![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
seawaspI was in a discussion a week or so ago, on Usenet, with a person who has recently made a habit of posting news about the anime industry and how it's DOOOMED, DOOOOMED I TELL YOU!
This person has consistently ignored counterarguments, or dismissed them with an insistence that the counterarguments weren't relevant, and it finally penetrated to me that all of his protests really proceeded from the logic that it simply was OBVIOUS that people would NEVER pay for stuff they could get for free, unless you held a gun to their heads. The idea that any significant number of people WOULD do so -- as they do with much of the Baen Free Library -- simply could not penetrate. He couldn't see what the reason would be, absent some kind of force being implied or directly applied.
It became clear that he was at least a complete cynic and possibly a latent sociopath. He truly believes that people are inherently nasty, evil creatures who are only kept in line by threat of force, by fear and intimidation.
I come from the opposite camp; I believe most people are basically decent, nice people. I think the very EXISTENCE of a high technology society is a complete and irrefutable PROOF of this, because the amount of voluntary cooperation -- any of which could be destroyed by "defectors", in the Prisoner's Dilemma sense -- necessary for the development of such a civilization is immense. I don't think you could get much above the tribal level in a species that had a basically sociopathic outlook. You have to have some capability, intellectual or emotional or both, for empathy and interest in the well-being of others beyond yourself.
This, of course, affects the worlds I want to read about, the worlds I want to write about, and the stories I want to tell. As those on my beta-reading list know, there is a story that could be told within the Grand Central Arena universe which would be a huge, challenging, fascinating novel in itself, but it's far too grim overall for me to want to write it, despite a dark fascination involved with it.
I like telling stories about heroes, about good people confronting evil and winning. Sure, you put them through hell first -- it's not very exciting if there's no major challenge, no real cost in effort, thought, pain, and other things to actually arrive at the final triumph -- but I don't write about futility, either. Some people think that's unrealistic, and point to the news (which I try to avoid watching, actually), but I think actually the news proves more my point than theirs.
News focuses on the unusual, on the things that happen that will be of interest because they're not normal to the listening audience. "Boy does homework, listens to parents, and tries his best" isn't news, because actually most kids DO, overall, try to do what they're supposed to do. "Postal worker delivers mail, jokes with co-workers, goes home reasonably cheerful" isn't news, because mostly they do. "No war breaks out between Country A and Country B" isn't news in most cases, because, well, most countries aren't at war most of the time.
In short, most people don't do rotten things all the time, even though there's infinite opportunity for all of us to be slimy nasty bastards in many ways.
And I like to recognize and promote this, not focus on a darker view of us as things that have a mask of shiny paint over blackness. (I have to wonder how people with the "people are rotten" worldview can explain us coming UP with concepts of honor, love, trust, etc.; a sociopath can't, and won't, come up with those on his or her own, and if they were living with a bunch of similar nutcases even if they DID come up with the idea, how would they get the others to play along?)
Of course, by this worldview I know I of necessity limit my readership to some extent. But I think the people who like MY kind of story are, hopefully, more numerous than the other group...
This person has consistently ignored counterarguments, or dismissed them with an insistence that the counterarguments weren't relevant, and it finally penetrated to me that all of his protests really proceeded from the logic that it simply was OBVIOUS that people would NEVER pay for stuff they could get for free, unless you held a gun to their heads. The idea that any significant number of people WOULD do so -- as they do with much of the Baen Free Library -- simply could not penetrate. He couldn't see what the reason would be, absent some kind of force being implied or directly applied.
It became clear that he was at least a complete cynic and possibly a latent sociopath. He truly believes that people are inherently nasty, evil creatures who are only kept in line by threat of force, by fear and intimidation.
I come from the opposite camp; I believe most people are basically decent, nice people. I think the very EXISTENCE of a high technology society is a complete and irrefutable PROOF of this, because the amount of voluntary cooperation -- any of which could be destroyed by "defectors", in the Prisoner's Dilemma sense -- necessary for the development of such a civilization is immense. I don't think you could get much above the tribal level in a species that had a basically sociopathic outlook. You have to have some capability, intellectual or emotional or both, for empathy and interest in the well-being of others beyond yourself.
This, of course, affects the worlds I want to read about, the worlds I want to write about, and the stories I want to tell. As those on my beta-reading list know, there is a story that could be told within the Grand Central Arena universe which would be a huge, challenging, fascinating novel in itself, but it's far too grim overall for me to want to write it, despite a dark fascination involved with it.
I like telling stories about heroes, about good people confronting evil and winning. Sure, you put them through hell first -- it's not very exciting if there's no major challenge, no real cost in effort, thought, pain, and other things to actually arrive at the final triumph -- but I don't write about futility, either. Some people think that's unrealistic, and point to the news (which I try to avoid watching, actually), but I think actually the news proves more my point than theirs.
News focuses on the unusual, on the things that happen that will be of interest because they're not normal to the listening audience. "Boy does homework, listens to parents, and tries his best" isn't news, because actually most kids DO, overall, try to do what they're supposed to do. "Postal worker delivers mail, jokes with co-workers, goes home reasonably cheerful" isn't news, because mostly they do. "No war breaks out between Country A and Country B" isn't news in most cases, because, well, most countries aren't at war most of the time.
In short, most people don't do rotten things all the time, even though there's infinite opportunity for all of us to be slimy nasty bastards in many ways.
And I like to recognize and promote this, not focus on a darker view of us as things that have a mask of shiny paint over blackness. (I have to wonder how people with the "people are rotten" worldview can explain us coming UP with concepts of honor, love, trust, etc.; a sociopath can't, and won't, come up with those on his or her own, and if they were living with a bunch of similar nutcases even if they DID come up with the idea, how would they get the others to play along?)
Of course, by this worldview I know I of necessity limit my readership to some extent. But I think the people who like MY kind of story are, hopefully, more numerous than the other group...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-02-15 02:54 pm (UTC)There's actually a culture studied by anthropologists here on earth that more or less fits that description. I can't recall the name off the top of my head.
But the believe anyone who does things to help others or is kind must be crazy. Luckily, they exempt crazy folks and children from the paranoia and dog eat dog syuff that's their cultural norm.
So researchers were tolerated and not threatened.
And...
Date: 2008-02-15 06:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-16 07:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-15 03:16 pm (UTC)Personally I fall between the two camps. I believe people can be decent, giving & caring -- but we also have a terrible tendency for mob/herd mentalities so I am wary of those in power. The old saying about absolute power...
Funny that it isn't the Gov't that I fear it's just the current idiot elected {Canadian BTW}. I'm all for a strong Federal system -- oddly I have more faith in a bureaucracy set up to defend/support the people that the people elected to add/maintain them. Hopefully they don't butcher the system before the next talking-head steps onto the throne.
Could be that I'm just bitter -- the Federal level elections are decided in basically one or two Eastern provinces -- so its pretty much over before we even start our polls.) ;p
Wow
Date: 2008-02-15 03:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-15 03:50 pm (UTC)I think that for whatever reason, whether readers have the desire to escape their points of view or the willingness to set aside disbelief (which I use freely in the case of evolution, for example, despite the strength of my convictions), or simply because your worldview is very subtle in your writing, it will not be much of an issue for your readership.
I'd just note...
Date: 2008-02-15 06:25 pm (UTC)I also believe that if there IS a God, He designed evolution as a brilliantly complex way of ARRIVING at His creation. It's a more elegant, artistic thing to me to think God would say, "Hmm, here is the way I want to see Creation go, and I will produce all of this, not by building all of it directly by hand (so to speak), but by envisioning the entire process, and creating it all from a single beautiful burst of energy beyond the dreams of the mortal men to come, and having that energy become matter, the matter become the innumerable stars, and the stars gain planets, the planets create life -- the life I envision -- and that life, in the end, producing the intelligent beings who will, one day, look up into the sky and wonder if I am there."
I can't remember who it was -- possibly Heinlein -- who described it as coming to a billiard table and finding all the balls in various pockets. The simplest assumption, of course, is that someone went around and placed all the balls into the pockets. But a far more difficult, and far more elegant, solution would be to imagine that a person racked up all the pool balls and, with a single perfect stroke of the cue, caused all the balls to ricochet around the table in a predetermined pattern, placing all of them in the exact pockets the person wanted.
Re: I'd just note...
Date: 2008-02-15 07:29 pm (UTC)I'll note in return that there are literally universe-shattering reasons for a six-day creation. And I definitely believe that coming up with a way to combine God and evolution is the more difficult solution. :D
no subject
Date: 2008-02-16 05:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-18 06:36 am (UTC)As far as I'm concerned, I think people will be buying your books (and those of quite a lot of other worthy authors) mainly for the social status involved, no matter if they're very dishonest or a bit dishonest or perfectly honest. It's like buying a Rolex or a TAG or any watch. It's a social statement as well as a reflection of the way you prefer to get info, whether that info is the time of day or a fictionalized account of a Mars Voyage.
no subject
Date: 2008-03-22 12:52 am (UTC)And then too you've got to think that the News is mainly about ratings. Sensationalism and "bad news" get high ratings.
Personally the person I don't trust is the cynic. Often their outward view towards everyone else is really a reflection of themselves. When someone like that person says "other people need to be forced to be good," he's either admitting he has a strong amoral streak, or backhandedly confessing to some crime in his past. Or failing both, then the cynic is a Knight Templar, inventing a terrible situation that doesn't exist so he can claim "I'm not like that, so I'm good" (or worse, so he can "fix" it by instituting something that really IS bad).
I'm almost glad many of these people are content just to grumble on anime newsgroups.
Til next time.