Trigger warnings and feedback from the identity-obsessed
In the realm of writing and publishing, feedback is an invaluable tool for authors striving to refine their work. However, the source of this feedback is crucial, as the perspectives and biases of the reviewers can significantly impact the quality and usefulness of the critique. People who base their entire personality on a single identity, such as a specific political stance, religious belief, or social movement, often bring a narrow and potentially limiting viewpoint to their feedback.
On the other hand, if an author is including a particular culture in his work, he should welcome all feedback on the authenticity and accuracy of that culture’s depiction from members of that culture, or those that study it. Sometimes, research isn’t enough, and having someone point out something you got wrong will avoid embarrassment later on. In fact, it is strongly recommended you seek out beta readers with knowledge of a culture you are not a member of to insure your work is as faithful as possible to the source. While culture and identity may be seen as similar, they are not the same. Someone who is member of a particular culture is knowledgeable in aspects about it and may participate in that culture. Someone who builds their life around one identity becomes that identity. Big difference.
When individuals base their identity predominantly on a single aspect of themselves, they may possess a limited and sometimes dogmatic perspective that can hinder their ability to provide balanced and constructive feedback. Their worldview tends to be shaped by a specific set of beliefs or experiences, which can create a biased lens through which they evaluate a manuscript. For instance, someone who identifies strongly with gender ideology might critique a work primarily based on how well it aligns with or opposes their beliefs, rather than assessing the narrative, character development, or overall literary quality. This type of feedback can skew an author’s understanding of their work’s strengths and weaknesses, focusing excessively on ideological alignment rather than the broader aspects of storytelling.
Literature thrives on varied perspectives, and receiving feedback from beta readers can help authors see their work through multiple lenses, revealing different interpretations and potential areas for improvement.
The author of this post has recently seen this with beta-reader feedback that points out a portion of a manuscript that some member of an identity considers “problematic” or “crosses a line.” Most of the time this kind of feedback should be immediately discarded. This is different from a reviewer who might question something more generally as “excessive” or “unnecessary.” Listen carefully to the terms someone uses. Calling out too much gore is something to be considered. Pointing out an opinion or even historical fact, as something that needs to be removed, is a red flag that the reviewer sees everything through an ideological lens.
It’s better than chocolate
OK, maybe not. But you can’t write with chocolate. It would make a mess.
Our promise to you: Word Weaver Pro will never raise your blood sugar or make you fat.
Sign up for a free account on World Weaver Pro. If nothing else, you won’t see these crappy ads anymore.
Remember to ask yourself: Would this person really ever read this book by choice? This is very analogous to the controversy over many recent video games and movies. The loudest voices complaining about some aspect of “representation” are never going to play the game or watch the movie and are not the target market. They represent nothing of consequence to the success of the item they complain about, and only serve to alienate fans looking forward to it.
Moreover, feedback from individuals with a single-identity-focus can lack the diversity needed to create a well-rounded and universally appealing manuscript. Literature thrives on varied perspectives, and receiving feedback from beta readers can help authors see their work through multiple lenses, revealing different interpretations and potential areas for improvement. When feedback is from those who view the world through a narrow scope, it can reinforce the current media-promoted identity-based group-think rather than challenge authors to think critically and creatively about their work.
In this context, it is also important to discuss the issue of trigger warnings. Trigger warnings are notices included at the beginning of a book, chapter, or scene that alert readers to content that might be distressing or triggering. While the intention behind trigger warnings is to protect readers from potential psychological harm, their implementation in literature is a contentious issue. Additionally, the contemporary discourse around trigger warnings presents a complex challenge, often leading to debates on their role and necessity in literature.
It is the opinion of this author that trigger warnings should never be utilized, beyond the standard designation of something with explicit sexual content or graphic violence.
Trigger warnings can limit an author’s creative freedom and the reader’s engagement with challenging content. Literature often explores complex and difficult themes, aiming to provoke thought, evoke emotions, and encourage empathy. By providing trigger warnings, authors might feel pressured to sanitize their work or avoid certain topics altogether, which can undermine the authenticity and depth of their narratives. Additionally, trigger warnings can preemptively frame a reader’s experience, leading them to approach the content with preconceived notions that might diminish the impact of the story.
You don’t get enough email
Well… Maybe you do. But this email will notify you about awesomely cool blog posts about writing.
All the cool kids are subscribed. Come on… do it!
We email very infrequently and will never sell your address to anyone. Unsubscribe anytime.
Furthermore, the subjective nature of what might be triggering can make it difficult to apply trigger warnings consistently and effectively. What is distressing to one person might be entirely innocuous to another, and attempting to account for every possible trigger can result in an overly cautious and diluted narrative. This not only compromises the integrity of the work but also places an unreasonable burden on authors to anticipate and address the diverse sensitivities of their audience.
Another critical point is that engaging with difficult or uncomfortable content in literature can be an essential part of the reading experience. It allows readers to confront and process complex emotions, develop empathy, and gain a deeper understanding of different perspectives and experiences. Shielding readers from challenging content through trigger warnings can deprive them of these valuable opportunities for personal growth and reflection.
Ultimately, while it is essential to consider the potential impact of a manuscript on its audience, authors should strive to maintain their creative integrity and focus on crafting authentic, compelling stories. Feedback from individuals who base their personality on a single identity is often limited in scope and can detract from the broader purpose of literature, which is to explore the human experience in all its complexity. Similarly, while well-intentioned, trigger warnings can undermine the literary process and the reader’s engagement with the material.
In conclusion, authors should seek feedback from diverse and open-minded individuals who can provide a broad range of perspectives, ensuring their work is evaluated on its literary merits rather than through a narrow ideological lens. By doing so, authors can create richer, more nuanced narratives that resonate with a wider audience. The role of literature is to entertain, challenge, provoke, and inspire, and this should not be compromised by someone’s fringe identity obsession or through trigger warnings.
Feel that FOMO?
*Fear of Missing Out.
Our emails are very infrequent. Unsubscribe anytime.
