Young Writers Society

I tend to believe that writing carries with it a certain moral obligation - maybe not to lead to people into virtue and enlightenment, but at the very least not to cause tremendous harm, incite racism or sexism, not to promote violence, and to consider how the words we write might impact the world before we release them.

I would say that when writing about real people - whether through memoir, biography, or historical fiction or nonfiction, one has an even greater responsibility to take care with how they are portraying real people.

What do you think?

Is there an obligation to portray people honestly?

To not divulge certain family secrets or uncomfortabilities?

Or is writing simply an expressive art that has no ethical limitation?

--

Personally I really struggle with this even in poetry and I believe it depends greatly on who the audience of your writing is.

If I am writing a rant-poem about an old ex from middle school that I plan on posting anonymously on YWS, I don't think I have much of an obligation to portray them truthfully or in the best light possible - the poem is never going to reach them, and my intended audience has no idea who I am talking about. However, if I am planning on publishing something about a living relative in which people could realistically conclude who the writing was about, then I think I have an obligation to not portray them as a villain.

I really enjoy writing about ancestry a lot too - I don't necessarily try to portray everyone as saints, but I do attempt to portray people with complexity, and you might even say generosity. It might seem silly, but I feel I have an obligation, even to my long-passed relatives who will never read my work, not to portray them in ways that I would consider slanderous.
 
What do you think? Do you get permission from your friends / family before using your shared stories in your writing? Do you tone down some of your writing about the negative realities of light to save people's feelings?

Feel free to engage in this question below - I'm quite sure there's not a universal answer - but as writers, I do think it's an important question to consider.

Is there an obligation to portray people honestly?

Is it too late to offer my thoughts?

Definitely share! I know you write a lot of historic fic so would love to know your opinion on this.

Is there an obligation to portray people honestly?

Sorry for the late reply! Stay tuned for a lengthy article if some sort.

I tend to believe that writing carries with it a certain moral obligation - maybe not to lead to people into virtue and enlightenment, but at the very least not to cause tremendous harm, incite racism or sexism, not to promote violence, and to consider how the words we write might impact the world before we release them.

I bypassed moral a long time ago. If a person in history was racist, etc., they are depicted as such. I do not white-wash facts, nor do I romanticize the nature of the beast. That said, I AM careful about the words I choose. The human body and how it reacts under duress will be the core of descriptions. I do have a slight advantage in that department— body reactions under stress— I’m diagnosed with depression and PTSD. That doesn’t mean I haven’t read countless stories online about survivors of all sorts to get a better understanding of rape and racism set in the 1700s.

I would say that when writing about real people - whether through memoir, biography, or historical fiction or nonfiction, one has an even greater responsibility to take care with how they are portraying real people.

I agree. As I said previously, if a real-life individual was a scoundrel, he/she/they should be treated as such because that is who they were. For example, Thomas Jefferson had good points, such as expanding his young country through the Louisiana Purchase. Still, Jefferson has proven through a living descendant of his genetics, thanks to modern DNA testing, that he did, in fact, rape Sally Hemings. However, I am meticulous not to let modern viewpoints today interfere with what was legal and perfectly fine then. It takes practice and self-discipline not to allow modernity to weasel its way in, no matter how bad you feel. Remember, under the lens of present eyes, you’re re-creating a deceased world. That is why I never held back when I finally arrived at the starting point, Jefferson’s secret relationship.

Is there an obligation to portray people honestly? Yes.

To not divulge certain family secrets or uncomfortabilities?

This is a good question. If there are still living relatives, written permission is necessary, writing under explicit, concrete examples. For susceptible subjects such as describing a real-life prisoner at Dachau, permission is a good start. At least try. In my case, my non-fictional characters are dead and buried as well as their political and family letters are published, so there their little secrets are public knowledge.

Or is writing simply an expressive art that has no ethical limitation?

Composing literature is its art form. The only ethical limitation is your conscious brain holding back the truth. Again, self-discipline. You’re writing about a world that doesn’t exist anymore. The rules are different. Most importantly, forget what people will think or about their opinions. More often than not, your chosen audience is clueless. They haven’t put in the hours, days, weeks, months of researching, studying. It is your job to yank them in and keep readers engaged. And there is no better solution than using real nastiness, the apprehensible, the stuff that makes our skin crawl, to maintain interest.

The critical aspect is to know your chosen audience. And learn to keep emotions relatively in check. Consider a mortician. They work on cadavers. Corpses (assuming) do not bother them. Doctors, surgeons, while not easy, have learned to accept death when it happens. This skill helps forbidding modern tendrils, grabbing a moral compass to try and be kinder to your reader. Do not.

I enjoy writing about ancestry a lot too - I don't necessarily try to portray everyone as saints, but I do attempt to portray people with complexity, and you might even say generosity. It might seem silly, but I feel I have an obligation, even to my long-passed relatives who will never read my work, not to portray them in ways that I would consider slanderous.

None of my ancestors were saints. I mean, Macbeth murdered King Duncan (my relative). King Kenneth MacAlpin is rumored to have killed King Drust X of the Picts in Kenneth’s court. Kenneth invited Drust X to create an alliance, a promise to protect the Picts from constant Viking raids in their lands. Kenneth pulled a switch, Drust and other Pictish nobles fell into a pit, and all were impaled upon stakes. Both Kings Drust X and Kenneth MacAlpine are my relatives.

Complexity is amazing. Human beings are complex creatures. Generally heinous by all accounts, discovering that little nugget of goodness, kindness, is so worth it, which adds dimension.
 
What do you think? Do you get permission from your friends / family before using your shared stories in your writing? Do you tone down some of your writing about the negative realities of light to save people's feelings?

I write exclusively in the era of the 1700s. They’re all dead. If I have to tone anything down, I choose not to write about the subject. I need freedom, not restrictions. Problem solved.