I have a question I'd like to present and get your opinions: How do you describe violence in a story that may appeal to a fairly wide audience? The extremes would be being so graphic that you turn off some of your readers, or being so vague that readers don't get a clear picture of what's happening.
Background: I'm writing a novel set in the early 1600's in Japan. The country was just coming out of many decades of war. It involves both samurai and ninja, both of which use deadly weapons in "up close and personal" fighting. There is a considerable amount of action in the story, but I have a friend who insists there is not enough killing and that I am not graphic enough in my descriptions.
Let me explain that I am a student of both martial arts and Japanese history. I have read 6 other authors who wrote historical novels set in old Japan (medieval or early-modern) and my story seems much more focused on action. I describe fight scenes more blow-by-blow, instead of using phrases like "a flashing flurry of swords ensued". However, I don't describe blood spray and internal organs falling out in vivid detail. Neither do the authors I've read. I also have a highly skilled ninja who has become more religious (Shugendo/Buddhist) as he gets older and avoids killing opponents. He uses a chain weapon with metal weights which he uses to knock out or disable opponents. He does kill at times but leaves many pursuers alive and completely humiliated. This is a major complaint with my blood thirsty friend, who says my characters are "too nice" or "chivalrous knights in shining armor".
Before I get into too much detail, let me ask (based on what you see here) where you think the balance is? Yes, it's a violent time and there is fighting with bladed weapons, but do I need to describe the color and consistency of the liver as it plops on the ground? Does every opponent my characters meet need to die? Let me know what you think?



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote



Bookmarks