the reasons why I haven't been finishing anything lately is because I've been wanting to tackle more complex projects, and not wrap things up neatly at the end as I've typically done with my SGA gen. I'm not saying that I wouldn't still be writing SGA gen, but I've been asking myself tougher questions -- I'm especially interested in doing a long post-season-five story, but it's going to be pretty dark and probably not put the team back together neatly when it's done. I've been planning stories that are not as satisfying to me fannishly, but more satisfying from a writerly perspective ... but they're not getting written because they don't have quite the same glow of fannish pleasure that I get from writing the less ambiguous, more straightforward stuff.

In short: writing is haaaaard. *g*

In short: writing is haaaaard. *g*

Good crap, yes! I'm in the same boat as you, in that I want to write darker, heavier stuff. I want to push my writing beyond self-indulgence fic and see what I'm capable of, but I either chicken out or (more often the case) lose interest.

There was this one story I so wanted to write: team Sheppard is stuck on a planet fighting a civil war. Rodney, Ronon and Teyla end up in prison and for Sheppard to get them out he has to take sides in the war. They eventually reunite (not sure how) but in order for Sheppard to keep his friends alive he has to pretend he doesn't know them. He does this by treating them harshly. They eventually end up in a situation where Sheppard doesn't have to put up a cruel front anymore, and thus I present the flip side to the situation in which the locals (who are beyond furious with the war) will torture and kill any soldier if they happen to be in a position to be killed (i.e. no armed back up), no matter whose side he is on. But in order for John to get his team to safety, he has to remain in uniform. Oh, and his team (most especially Rodney) are rather uncomfortable around him.

So, yeah, whumping and angst for all. But I found the story impossible to deal with because it was just too dang easy to woobify Sheppard, and my fannish side really wanted to woobify him while my writing side balked at the idea. My writing side wanted heavy and dark, while my fannish side whined about wanting a happy ending (or near to) in a story that might not allow for a happy ending. So I finally just gave up on the idea all together. Which sucks because it would have been an interesting situation to explore, I think :/

But I found the story impossible to deal with because it was just too dang easy to woobify Sheppard, and my fannish side really wanted to woobify him while my writing side balked at the idea. My writing side wanted heavy and dark, while my fannish side whined about wanting a happy ending (or near to) in a story that might not allow for a happy ending.

Oh man, I've been fighting with this so hard in a lot of my unfinished stories lately! In fact, that's one of the big reasons why I haven't finished a post-season-five story yet, because so many of my ideas are pretty dark, and break up the team, and make my inner fangirl wail. *g* These stories are creatively satisfying to me, but they aren't nearly as fannishly satisfying as the emotional catnip that I've been writing for the last few years!

The story you proposed sounds like a fascinating story with a lot of potential for character growth and different sorts of interactions that we don't normally get from them. Honestly, I think one of the things that's been holding me back at writing new stories is that so much of what I would have liked to have seen from the characters and their interactions with each other has already happened in canon, or else has been thoroughly covered in fic to the point where I can't imagine how I can come up with a new twist on it. Which mostly leaves the darker, morally ambiguous stuff ... but that's depressing to write, and I worry about fannish reception as well.

'"Can I do this?", not "Should I do this?"'

This is an EXCELLENT point that I too believe I am probably guilty of...I think the allure of this tendency is that we *love* the SGA team members. I, for one, like to write stories about their hardships, but you are right in that they are almost always on the socially acceptable side of the fence glaring over at the other not so moral side.

I am also a H/C writer...or at least I have been explicitly a Rodney whumper in all of my SGA fics so far. Most of my stories don't have much of a plot...they are more focused on the relationships among the team members. But I feel that I do have a need to branch out into new territory.

I would say that the series did a decent job of dredging up this issues (think retrovirus, Arcturus, etc.). Our characters made mistakes, but it was quickly forgiven and forgotten and I think that a large trend has been to explore this greyer areas that the show kind of skimmed over in favor of advancing forward with the plot, on to more exciting horizons I suppose. Another meta I read recently talked about something along a similiar vein, we don't often see our characters in a grey light. Most cultures are inferior to that of earth. Most peoples encountered in the Pegasus galaxy either are simple tribesmen, or a more advanced society with a serious deficiency in moral standards. For example, the Genii are just mean on general principle, they try to take over Atlantis and double cross our boys at almost every crossroad. One of the other few advanced people we have encountered (the name is escaping me) were the people that were engineering a virus to make them immune to the Wraith. But even then, the leaders of that people made the decision that killing half the population was an acceptable sacrifice to save the rest, they didn't blink an eye at committing the genocide of their own people.

This did bother me and was something that stuck with me. So much so that I scrapped my Big Bang plot outline for another standard Rodney whump fic and decided to do some world/culture building. I am working to design a world where maybe the people *are* more moral than the SGA expedition, or at least have some redeeming qualities, maybe they've gone right with their advanced culture where earth has gone wrong. I really think it's going to be interesting to look at a people that make the expedition members pause and consider whether this is something they should be aspiring toward instead of knowing that their culture is more advanced, etc. And now that you've brought this up, I think this would be an interesting idea to throw into the mix, presenting the team members with a moral dilemma that isn't so clear cut as 'these are the bad guys, let's kick their butts.'

I think the allure of this tendency is that we *love* the SGA team members.

*nods* Yes, this, absolutely! It's hard to write the SGA characters severely at odds because we love them together; it's hard to write them wrong because we want them to be right; and it's hard to write them growing as people because we like them as they are, and in order to grow, they're going to have to change.

And you do take a risk when you write something that's unusual and that takes the characters to new places. Some of my favorite stories in the fandom are those that really stretched, grew and changed the characters. (Have you ever read East of the Sun, West of the Moon (http://www.zonezine.net/~dossier/html/eastwest/ew.htm) by

dossier? It's long, but so good, and it forces the characters to bend into whole new shapes.) But I've really disliked some stories like that, because they took the characters to places I didn't want them to go, or treated them in ways that really didn't fit with how I see them. The farther you get from canon, the more you're really going out on a limb, and some readers may not be willing to follow all the way to the tip of the branch.

Like you point out, SGA has a ton of morally gray areas that could be used to explore ethical dilemmas ... but usually aren't, either in the show itself or in fic.

And I think your story sounds very fascinating; I'll be looking forward to what you come up with. :)

I'd say that with most of what i write, i'm not tackling any great moral dilemmas. Yeah, the characters might have issues that they need to work through, but they usually make the right decisions and a full recovery. I don't tend to write about the societies they visit and the wider implications of their actions.

I've had a story on my hard drive for the last year and it's definately in the "should i?" catergory.

It deals with the implications of Teyla being on an all male team. It deals with the issues of attempted (I stress the attempted) rape.

The planet they visit has something in the air that makes the men there act like hormone-raging teenagers. Her team mates are effected and cross a line. But on the world that they visit, where this happens, the men of the culture have been acting in this way for generations and the woman keep them locked away in catacombs so they can do no harm (bringing them out, only when they need children). When her team become trapped in the catacombs Teyla obvously has to rescue them (With an all female team), but also she has to consider whether the men being kept prisoner in the catacombs is right, even though their release might have dire consequences. Throughout this, she must reconcile her feelings about her team.

It's something that i have wanted to explore for a long time, but i think because the subject matter is dark, and the characters we know and love are acting waay waaaaay out of character, i have been reluctant to finish it.

It's not a story that you can tie up with a bow at the end. Their actions will have implications for the future, for the way that they behave towards one another, for the society that they are visiting....

I guess it's based on the age old argument of "Should women be on the front line in war?"

You can say that woman are capable as the next person (I agree - as a woman) but then on the flip side, woman can be easily used in war as a 'device'. E.g. If a tormentor was threatening to rape a female soldier .... how would a male soldier react? (And i realise you could also say the same with the men also)
(This is one view on a hugley complicated subject and this is one tiny extract .... this is a post in itself i guess)

So yeah - it's something that i want to write, but i think it would probably squick a lot of people out. Should that matter? If it's expressing valid points, but makes people uncomfortable is that okay? Because the subect matter is difficult and i can't put the team together at the end, will people read it?

Who knows?

I'll probably end up finishing it at some point, (Mostly because it's a character piece about Teyla and i don't write many of those) but again, it's a subject that i think needs to be handled VERY carefully to do it justice.

So yeah, should i ..... ?

That's the question

Ooh, fascinating. :) I really hope that you finish it!

And yeah ... the trouble with fanfic, I guess, is that we're so invested in the characters -- and in our specific view of the characters, too! I know that I've stopped reading stories because they made me think "Rodney wouldn't do that!" or "That's not *my* Ronon!" -- but it's really just an irrational emotional reaction, not necessarily anything to do with the author's writing skill. And the more flawed the characters are portrayed, the more you run the risk of turning off readers. (I've been accused of bashing every single one of the team members in one of my stories or another. Obviously I didn't set out to bash anybody! But writing the characters as flawed people who screw up, alienate others, and fail ... it reads like bashing to people who like to see the characters as more heroic than that.

I’d been thinking lately about my own writing and the fact that I don’t think I explore moral ambiguity enough. My stories are mostly an outlet from reality and therefore I tend to stick to fairly basic tenants of action/adventure escapism. I’m not even sure about what my ‘style” is per say. I know I try to put a sharper edge of realism in everything and I attempt to avoid re-telling the same story over again if I can. Other than that, I take a specific idea for every one short or longer fic, and tackle it the best I can.

To deal with my own emotional upset over it, I considered applying it to fiction (as one does), and this got me thinking about the fact that I don't often deal with that kind of moral dilemma in my stories: the sort in which there are good and bad points on both sides, and any choice is likely to lead to unfortunate consequences.

I’ve come to really enjoy these types of stories of late because it’s a challenge do them right without painting characters’ choices and reasons as purely black and white. We are dealing with other cultures after all. The last two stories I rec’d recently were ones where the author took care in trying to flesh out both sides.

In the current story I’m working on I feel that I’ve finally jumped into the shallow end of the pool in exploring moral dilemmas.

In “Red Sands” John and Ronon made a choice which I find somewhat hypocritical on Sheppard’s part given his own checkered background. This decision weights heavily on him, but what he and Ronon did is slowly revealed, and not really explored until the very last sections of the story because their current situation is about living in very harsh environment. I tried taking the normal desert survival fic and gave it my own twits.(I hope, it’s tough!) The emotional plot is centered on the decisions both John and Ronon are forced to make and having to deal with the consequences of making them –and in John’s part, not dealing with them.

The focus is on choices and coping mechanisms. I realized that being trained to survive in situations, doesn’t mean you’re trained how to do deal with the emotional consequences. I had to put myself in the shoes of two different types of soldiers before and after various conflicts and see how one rationalization in the heat of the moment doesn’t necessarily seem ‘right’ after wards.

I guess that counts?

My stories are mostly an outlet from reality and therefore I tend to stick to fairly basic tenants of action/adventure escapism.

*nods* I think this is true of a lot of us! And that's not a bad thing, I don't think; fandom is an escape, and we have the ability to craft our stories however we want them, and put in the precise combination of factors that makes us happy. And writing thorny moral dilemmas, in which there's no way to "win", isn't exactly a happy fun escape.

I've been struggling with all of my post-season-five story ideas for that reason, because I think they'd be good solid stories, but they're not happy, easy, escapist stories -- most are pretty dark, and most break up the team permanently.

I don't think the darker and more complicated stories are inherently better by any means; I think the reason why there's so much happy, fun, escapist fic in fandom is because it speaks to a deep emotional need, and frankly, there's no shortage of bleak, dreary tales being told in the media!

But I do think one learns a ton about writing by working on those intense and complicated stories. And when they work, they really really work.

I think "my" theme is along the lines of personal shades of grey, where you may want two things that are contradictory. I like exploring relationships: what makes them tick *aside* from love. Negotiating complicated dynamics/situations, and whether that will break a bond or strengthen it. And what can happen when your romantic love for someone is not necessarily in the best interests of that person.

E.g. a few things I've written/am working on. Woolsey/Caldwell, where they're both mature and career-focused, which means they can't really have a conventional relationship. Teyla/Kanaan, where first their friendship is tested and falters (season one-era, where she stays on Atlantis and he doesn't) and then it slowly morphs into something else. Lorne/Ford (my Runner AU), where not only do they have to deal with the fact that Lorne is in a position of authority over him but Very Bad Things could happen to Ford if he's discharged from the military. Rodney and Katie trying to figure out how co-parenting would work post-season five (she's managed without him, and will continue to do so if he goes back to Pegasus, so the question becomes where does he fit in, what does he really want and what are his plans for the future?).

I likes my conflict.

Your stories sound fascinating! Especially Woolsey/Caldwell, which is the first Woolsey pairing I've run into that really works for me (in concept, at least).

Fanfic tends to be so full of romantic stories, where the couple in the story is essentially a vehicle for the author's id, that it's rare to get the more ambiguous and uncertain sort of relationships. I'm not saying it's bad -- we're all in fandom to satisfy our own cravings, after all -- but I tend to like reading about difficult love affairs in which it may not be in the characters' best interests to stay together.

LOL I think my id is ambiguous and uncertain. It's very familiar territory.

At least in my original stuff I seem to be writing a lot of "Should I ...?" stories. Not that I don't know which decision I want the character to make - I think it's actually fairly obvious to the reader, most of the time, in which direction the whole thing's headed. But it's not about making the "right" choice, only about ... making the best choice you can when anything you do is going to have unpleasant consequences, and how you evaluate that. I like writing about characters making hard decisions that don't have a "right" answer. I like forcing them to make impossible choices. And I like seeing them have to live with them, for good or ill. I enjoy that as a reader, but I don't find it nearly often enough, so I write it myself, I suppose.

(I generally do let my characters make what I consider the better decision, but it's by no means a given that the reader will agree with me on that. But if I've done my job right it'll make sense for the character regardless.)

How do you avoid painting the issue in terms of an obvious right and wrong? How do you approach it from a character perspective?

I'm not entirely sure how to answer that. One way is to have several characters on the same side, with shared ethics, disagree over which is better. Different temperaments; different personalities; different fears that take precedence. And of course introspection is one of the things that comes easiest to me as a writer, so I like having characters weigh different options in their own mind, thinking about the different ways each of them could go horribly wrong. I don't know; it's hard to think about this in general/theoretical terms! But thanks for making me think. *g*

This all makes sense to me. :) I've actually realized in the course of answering comments that I actually write a lot more morally-ambiguous storylines in my original fic than in my fanfic. I suppose one reason is that it's easier to craft the situation from the ground up, and to plausibly fit the characters into their roles, than to take existing characters, produce a conflict between them and then resolve it in a way that won't be alienating to the characters' fans.

Ironically I think that in certain ways, I'm more heavily invested in fan characters than in my own original characters. Possibly it's just that I'm exposed in fandom to a huge variety of different ways of interpreting the same characters, whereas with my own, I'm the sole arbiter of what's "in character" and don't have to defend it to other people.

I think it depends on the canon and the fandom both - the section of SGA fandom I'm in is very much about the fluffy happy pairing (which is, I think, why the complications of season 5 threw so many people so much). But in HP, for example, morally ambiguous stuff abounds, and you don't have to work as hard at those conflicts because in many cases they're already there. *ponders*

Possibly it's just that I'm exposed in fandom to a huge variety of different ways of interpreting the same characters, whereas with my own, I'm the sole arbiter of what's "in character" and don't have to defend it to other people.

Oh, that's a great point! I wonder if it changes again for popular novels - as reviewers and fans interpret your characters, does one become more invested and defensive about one's own take? Hm.

But in HP, for example, morally ambiguous stuff abounds, and you don't have to work as hard at those conflicts because in many cases they're already there.

You know, I think you've got a good point here. I think I tend to forget that I've spent the last four years spending most of my time in a fandom that tends to embrace the happy/fluffy/hopeful side of the show, and before that, most of my active fandoms were for similar action-adventure happy shows, or else shounen manga, which is pretty much the same.

But I've also spent some time in fandoms that tend to embrace the fucked-upness of canon (I can think of several fandoms off the top of my head in which the popular slash couple is not the main character and his best friend, but the main character and his rapist/tormentor/guy who tortured his best friend to death, etc.). So, yeah ... it's definitely something to do with the fandoms I've been in lately, and the relative willingness of the fandom to deal with the darker side of canon.

I wonder if it changes again for popular novels - as reviewers and fans interpret your characters, does one become more invested and defensive about one's own take?

Ooh, that's a good question! It does seem like a lot of writers who've had public anti-fanfic meltdowns are popular writers with a lot of fic around (Anne Rice, Anne McCaffrey) but I'm sure there's an element of selection bias, since those writers are the ones who are popular enough that everyone hears about it. (If some newcomer sci-fi writer with one book out discovers the single piece of fanfic that anyone's ever written for her book and goes ballistic, most people won't hear about it ...) Still, I wonder if what's going on is a sort of extreme version of the ship-warring/character-warring that happens in fandom all the time, except the writer actually has the clout to bring down the hammer on the fans who are writing the other ship. Actually ... that's weirdly plausible, in a way ...

Yes, I think enemy pairings lend themselves to this trope far more easily. (I love enemy pairings, actually.) And while you could emphasize the conflicts in SGA a lot more, the fandom's been people's happy place for a long time. They don't want that to intrude. Me, I'm a bit of an outlier there insofar as I like a darker take on the 'verse so long as the characters are still written sympathetically.

till, I wonder if what's going on is a sort of extreme version of the ship-warring/character-warring that happens in fandom all the time, except the writer actually has the clout to bring down the hammer on the fans who are writing the other ship. Actually ... that's weirdly plausible, in a way ...

Hee! It really is! Bah, I hate ship wars.

I think that the moral dilemmas are harder to write in fanfic, where if you show someone in a gray light, it's often called OOC. I usually read fanfic for the catnip factor of getting more of the characters I love, so I get that. The current story I'm working on is, well, I'm on the edge of abandoning it because it works as a plot and a science fiction story, I think, but it completely lacks the catnip factor.

Yeah, I totally agree with this. One thing I've been realizing throughout this discussion is that my original fic tends to be more shades-of-gray than my fanfic, because I'm able to build the characters and their moral dilemmas from the ground up, rather than grafting them onto pre-existing characters for whom I already have deep affection in their original versions.

And I really hear you on the catnip. One of the big reasons why I've been having so much trouble finishing anything lately is because I've been attempting to write ideas that aren't catnip for me. I have lots of post-season-five ideas that I'd love to flesh out, but nearly all of them split the team permanently and end up with the characters in a very different place than they started out; they work great as stories, but there's something emotional that's missing.

And then this morning, I started writing a silly little team gen action thing which is already up to 5000 words and showing no signs of slowing down. Apparently, morally gray sci-fi is not why I write fanfic, and very often is not why I read it. I can definitely enjoy it with the characters I've grown to love, but I do struggle with some of the harsher characterizations, especially of the characters I'm especially protective of.

(I've noticed that I've been getting almost knee-jerk reactive about Rodney; there are increasing numbers of writers that I can't read because of how they handle Rodney and his relationships with his teammates and others, even if the stories are objectively good.)

As readers and watchers, we want an easy binary, right/wrong, in our escapist entertainment. Ethical dilemmas, moral questions, hard choices with hurt no matter what you do; those we have to deal with every day. It take cojones and talent and skill to face us with that in a story and make it so good, so fascinating, and so satisfying that we like it despite the difficulty and being forced to think.

Yes, this! Actually, this is something I've been saying all along about SGU. It's not a terrible show, but it's nowhere near good enough to support the kind of show that it's trying to be. You can deliver fun escapism in a shallow, inconsistent, hackneyed package (and lots of shows and books I've loved have been that way), but if you're going to offer up dark, painful, emotionally wrenching fare, it has to be good enough to make up for not being fun escapism. You're setting the bar much higher for yourself by making that choice, and viewers (or readers) aren't going to be very forgiving if you start writing checks that your writing skills can't cash.

I think that's why I like some of your darker stuff. You can sell me on bleak characterizations I wouldn't be willing to accept from someone who can't pull it off. (And eventually I do want to finish "Gypsies, Tramps & Thieves"; I just have to get myself around to a point where I can read John/Rodney again.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Moral dilemmas (of the fictitious kind)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject