suicides in novels

What an ugly, ugly thread. The pop understanding of suicide doesn't permit most people to fully understand your position YesNo. But that's age appropriate sometimes. That's the nature of being fooled (by nature). Which is worse seems like a horrifically superficial question. And answering that question only provides information... of other interest.

Western conception of suicide seems to crutch on 'It's my life, I'll take it if I want to.' The moral argument follows pretty easily from the inverse. If you fully respected agency of the other, ie appreciated their capacity to feel pain is equivalent to your own, you assess the nature of suicide in proper context. Even though you don't feel it yourself, you honor the reality and fullness of someone else's pain-- such as the effects on a family or a community caused by suicide.

So much goes out the window when Western conceptions of the self get a little nut checked.



J

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darcy88

I'd be far more devastated by finding my girlfriend or mother dead after their suicide than I would be after being raped, but I would think lesser of the rapist than I would of my girlfriend or mother. Likewise, I think my mother would think the person who raped her is morally lesser than her suicided son. I suppose overall you could try and argue that suicide is in a certain sense "worse" than rape, but that would be in the wider emotional devastation it causes on others and not in regards to the moral status of the person who commits the act.

---

I agree with that. I would feel the same way. I am only arguing for the wider emotional devastation a suicide causes.

I don't have any metaphysics that claims that the person who committed suicide goes to hell or is punished in some way after death. Although I don't think our consciousness ends at death, based on what I've read from psychics, people who commit suicide are not punished except in perhaps knowing the harm they caused. You may not find what psychics say to be evidence, but I don't have any other evidence to go on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack of Hearts

Western conception of suicide seems to crutch on 'It's my life, I'll take it if I want to.'
J

---

That's how I feel on the matter, but I don't encounter this attitude very often. A person who expresses suicidal thoughts is met with horror and is liable to be locked up and forcibly medicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cafolini

I think you just spoke about empathy, a natural parameter of feeling. Com-passion is passion in common, and rare cases do exist, but they are not the norm.

---

Empathy is an interesting word and I admit I do get empathy and sympathy muddled up. I think they are interrelated in that one cannot sympathise if one does not empathise.
I think a subject such as suicide goes ibeyond both because wishing someone to do something as permissible and fine but that we do not wish to ourselves is contrary to our beliefs and therefore false. Someone I know once told me do not feed something to somebody if you would not eat it yourself.
This brings me to think about present days jobs and the whole ethos about what we do professionally and how we feel about it. I was thinking it must be fake and allusive to do a job one does not believe in . To be professional and to believe in the profession is two separate things. I think our lives are already geared to live a lie an allusion. To strive in life teaches people to adopt blasé attitude and care free sentiment about everything else in life and that is concerning to say the least.

I agree with what peeps are saying about the emotional devastation killing yourself would do to others (that's why I for one would never contemplate suicide), but in my opinion you should still have that right to die. For example, people with terminal illnesses that make their life very painful. If they want to end their life now rather than prolonging it, who are we to deny them that right? I would certainly think that their family would be able to respect that decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Volya

I agree with what peeps are saying about the emotional devastation killing yourself would do to others (that's why I for one would never contemplate suicide), but in my opinion you should still have that right to die. For example, people with terminal illnesses that make their life very painful. If they want to end their life now rather than prolonging it, who are we to deny them that right? I would certainly think that their family would be able to respect that decision.

---

Hi Volya you do bring a valid point and I feel that one that is in pain because one is disabled and is not able to conduct a normal life because he or she is literally in a vegetative state is a different subject. That is in my eyes not suicide but more of a need because physically one is impaired really badly. However someone who commits suicide because one is not able to get what they want or because they have gone bankrupt are physically able and can recover with the help for others. A physically impaired person is helpless because one cannot help their body adjust it is different. I feel it call it suicide is wrong. It must have a different name.

So someone who has a 'physical' desire for release from this life due to pain or degenerative illness is exonerated from the sin in your eyes. How very kind of you. But someone with a 'non-physical' need, be it depression or loneliness or some mental illness or whatever, is not?

Empathy? Hardly.

But this thread is supposed to be about whether suicide should be written about in literature or not. We seem to be wandering off-topic.

H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hillwalker

So someone who has a 'physical' desire for release from this life due to pain or degenerative illness is exonerated from the sin in your eyes. How very kind of you. But someone with a 'non-physical' need, be it depression or loneliness or some mental illness or whatever, is not?

---

Not entirely sure if this was aimed at me, but if it was, I was merely using the terminal illness as an example, I am aware that there are other reasons people commit suicide

The answer is simple. Literature often reflects the harsh, cruel realities of life. Suicide is one of those realities. Deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Volya

Not entirely sure if this was aimed at me, but if it was, I was merely using the terminal illness as an example, I am aware that there are other reasons people commit suicide

---

No - it was aimed at the OP.

H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack of Hearts

Western conception of suicide seems to crutch on 'It's my life, I'll take it if I want to.'

---

Yes, I hadn't thought of it like this before but based on your comment and those of others, this seems to be the underlying story that we are telling ourselves about ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

So, it seems you are saying there are issues with respect to suicide and its justification that are highly debatable and of critical moral weight. Do you not believe that novelists who make the best possible case for controversial stances on this issue might be furthering the discussion by actually portraying suicides and suicidal characters? And wouldn't many writers consider it their duty—a matter of artistic integrity—to make the best possible case for their characters' actions, whether or not they ultimately endorsed their positions?

---

One should not assume that someone is exercising "artistic integrity", just because that person made a movie or wrote a story. I doubt there is even such a thing as artistic integrity. If artists are professionals, they realize that they are constructing a product they hope to market. I think the question of the thread is how do we treat suicide in literature? Has it become a quick, overblown, self-righteous solution? If so, I would like to pop some of that nonsense. The extreme case is suicides that are designed to politically punish adversaries.

Perhaps one needs examples from literature. I could mention Emil Miller's A Tangled Tale, which has a suicide in it, but maybe something else would be useful to discuss. I'm trying to remember the name of a Canadian movie I recently saw where the older man ended his life with an overdose of heroin provided by his relatives. He could have waited a month or two and died without the overdose. There is a youtube video of a copy-cat Buddhist suicide of a young man from India with a lot of self-righteous political rant at the end. One has to consider this "art" as well. There is dark comedy movie called "Four Lions" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1341167/) about a group of Muslins who messed up their suicide attempts although a bunch of innocent people were killed. I think that movie treated these suicides well because it made those committing suicide look like idiots.

I'm not promoting censorship. The market does an adequate job of censoring. I don't mind hearing a suicide story, nor even writing one. However, just because someone writes a story about suicide doesn't mean I have to accept it.

Despite opinions on the issues at hand, we can all agree cacians topic sparked most of our interest. 2000 views, 90 posts .
Well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hillwalker

So someone who has a 'physical' desire for release from this life due to pain or degenerative illness is exonerated from the sin in your eyes. How very kind of you. But someone with a 'non-physical' need, be it depression or loneliness or some mental illness or whatever, is not?

Empathy? Hardly.

But this thread is supposed to be about whether suicide should be written about in literature or not. We seem to be wandering off-topic.

H

---

I am not advocating one's life against another. Taking one's life is tragic regardless but someone whose life is non existant because his or her disability is untreatable is better understood more then someone whose is life is shattered on hold for a bit because their lovers left them or because they have gone bankrupt . This someone is perfectally able to recover with the help of others. It is a wasted life if one is not seen to fight tragedy . Humans need to see that others fight life and go on to live a better life.
A story that tells me someone committed suicide is I think extreme radicalism and has no logic because fundamentally humans are readjustable. Humans are rational and can meet their dead ends with other alternatives because they have the power to think clearly and solve anything. A character that challenges death is a character that has more credibility then one who does not. It is what heroism is made off challenging the impossible and death is one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

One should not assume that someone is exercising "artistic integrity", just because that person made a movie or wrote a story. I doubt there is even such a thing as artistic integrity.

---

No one is making such an assumption, and it is clear you simply don't want to engage the questions I raised. I merely asked if making the best possible case for a suicidal character's thinking and motivations, that is, showing how such a character is aware of his/her own thinking and motivation about the contemplated act, might not further our understanding of a vital area of human experience and our ability to empathize with those among us in extreme emotional and physical distress. And yes, artistic integrity exists. In this case it might consist in doing one's best to see the act from the suicide's perspective, rather than using the character as a sock puppet to advocate for a particular moral or political position, as a source of superficial or lurid excitement because one believes it might sell books, or as a convenient way to tie up loose ends in a plot because one can't construct a better one. All of these latter options illustrate various deficiencies in artistic integrity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I think the question of the thread is how do we treat suicide in literature? Has it become a quick, overblown, self-righteous solution? If so, I would like to pop some of that nonsense. The extreme case is suicides that are designed to politically punish adversaries.

---

Obviously, like anything else, suicide will be handled well by some and poorly by others and one should distinguish between instances of the former and the latter. You seem interested only in the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I'm not promoting censorship. The market does an adequate job of censoring. I don't mind hearing a suicide story, nor even writing one. However, just because someone writes a story about suicide doesn't mean I have to accept it.

---

Whoever said you have to? You are attacking straw men of your own construction and seem to think you are making some kind of general point in doing so. I find no content in it other than the fact that you don't like stories involving suicide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

No one is making such an assumption, and it is clear you simply don't want to engage the questions I raised. I merely asked if making the best possible case for a suicidal character's thinking and motivations, that is, showing how such a character is aware of his/her own thinking and motivation about the contemplated act, might not further our understanding of a vital area of human experience and our ability to empathize with those among us in extreme emotional and physical distress.

---

Hi Wyatt I do not understand what you mean by best possible case. Would you mind further explaining what you mean by this paragraph. Sorry I am understanding it sorry :)

Quote:

---

And yes, artistic integrity exists.

---

Intergrity has no duplicity. It is an alone serving/standing concept. Committing suicide is duplicity because has to rely on it to help him her achieve their ends.

Quote:

---

In this case it might consist in doing one's best to see the act from the suicide's perspective,

---

suicide is extremely intricate and very personal to each individual. One case does not could not explain to all its distress. No one could ever know what the suicide went through because they are no longer. To imagine a suicide in a book is to play on clichés of what others might have suffered and therefore it is not recognised as dealing with the issue but more propagating its distorted reality/myth.
A person who has not experienced suicide may never vouch for others who have gone to it and died.

Quote:

---

rather than using the character as a sock puppet to advocate for a particular moral or political position, as a source of superficial or lurid excitement because one believes it might sell books, or as a convenient way to tie up loose ends in a plot because one can't construct a better one. All of these latter options illustrate various deficiencies in artistic integrity.

---

I am not so sure a character advocates whatever it is act or not because as soon one is involved it becomes fictional and nothing else that is the idea of a story. to take suicide which a distressing reality and to imply it as being fiction is not the right way to go about it because it is a very much palpable frightening reality.

Quote:

---

Obviously, like anything else, suicide will be handled well by some and poorly by others and one should distinguish between instances of the former and the latter. You seem interested only in the latter.

---

Suicide in my views could never be handled well. It is impossible how is death handled well?

Quote:

---

Whoever said you have to? You are attacking straw men of your own construction and seem to think you are making some kind of general point in doing so. I find no content in it other than the fact that you don't like stories involving suicide.

---

I am no sure liking the story is what it is all about. I am questioning the validity of suicide within a story. Why prolonge its agony again and again in stories when life is littered with it. I do not get this concept of agonising over it when one does not know what it actually feels to commit suicide. A writer is in my views not well placed to write suicide as a fait du jour is because he or she has not experienced it. That that is integrity mystified because unless on has lived it then I am afraid it has to be pure speculations and the wrong ones no doubt.

Cacian, so correct me if I'm wrong. Are you proposing it's not possible to write about suicide, because the only people who know how it feels to be suicidal have committed it? That since the writer is alive, they must use cliches and speculation on the matter?

...seriously?

Not everyone who is suicidal commits suicide. Further, there's many people who attempt suicide and fail. So, are they simply speculating too? Point is, there are plenty of people who have experienced enough emotional distress to probably relate an original, genuine struggle with their suicidal depression, without being cliche.

It doesn't sound like you've ever been suicidal, for that I say congratulations. But plenty of others have, and have valid statements, feelings, etc. to discuss it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cacian

I am no sure liking the story is what it is all about. I am questioning the validity of suicide within a story. Why prolonge its agony again and again in stories when life is littered with it. I do not get this concept of agonising over it when one does not know what it actually feels to commit suicide. A writer is in my views not well placed to write suicide as a fait du jour is because he or she has not experienced it. That that is integrity mystified because unless on has lived it then I am afraid it has to be pure speculations and the wrong ones no doubt.

---

So, Cacian, do you think a detective-story writer should write about murder only if he has actually murdered somone? This could create a new motive!

It seems to me that fiction differs from autobiography.

You're really offensive Cacian.

Well I'll just write a fictional story on incest since I know all about it first hand and am an authority on it. Will you wrinkle your nose up at that or give me the author some respect or will you fall back on your theory that the world should be all flowers and bubble gum in literature and art and there is no place for such distatesful realities either?

How dare you insult those who have been touched by such tragedies with your pathetic theories and low level thinking. Go find la la land and pedal there as fast as you can. Who knows? You might be the most literate and intelligent one when you arrive - that is if you don't get hit by a double decker on your way there (because they're real too and feature in literature and art in case you want to start a thread objecting to them!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

No one is making such an assumption, and it is clear you simply don't want to engage the questions I raised. I merely asked if making the best possible case for a suicidal character's thinking and motivations, that is, showing how such a character is aware of his/her own thinking and motivation about the contemplated act, might not further our understanding of a vital area of human experience and our ability to empathize with those among us in extreme emotional and physical distress. And yes, artistic integrity exists. In this case it might consist in doing one's best to see the act from the suicide's perspective, rather than using the character as a sock puppet to advocate for a particular moral or political position, as a source of superficial or lurid excitement because one believes it might sell books, or as a convenient way to tie up loose ends in a plot because one can't construct a better one. All of these latter options illustrate various deficiencies in artistic integrity.

---

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. You may not believe that, but I am really trying to convince myself. I have learned something about "artistic integrity" from you because you mentioned the phrase and I hadn't thought of it before. Indirectly, you convinced me it doesn't exist. I know that wasn't your intent, but it doesn't matter.

I find your views interesting and I would like to continue discussions with you. It is unlikely that I will agree with you. Who cares? How boring would it be if everyone agreed with everyone else? What would we learn from the discussions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

Obviously, like anything else, suicide will be handled well by some and poorly by others and one should distinguish between instances of the former and the latter. You seem interested only in the latter.

---

For me that is what I like about this thread: examine the ways suicide is treated poorly and avoid them. Why should one avoid them? To make our products more marketable because they will be more enjoyable to a broader audience.

Admittedly, I am also concerned that young people are not deluded by the self-righteousness that centers around suicide. I don't want to encourage those stories in any way, nor would they be easy to market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WyattGwyon

Whoever said you have to? You are attacking straw men of your own construction and seem to think you are making some kind of general point in doing so. I find no content in it other than the fact that you don't like stories involving suicide.

---

How do you know I don't like stories about suicide? I'm actually quite fascinated by stories of suicide where I can detect self-righteousness involved either with the author portraying the character in a negative way by saying the character committed suicide (Anna Karenina) or when those inane suicide-terrorists are allowed to express themselves as long as they are presented in an inane manner.

What I don't like are stories that are boring about suicide--or stories that propagate self-righteous fantasies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delta40

You're really offensive Cacian.

Well I'll just write a fictional story on incest since I know all about it first hand and am an authority on it. Will you wrinkle your nose up at that or give me the author some respect or will you fall back on your theory that the world should be all flowers and bubble gum in literature and art and there is no place for such distatesful realities either?

How dare you insult those who have been touched by such tragedies with your pathetic theories and low level thinking. Go find la la land and pedal there as fast as you can. Who knows? You might be the most literate and intelligent one when you arrive - that is if you don't get hit by a double decker on your way there (because they're real too and feature in literature and art in case you want to start a thread objecting to them!)

---

I am always amazed when people who are supposedly writers block out people they disagree with. These are the ones you should be paying especial attention to. They provide you with prompts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I am always amazed when people who are supposedly writers block out people they disagree with. These are the ones you should be paying especial attention to. They provide you with prompts.

---

Oh so now you've got a basket of supposed writers that should behave in a certain way. Did you get that from another story you were told? :frown2:

Suicide represents the ultimate freedom in life. What other power do we have over our lives? We choose a job like we choose which bars in a cage to lean on.

We choose what to do within the limitations put in place by others.

I saw a sign the other day that said democracy is freedom. I asked for who? The masses but not the individual.

Cacian is obviously sheltered and to some degree shallow. It's like she wants literature to mirror some dreamworld dystopia where she's chancellor of morality and everything is kept in order with good, clean, literature.

Suicide happens. It's devastating to families and friends and no one has any right to say it shouldn't be written about. Especially for the stated reason that no one can do it accurately. It's called imagination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cacian

Hi Wyatt I do not understand what you mean by best possible case. Would you mind further explaining what you mean by this paragraph. Sorry I am understanding it sorry :)


Intergrity has no duplicity. It is an alone serving/standing concept. Committing suicide is duplicity because has to rely on it to help him her achieve their ends.

---

To commit suicide is to be duplicitous? Please do elaborate.

Quote:

---

suicide is extremely intricate and very personal to each individual. One case does not could not explain to all its distress. No one could ever know what the suicide went through because they are no longer. To imagine a suicide in a book is to play on clichés of what others might have suffered and therefore it is not recognised as dealing with the issue but more propagating its distorted reality/myth.
A person who has not experienced suicide may never vouch for others who have gone to it and died.

---

People who have attempted suicide and failed know what its like to go through what a person who committed suicide did. And since when does an artist need to experience for him or herself what each character has experienced? Can male authors write female characters? Can someone who has never gone to war write of war? I don't see your point here.

Quote:

---

I am not so sure a character advocates whatever it is act or not because as soon one is involved it becomes fictional and nothing else that is the idea of a story. to take suicide which a distressing reality and to imply it as being fiction is not the right way to go about it because it is a very much palpable frightening reality.

---

This simply makes no sense. Literature is full of "frightening palpable realities." To exclude them would be to do away with much of the canon.

Quote:

---

I am no sure liking the story is what it is all about. I am questioning the validity of suicide within a story. Why prolonge its agony again and again in stories when life is littered with it. I do not get this concept of agonising over it when one does not know what it actually feels to commit suicide. A writer is in my views not well placed to write suicide as a fait du jour is because he or she has not experienced it. That that is integrity mystified because unless on has lived it then I am afraid it has to be pure speculations and the wrong ones no doubt.

---

Again, since when does an artist need to experience everything he or she portrays? I see no basis to this contention. Its silly to me.

I did not see Cacian trying to get suicide out of the literature scope. She is simply telling the way she feels it. She will never present the case as censorship. Thar's all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I am always amazed when people who are supposedly writers block out people they disagree with. These are the ones you should be paying especial attention to. They provide you with prompts.

---

YesNo, I don't think anyone is trying to block out anyone. It's just aggravating hearing Cacian try to propose suicide in literature is in general, poor writing. It seems she wishes to ban it from being written about, which is ironic considering she posted in one thread that the greatest sin of all was "banning"...frankly, I'm more of the opinion she just likes to argue for the sake of argument, which I also think some others on here feel this way, with due reason.

As for you, I've read your posts, and respect your opinion which seems to be if I'm correct: I can enjoy a novel/story that contains suicide if it's written well, without supporting suicide. I agree to this. But that doesn't seem to be the point Cacian was bringing across in her original post, which was: "suicide as a whole is distasteful."

This thread should have been started in philosophical literature, because we're not arguing quality of writing here, were arguing morality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delta40

Oh so now you've got a basket of supposed writers that should behave in a certain way. Did you get that from another story you were told? :frown2:

---

From the one you are telling me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaman_Raman

YesNo, I don't think anyone is trying to block out anyone. It's just aggravating hearing Cacian try to propose suicide in literature is in general, poor writing. It seems she wishes to ban it from being written about, which is ironic considering she posted in one thread that the greatest sin of all was "banning"...frankly, I'm more of the opinion she just likes to argue for the sake of argument, which I also think some others on here feel this way, with due reason.

As for you, I've read your posts, and respect your opinion which seems to be if I'm correct: I can enjoy a novel/story that contains suicide if it's written well, without supporting suicide. I agree to this. But that doesn't seem to be the point Cacian was bringing across in her original post, which was: "suicide as a whole is distasteful."

This thread should have been started in philosophical literature, because we're not arguing quality of writing here, were arguing morality.

---

I agree with cacian. Introducing suicide is poor writing. It is distasteful. It has a deus ex machina feel to it when it comes to plot construction. It has a juvenile whining quality about it. It makes one think that the author forgot to take his or her meds. But the main reason is it won't sell. She is giving you good reasons why it won't sell and it is better to pay attention to what people like her are saying than waste your time writing about "deep reality" which is little more than shallow, self-righteous fantasy.

There is no reason to be aggravated by anyone on these forums, but if somebody enjoys getting aggravated, that's fine. Others can watch and be entertained and perhaps incorporate the perceived aggravation into a new story or poem. Theoretically we are all writers here and we are all prompts for other writers.

By the way, I finished writing a story about a suicide last year. It was about a chicken who killed herself by walking up to a dog and letting the dog grab her head in his mouth and spin her around in the air breaking her neck. It's a true story. I'm trying to make sense out of it--and rewrite it, because, frankly, it sucks and I think I owe that chicken better. This thread has helped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I agree with cacian. Introducing suicide is poor writing. It is distasteful. It has a deus ex machina feel to it when it comes to plot construction. It has a juvenile whining quality about it. It makes one think that the author forgot to take his or her meds. But the main reason is it won't sell. She is giving you good reasons why it won't sell and it is better to pay attention to what people like her are saying than waste your time writing about "deep reality" which is little more than shallow, self-righteous fantasy.

---

Yep, you're so right. That's exactly how I would characterize Tolstoy and his masterpiece Anna Karenina.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I agree with cacian. Introducing suicide is poor writing. It is distasteful. It has a deus ex machina feel to it when it comes to plot construction. It has a juvenile whining quality about it. It makes one think that the author forgot to take his or her meds. But the main reason is it won't sell.

---

I agree with practically every other word in your post.

Code Geass is an anime that came out in the last few years, is wildly popular and highly rated by fans and critics alike.

Warning Code Geass Spoilers

I will start by saying I don't really like anime. All I care about is story. CG has an awesome story.

At the end, the MC commits suicide but it's very well done. In context, his suicide was selfless and completed his arc. It was an unfotgettable ending, unexpected and Id consider it great writing.

The show sold BIG. Multiple movies and a new series came from it.

I don't think it's fair to say one subject matter is bad writing. It's not what it's about, it's how it's about it.

Shakespeare portrayed a lot of suicides. Flaubert's masterpiece ends in suicide. As does Tolstoy's. As does Victor Hugo's. Goethe is another. Doestoevsky. Woolf. The list goes on and on.

It is laughable to question suicide's portrayal in literature when the greatest writers of all time have featured it prominently in their masterworks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darcy88

Shakespeare portrayed a lot of suicides. Flaubert's masterpiece ends in suicide. As does Tolstoy's. As does Victor Hugo's. Goethe is another. Doestoevsky. Woolf. The list goes on and on.

It is laughable to question suicide's portrayal in literature when the greatest writers of all time have featured it prominently in their masterworks.

---

Well of course these writers did what they knew best and see there is that one similarity running through all of their work which stands out like a sore thumb. It makes them all in effect of the same calibre and not at all different from each other. They all chose suicide as a theme to their stories. It must tell you something no? and with all the greatest respect to these greatest writers and no one is questioning their greatness that is definetely not the point of this thread.
You mention the word 'laughable' and I think it is rather laughable that no one ever question literature and what it present us with and that is the greatest dilemma. One writes one reads and one also one must think aboutwhat one is reading and writing.
It is ironic because we question rules and laws and put safety barriers to stop people from offending and we also inspect our food and bring health and safety measures and yet no one object to literature that incorporate violence child abuse and suicide. There is a double edge sword there stand a hypocrisy and if we think we are to ever conduct a life in a normal safe environment then we are all fooling ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darcy88

Yep, you're so right. That's exactly how I would characterize Tolstoy and his masterpiece Anna Karenina.

---

Not to mention worthless scribblings like Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment and The Possessed, and Hugo's Toilers of the Sea.

I think all idyllic literature should be banned. It creates an unrealistic standard and leads to suicide and terrorism.

Literature is supposed to be like real life, and real life is far from idyllic, but cus of idyllic literature, many will think the universe is idyllic.

When that idyllicism is face on face with reality, things implode inside the mind. Bolts unbolt. Hinges...unhinge.

It's truly unpalatable that idyllic literature is written in my opinion.

However we sometimes want to read something enabling us to forget about the real life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaman_Raman

YesNo, I don't think anyone is trying to block out anyone. It's just aggravating hearing Cacian try to propose suicide in literature is in general, poor writing. It seems she wishes to ban it from being written about, which is ironic considering she posted in one thread that the greatest sin of all was "banning"...frankly, I'm more of the opinion she just likes to argue for the sake of argument, which I also think some others on here feel this way, with due reason.

As for you, I've read your posts, and respect your opinion which seems to be if I'm correct: I can enjoy a novel/story that contains suicide if it's written well, without supporting suicide. I agree to this. But that doesn't seem to be the point Cacian was bringing across in her original post, which was: "suicide as a whole is distasteful."

This thread should have been started in philosophical literature, because we're not arguing quality of writing here, were arguing morality.

---

About banning I think you are again misunderstanding the point of this thread.
I am not suggesting banning it I am putting to you as I feel about it and I am trying to say that perhaps suicide in literature is not the right way to go about story and writing in generals because readers are different and will react differently to different subjects.
I picked suicide because that was the most obvious thing to do. The reason is that it is a real tragedy and one must tread carefully when associating fictional character with it. To write a book for all to read and and assume that every reader is going to reflect in the same way as everyone else a cliché.

The other thing is you mention that I argue for the sake arguing that is simply untrue. This is not an argument but something I thought very carefully about. It has many times crossed my mind that it was not right. It felt wrong to me to read stories with characters committing suicide especially in a manner that advocated heroism or just something done as a mean to get rid off a character. We do not do that in real life get rid off people we decide we do not want to be friend with and so I started this thread.
The point of a discussion is to talk about issues and hear everyone else's thoughts and reactions regardless of whether we like what we hear or disagree for that matter. We could never possibly all agree or disagree all at the same time because we are all different.
So whilst we tolerate each other we must also be able to express opinions different from other or similar. That is the essence of any discussion. Arguments are justified when it comes to are very important to our lives. That is how I conduct life by communicating and literature is one the greatest forum for ideas and intellectual development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cacian

It is ironic because we question rules and laws and put safety barriers to stop people from offending and we also inspect our food and bring health and safety measures and yet no one object to literature that incorporate violence child abuse and suicide. There is a double edge sword there stand a hypocrisy and if we think we are to ever conduct a life in a normal safe environment then we are all fooling ourselves.

---

So what are you actually saying? That literature should not deal with life's toughest realities? That suicide, violence, and things painful as child abuse shouldn't be written about? There are plenty of safe sanitized novels out there for one who would rather not delve into the darker corners of human nature. No one is forcing you to read these books.

After 8 pages of this thread I have yet to encounter a rational convincing argument against suicide's portrayal in literature. Suicide works in literature. There are too many masterpieces of fiction which feature it for it to be otherwise. One of my favourite stories in all literature is that of Kirilov in Dostoevsky's novel The Possessed who has philosophically proven to himself that he must end his own life. Would Romeo and Juliet be so powerful a story without that tragic ending? I don't think so. And this holds true for countless great works which contain suicide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

I agree with cacian. Introducing suicide is poor writing. It is distasteful.

---

I think you and cacian should drive off together into the sunset and live happily ever after in your fantasy world.
All this thread has achieved is reveal how shallow you both are.

Maybe all books should carry a government health warning. That seems to be what you are advocating. Shameful behaviour on a supposed 'Literature' forum.

H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darcy88

Yep, you're so right. That's exactly how I would characterize Tolstoy and his masterpiece Anna Karenina.

---

About Anna Karenina, I wonder if Tolstoy is using suicide as a punishment for her, giving her what she deserves for her adulterous activity. I was also thinking of Maugham's Rain which portrayed a missionary committing suicide after converting a prostitute and then wanting to have sex with her. Suicide is used in these stories as a way to portray the character negatively, giving the fantasy character a fantasy they deserve. Dante would have just sent them to hell.

In considering this thread, I think suicide can be used in various ways in literature:

1) The person committing suicide is self-righteously punishing others, for example, the 20-something's mommy bothered him and so he takes her gun, kills her and wipes out a class of 5-year-olds in the local school, or the Buddhist monk immolates himself to condemn his political enemy--(this one is amazing, if that's what meditating up the yingyang gets you, I'd want nothing to do with it)--the Muslim with bombs around his waist wants to make sure everyone sees his sacrifice and so he blows up as many kids as he can. All of the stories you see on the news are stories and they do sell, so I guess you're right--I've learned something again--suicide does sell.

2) Suicide is used by the author to condemn the character's action. I already mentioned Maugham and Tolstoy, but this is a self-righteous act as well, except now it is the author's self-righteousness against the character.

3) Suicide can be the result of grief and here I think of Sophie's Choice.

4) Suicide can be used as a way to get rid of the elderly and the terminally ill. I still can't remember the name of the Canadian movie that featured this as an ending.

5) Suicide can be the side-effect of an act of heroism. Here I am thinking of Sucker Punch which I saw recently. Quite entertaining, but I don't count this as "suicide".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hillwalker

I think you and cacian should drive off together into the sunset and live happily ever after in your fantasy world.
All this thread has achieved is reveal how shallow you both are.

Maybe all books should carry a government health warning. That seems to be what you are advocating. Shameful behaviour on a supposed 'Literature' forum.

H

---

Cacian has provided me with many valuable direct prompts both in the poetry games sections and in the threads she has started.

Others provide me with indirect prompts that I pick up from the way they behave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grit

I think all idyllic literature should be banned. It creates an unrealistic standard and leads to suicide and terrorism.

Literature is supposed to be like real life, and real life is far from idyllic, but cus of idyllic literature, many will think the universe is idyllic.

When that idyllicism is face on face with reality, things implode inside the mind. Bolts unbolt. Hinges...unhinge.

It's truly unpalatable that idyllic literature is written in my opinion.

---

I normally get bored with graphic novels, but I'll see if I can find Code Geass in the library. I assume it is like real life. I did like Victoria Roberts' After the Fall.

As far as not liking idyllic literature, did you see Sucker Punch?