The preferred reading vs alternate interpretations

[Braveface]

Hello!

I have only really posted an intro thread but got chatting with hopewrites and jastius about becoming attached to the 'preferred reading' of my own work since it had been something of a concern of mine. It was suggested that I bring the discussion here so...here I am. I do not have the power of linking yet so I'll quote bits here and there.

The original question I asked was 'where is the line?'. By this I meant at what point are you as a creator too attached to how it is being received?

I suppose if a writer went around punching people who didnt cry at the sad bits so that the page could become tearstained, that would be over the line. but they should have just wrote it better. save them time and arrest warrants. Although they could probably use the experences as materieal for their next fail attempt at illiciting emotion.

If it is a concern that the work could be miscontrued, at what point does it become the author's responsibility to be aware of possible alternate interpretations? If a piece is consciously controversial, is it really just a case of 'well I didn't mean it like that' if someone makes an extreme interpretation? Then there is the possibility of an oppositional reading arising from a place that would oppose the message of your preferred reading were it to be spoken openly as opposed to being concealed within a work of art and, if they 'outgun' you, would it be appropriate to be concerned about an oppositional reading of your work taking precedence over your own preferred reading in the collective consciousness? How much would you fight for your preferred reading to be the dominant one and at what point do you acknowledge that perhaps it is not enough to trust that sensible people will make up their own minds for themselves? There are an awful lot of people who simply do not entertain what they have read and allow their genuine, authentic reaction to form their personal opinion. If these opinions could lead to more than just reviews, where does the author's responsibility begin and end?

even though the emotional catharsis element remains a necessary release in many persons lives, enabling them to forgo other recreational indulgences such as drugs alcohol and gratuitous sex, i believe that such emotional self-play contributes to the desensitization of society in part and towards a loss of empathetic involvement in the human condition (as per the fate of the individual) as a whole.

Jastius got into more about eliciting emotional reactions and I am not entirely sure but it seemed to be heading into a discussion of the very real effects on the human condition of living vicariously through fictional characters. I would never deny that fiction can be tremendously inspiring but if it does not call one to action in 'real life', but rather draws the reader to 'experience' more and more of 'exciting' fictional events or worlds, can this be damaging to otherwise pro-active people?

Should we just not be writing things that could be miscontrued with such devestating consequences or would that lead to the kind of slow-death of emotional honesty (maybe) heralded by Jastius?

I am very interested to hear all opinions because I am really not entirely sure what I am asking, let alone where I stand on it. The issue keeps expanding in my mind whenever I consider it further so I will put it to the forum.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Go and read Mark Lawrence's thread - he has had everything thrown at him about his work.

Bottom line - once it's out there, each reader will take what they will from it and I no longer own it. In fact, I'd welcome seeing nuances I didn't plan for! I have two controversial story lines in my trilogy, I'm aware they could be taken in a different light than I wrote them. I'm prepared to face that risk and defend why I did include them.

 

[Kissmequick]

Worry about what you CAN control -- the quality of your writing

Given that there is no one book that every single reader has loved, do NOT worry about the things you can't. You have no control over what a reader brings to the book, or how they read it. You can write the best you can, but that doesn't mean they have to love it, and if you worry over much about it, you'll send yourself doolally.

Look up "Death of the author"

Once it's out there, it is no longer yours -- it belongs to the reader and they are free to do with it what they will.

ETA: Be aware of how it might be received, yes (I knew I was going to get mixed reactions on a certain aspect, and boy howdy did I), but once it's out there, what can you realistically do about it? Stand over people's shoulders as they read? No. Let it go.

 

[The Judge]

By a curious synchonicity, I started reading Christopher Priest's Fugue for a Darkening Land at the weekend. It was originally written in 1971, but the edition I've got is a revised one from 2011. The story deals with the consequences of a huge influx of refugees into the UK from Africa, and in his introduction, Priest says this:

When Fugue was first published the reviewer in Time Out was extravagant in his praise. What he saw as my anti-racist views and descriptions of a country torn apart by extremists were highly recommended. A few years later, when the book was republished, Time Out reviewed it again. (Different reviewer but same general political credo.) This time I was criticised for being an agitator, a fellow-traveller of the right-wing.

As my novel was politically neutral, I felt both critical opinions were off the mark, but I did not like being lined up with racists. ... While I dislike political correctness, I have removed anything that I think could lead to overt political interpretations, on either side.

Personally, I'm not sure any novel can really be politically -- or socially, or any other -ally -- neutral, since we bring with us into our writing our own beliefs and prejudices, and no matter how even-handed we strive to be, something is bound to leak through.

As importantly, people don't read a book in a vacuum -- no matter how they try, they will carry their own ideas, beliefs, prejudices and so on into the material, so it's inevitable that someone somewhere will miscontrue your work. But, perhaps, if most people who read it are misconstuing what was intended, then it's time for the author to consider that perhaps what he meant to say isn't actually what he did say.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I learned a very valuable lesson with my first story. No matter what I did my beta readers would not accept that my main character was an ugly, pathetic wimp lol He just had low self esteem apparently.

In another urban fantasy every single beta reader thought Iris was black. I had no objection to her being so and actually it gave a wonderful dimension to the rewrite but it hadn't been my initial intention.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

To the point where you publish it - then it's no longer yours. And what you intended to write may not be what people read.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Braveface]

Good responses, thanks!

I think it may also be due to being unsure whether to write allegorically or with applicability. My gut says allegory, but with a definite entertainment factor. The art of anvil-dropping may need to be learned before I would be happy releasing anything.

I'm not sure I like the 'death of the author' notion but I can see how it has come about. I do think the author knows better than the audience what a piece is about but then I do also acknowledge inspiration that comes from...elsewhere. I just don't want to follow it blindly.

But yeah, the point of release being when you let go makes sense. The responsibility, then, would be to make sure it is how you want it to be before that point if it is still an issue at all.

 

[Kissmequick]

Sadly, you may not like it, but people will read it how they want to -- you can't stop that! And you can't be over their shoulder explaining either. People will read all sorts of things into writing that wasn't the intent -- but may get more out of it that way. Knowing the actual intent sometimes lessens the enjoyment

Here is an amusing infographic showing it (Note it contains a rude word)


The first few times sting a bit (if they're bad), but you soon get used to it (or you don't and have a froth at the mouth. Not advised in public) If the reactions are good, but not what you intended, weeell, at least they like it, right?

Bet you didn't know Hemingway was just writing a story about fish, huh?

Bottom line is -- write as well and as clearly as you can. Accept not everyone will get it. The more clarity you have in your writing, the more people will get it (probably. Doesn't mean they'll like it.....)

 

[AnyaKimlin]

The first few times sting a bit (if they're bad), but you soon get used to it (or you don't and have a froth at the mouth. Not advised in public) If the reactions are good, but not what you intended, weeell, at least they like it, right?

I'm not published yet but that's how I feel about Angus (my first MC). The beta readers loved him they just didn't think of him the same way I did.

 

[Braveface]

Bottom line is -- write as well and as clearly as you can. Accept not everyone will get it. The more clarity you have in your writing, the more people will get it (probably. Doesn't mean they'll like it.....)

True, true...this is really more than enough of a task to be getting on with!

I liked the link too. It was partially those aspects, and a horrible (but in hindsight, inexperienced and prone to panic-rage) English teacher that put me off literature, but not writing, for a while.