Snake Re-imagined And Taken To The 3rd Dimension!3.97 / 5.00 6,417 Views
Be a badass and go on an epic kung fu quest!3.92 / 5.00 6,717 Views
Learn puppet reptile's best ABCs in this physics-driven interactive storybook3.91 / 5.00 6,516 Views
First of all, I apologize if this is the wrong forum, but the writing forum seemed more about showing off work and less about asking questions.
Here's my question though. Obviously, many writers try to avoid onscreen violent deaths of children due to the moral backlash it would cause, however are there any laws or regulations against it? Is there a law against exposing a child to the kind of R rated gore necessary for them to act out their own dismemberment scene? And if that's the case, would there still be rules against describing the gory details of some 8 year old fighting a wood chipper in a novel or a comic book?
I don't condone violence against actual children, but I don't condone shooting an actual innocent 40 year-old man in the face so you can take his car. The latter is perfectly acceptable in video games, movies, books, hell you could even write a song about it.
Either people realize that fiction is fiction, and the act of one person slashing, mauling, and disintegrating another of any age is really just a collection of lines moving around a screen, not ACTUALLY hurting anyone (in which case it makes no sense that the murder of a child would be any more disturbing than the murder of an adult), or people feel that murdering a child in fiction is wrong because to show it being done is like endorsing it (in which case the writer of something where innocent adults are murdered but children aren't must be encouraging real people to go murder innocent people as long as they're adults, which is disturbing in and of itself).
But yeah, personal opinions aside, is there any legal action preventing the onscreen death of a child in a work of fiction?
It's okay to make the point that it's not okay to kill kids, by killing them; that's what happens and is already acceptable in literature. People who can't handle that shouldn't read that heavy stuff.
I don't think there is any law against the killing of kids in fiction whether it be in writing, movies, or video games. I'm sure most writers just think it's a little too grim.
That being said, Anakin Skywalker killed a bunch of kids in Star Wars Episode III. It doesn't show his psychically killing them (at least I don't remember seeing it) but it's in the story.
Writers will always write what they want (unless they become sellouts), the reason you don't see many children being killed in gory ways is for a multiple of reasons
1: The story would need to fit with such a situation
2: Adding gore for the sake of gore is no better in written form than it is in games or movies.
3: If the readers aren't interested in reading such things then it won't be read much.
4: If the publisher isn't interested in having such things in their books it won't be published by any good business.
Make no mistake that there are many stories which contain children dying or dead children, those containing ancient monsters usually have backstories that consist of eating children and they may have a home filled with bones or shoes etc. and may be trying to trap characters in the books to kill.
However the main thing is that if the writer doesn't want to write such things they won't, and if it doesn't fit the story then they SHOULDN'T, adding random things to be 'edgy' will only make them shit. And in the end of the day if you want to sell your stories and you find they get rejected with trying to fill as much gorey children murders in them then a smart writer would decide to keep those to himself or leave them as free to read online and focus on less stupid things to sell.
For a case of point, I wrote a story about rape and heavy domestic violence with attempted murder once, it wasn't as successful or well perceived as my other stories and was mostly commented on as "what the fuck man?" type phrases. Of course I felt like writing it and am not ashamed of it or have any plans to stop myself writing such interesting things in the future, but as a whole it is neither as nice to write as the other stories I do or seen with as good praise.
So if you choose to fit that niche of people who get off to pedophilia guro then go ahead, but most wouldn't focus on it.
I fucking slaughtered those little assholes in the mod. Fuck them
Every play fallout NV?
"Come to mick and ralphs, for all your shopping needs!"
The Human Nugget- Ruining the internet, one post at a time.
Become my fan, because then you'll be cool.
They have to be a character like Chucky or a child of satan to be killed without having any sympathy attached. If it's a bad kid no one cares if they die or not
Are you not Entertained ?!?
There are quite a few stories I've read -- shows I've seen and movies I've watched -- where killing a kid was fine.
I think it's less okay to kill a kid that the audience has time to grow with and get into. That makes it more shocking, because creating a kid character just to kill him is for cheap drama at best.
Artistic freedom overcomes. Any honest jurist will admit it.
"What seest thou else. In the dark backward and abysm of time?"
Though I am satisfied at first by my actions, IâEUTMm suddenly jolted with a mournful despair at how useless, how extraordinarily painless, it is to take a childâEUTMs life.
Depends on the character.
Have you ever read Steven King's Cujo? Frankly I found the kid to be so annoying I would have been offended if he hadn't been killed off.
On a side note I just spoiled that book for you all, so now you don't have to read it. EVER.
It's just another double standard. Most people who have a strong enough reputation to be able to act against cultural standards completely ignore it - Stephen King killed of tons of kids in the book It. But of course, he's only able to do that because it's extremely difficult to criticize a writer with such a reputation. And while I'm using him as an example, King doesn't just do it to be alternative; he implements plot devices naturally, not to coincide with or break cultural standards, but to tell a story naturally. Similarly, Lord of the Flies is such a well-known classic that people typically leave it alone.
The Hunger Games may also have been somewhat of an exception because of its thick anti-government message, which is kind of similar to the amount of blood and violence we allow children to be exposed to in the bible. If it tells the 'right' political message, then it's excusable. And while I may seem biased for saying this, it's typically conservative Christians that are the first to start a shitstorm and talk about what's 'right and wrong'. So what's permissible in literature is heavily dependent on Christian culture.
Read Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian, and you'll find a detailed passage about a tree full of dead babies
It isn't that serious. I read a book called Angel by James Patterson and a 6-year-old with bird wings dies.
At 12/7/12 02:10 AM, YellowisCOOL wrote: It isn't that serious. I read a book called Angel by James Patterson and a 6-year-old with bird wings dies.
James Patterson's creepy, obsession with people-birds and the sheer amount he lets that influence his writing is more offensive then any amount of kids he could kill off.
Anyway killing off kids is fine, go nuts. Draw the line at raping them onscreen, though (this is assuming you're making a story-based flash and not a sexually fetishistic one) the shock value would undermine the entirety of the flash.
Hopefully your audience can separate fiction and what you actually think is okay to do. Sure enough there be some dumb moral guardians trying to call you out, but most people understand that it is just fiction and not actually what you the writer think is morally okay.
the key word is "artistic freedom".
I'm going to die one day XD