Young Writers Society

i've been told by several people who have read some of my work that the graphic violence portrayed in my stories goes too far. to sum up one reader's comment: "I thought it was amazing until it got too violent." obviously i don't want to change my writing style. i enjoy being graphically detailed when people die or get injured. but i fear i may lose a lot of more sensitive readers. here's an excerpt from a story of mine, keep in mind that this is par for the course:

Abrand brandished his second war axe out at the soldier. "I'll die gloriously yet!" he cried.

"No", the soldier replied, and brought the sword above him with both hands, then brought it down. Abrand braced for the impact, though it was of no use. The sword sliced cleanly through the blade, then through Abrand's remaining arm. It continued until it reached the ground under Abrand's tremendous skull. The skull violently separated in two directions, a spray of brain matter and misty blood exploding from it.

The soldier gazed down at the chieftain's corpse. He didn't know conciously that what he was going to do would work. It was an instinct, a not finely-honed one that was just budding. He stabbed his sword into the ground and came to the dead chieftain's skull. It was split vertically two, rejoining at the neck. His eyes had fallen to the ground between the severed sides of the skull, as had his brain. Blood ejected from either side of the cranium and poured into the crevices of the cobbled road, running like rivers and tributaries. The soldier reached down, grasped a hunk of pale, bloody brain meat and yanked backward, liberating it from the rest. He brought this hunk close to his face and examined it closely. He sniffed. The odor was powerfully appetizing. He closed his razor sharp teeth around the brain matter and chewed thoughtfully.

This story is particularly gorey, but most of what i write can be just as bad. am i crossing a line?

I think, as a writer (or any artist for that matter), you should do what you want/like to do. Who cares what other people think?

At the same time, excessive violence (or any description, for that matter), can bog down your narrative. You're using a lot of adjectives/adverbs ('violently, cleanly, tremendous' etc), and describing the action with a considerable amount of detail, perhaps unnecessarily. Depends on the context.

If the violence slows the story down, cut it away. If excessive description of violence is not necessary, cut it away. If it is necessary, don't hold back. That's how I see it.

I think the problem you're having has more to do with knowing your reader than it does to do with the writing itself. if your story features graphic violence send it to a place where readers go to look for that kind of work. if your story features clones and space aliens send it to a sci-fi lit journal. that's not to say you should change your writing to appeal to a certain type of reader. you should write and edit the story first, then send it in.

now, if I were you I'd be even more concerned with the graphic depictions of violence becoming a crutch. a lot of young writers confuse graphic writing with good writing. in their minds they are being "gritty" or visceral. they're showing the world for what it is. but the world isn't all blood-mist and brain matter. shock is cheap. superficial gore makes for forgettable stories. all the severed spinal columns in the world cannot compensate for weak plot or lack of character development. even fans of those old B-film slasher flicks can appreciate a cathartic moment in a story about war or serial killers.

also, remember that when your work is saturated with violence, each chunk of brain-meat has a smaller and smaller impact. eventually your reader will lose his or her ability to become shocked by anything you read if you keep doing the same thing. "Oh, look he's eating the guy's kidneys...again, never seen that one before." I'm not saying don't be graphic. just be economical with it. save the grit and gristle for the moments when it will be the most meaningful for the reader.

hope that was helpful.

One thing I discovered with horror writing is to let the more taboo subjects run on assumption. For example, I wrote a zombie story a while back and in the first draft I had so many vivid descriptions of the zombies and how they looked. Then I realised that everybody has different ways of thinking of zombies. For example, when I think of zombies, I think of the overly sensationalized 'walking dead' style zombies. Where as when my sister thinks of zombies she thinks of the clean-cut, sunken features, original 'Day of the Dead' style zombies. I'm ranting.

Basically, what I'm saying is use the minimum, and let the reader decide how gory it is in his/her head. As a reader, we don't picture everything exactly how it's written.

Obviously there are exceptions, but if it's unimportant to character or plot development, either minimize or cut it. Let the reader do the work.

No, it's never wrong. Just put a 18+ on it. I love violence in story. I'm writing a 3 part story and there's a part where a character commits suicide similar to the Budd Dwyer suicide on National TV. I watched that video multiple times to get it right on. The readers said it was "freaky" along with the Na Water Bath. Nothing wrong with it, just tag it.

There is no such thing as 'crossing the line' in fiction writing. It's your own little world and you choose what happens, whether it is puppies dancing among flowers, or teenagers practising voodoo. It's your choice.
Admittedly, your description of cannibalism did make me feel rather sick. But it also intrigued me and filled my head with questions (the first one was "why?"). Also, when you do manage to get a reader feeling queasy, it usually means you have done a job well done.

Nope, nothing is too graphic. At least that is the way it is for me. When I first joined this site I was scared that I would get banned for some of the stuff I write about, but I didn't. I feel there is a fine line between a lot of violence and a just plain silly amount of violence. Currently I'm writing a novel that involves rape, torture, execution (including the killing of baby animals), insanity, sex... you get the picture. I only ever once had someone complain that I use too many swears. So, don't feel like you have to censor your work just because others tell you too. It's your writing, if they don't like it, they can go elsewhere.

George R.R. Martin and Ken Follet write some pretty gritty books, and they are pretty popular authors right now, so much that they have large fanbases and even TV shows/miniseries' based off of their own respective books.

It works for them and people like the realism, since the world, especially back in the Middle Ages, was not butterflies and bubblegum. Rape, torture, killing of children, and cutting off penises make historical fiction and gritty fantasy/sci fi fun, depending on the audience.

But you can still write a fantasy book that is dark and even creepy without making it gritty and ultra violent. Take Lord of the Rings for instance. In my opinion, it is much darker than Game of Thrones, even though the latter is grittier and has more adult content.

While *personally* I find the passage above too graphic for my own tastes, what matters is what you're trying to do as an artist. So long as you're using the graphic violence to convey something about the story, world, characters, or meaning of your story then I vote keep it in. If it's just self-gratuitous violence that exists for no real reason other than to exist then you might have more of a problem.

Ultimately, do what you feel is right as an artist. But keep in mind that if you want to make this a profession, there's a slimmer market for needless violence which will make publishing harder (publishers buy books they can market to as many people as possible, after all).

It's not too graphic, it's too long. Find a way to describe the violence more succinctly, and it'll not only read better but have more impact too.