We
all have ideas on politics, or religion, or whatever, and as writers there is
the temptation to use the platform of our writing to spread these ideas, even
if they don’t necessarily fit the story.
This is a broad definition of social commentary. But one person’s social commentary is another
person’s ideological screed. Years ago
there was a show coming out that didn’t really look interesting to me. But then one day Twitter exploded with people
talking about an episode and how brave they were to “go there.” So out of
curiosity, I started watching the show.
It wasn’t really for me and when I got to “the” episode, I couldn’t even
finish it. Because to me the social
commentary felt so ham-fisted that it felt like I was being beat with the whole
pig. Don’t get me wrong, the issue they
brought up is important, but it was like going in to have the oil in your car
changed only for them to start repainting it.
Yes, it needed done, but it wasn’t what I signed up for today.
Social
commentary is great when it works, but it is so easy for it to not work. And I think the easiest way for it to not
work is to try to do too much with it, or to make too big a deal of it. Stories are like meals. While some are fine with plain fare, most
readers/watchers want their stories seasoned with some clever writing. And if the writer wishes to garnish it with a
bit of social commentary, that’s fine, although some will just push it to the
side of the plate. I think the reason
social commentary often has a bit of a negative connotation, is because writers
are afraid of being too subtle and their message being missed by the public, so
they go superliminal.
So
if you feel the need to add some social commentary to your writing, remember,
it’s best as seasoning. Some might miss
it, but if you add too much, you’ll probably annoy more people, which kind of
defeats the purpose.
***
No comments:
Post a Comment