Good point. Wicked also is an imperfect example because it was written for adults, unlike the examples in the grandparent.
I wonder if there’s something different about the way (most) authors write books for children and (some) authors write books for adults—HP, Narnia, Star Wars, and Oz all had young audiences in mind. Most of the more morally complex movies mentioned in the grandparent were for adults. Do any of Stephen King’s bestsellers have moral complexity?
I also wonder if those writing and creating works for children (if they do gravitate towards moral simplicity) have the correct understanding of what their audience wants? Of course, HP and Star Wars certainly broke out well beyond children, so maybe a lot of adults want moral simplicity too.
Speaking of media for children, I once read that the MPAA will not certify a film as “G” if it contains if it contains morally ambiguous characters, regardless of the sex, violence, language or drugs. Unfortunately I cannot find an internet citation for this (beyond the talk of “mature themes”).
I read an essay by Stephen King where he claimed that his writing was basically socially conservative and morally simplistic—there’s always evil in his worlds, but it’s always an invader from the outside that must be repelled.
I read an essay by Stephen King where he claimed that his writing was basically socially conservative and morally simplistic—there’s always evil in his worlds, but it’s always an invader from the outside that must be repelled.
That seems like a major oversimplification. A whole bunch of exceptions spring immediately to mind, such as pretty much all the Bachman Books (where the villain is often society itself or the masses thereof), and short stories like Dolan’s Cadillac (where it’s not really clear who’s the bigger villain). And what about Firestarter?
Even in books like The Stand or Needful Things, where the evil really is a non-human invader from the outside, it gets big chunks of its power from individuals’ failings of character.
The “Save the Cat” series of books on screenwriting says that’s an essential part of such movies—that the monster only gets to invade because someone’s moral failing lets it in.
I’m not fond of their attitude—that there are only about a dozen possible plots for movies—but there certainly are a lot of movies that conform to them.
Good point. Wicked also is an imperfect example because it was written for adults, unlike the examples in the grandparent.
I wonder if there’s something different about the way (most) authors write books for children and (some) authors write books for adults—HP, Narnia, Star Wars, and Oz all had young audiences in mind. Most of the more morally complex movies mentioned in the grandparent were for adults. Do any of Stephen King’s bestsellers have moral complexity?
I also wonder if those writing and creating works for children (if they do gravitate towards moral simplicity) have the correct understanding of what their audience wants? Of course, HP and Star Wars certainly broke out well beyond children, so maybe a lot of adults want moral simplicity too.
Speaking of media for children, I once read that the MPAA will not certify a film as “G” if it contains if it contains morally ambiguous characters, regardless of the sex, violence, language or drugs. Unfortunately I cannot find an internet citation for this (beyond the talk of “mature themes”).
I read an essay by Stephen King where he claimed that his writing was basically socially conservative and morally simplistic—there’s always evil in his worlds, but it’s always an invader from the outside that must be repelled.
That seems like a major oversimplification. A whole bunch of exceptions spring immediately to mind, such as pretty much all the Bachman Books (where the villain is often society itself or the masses thereof), and short stories like Dolan’s Cadillac (where it’s not really clear who’s the bigger villain). And what about Firestarter?
Even in books like The Stand or Needful Things, where the evil really is a non-human invader from the outside, it gets big chunks of its power from individuals’ failings of character.
The “Save the Cat” series of books on screenwriting says that’s an essential part of such movies—that the monster only gets to invade because someone’s moral failing lets it in.
I’m not fond of their attitude—that there are only about a dozen possible plots for movies—but there certainly are a lot of movies that conform to them.