To cuss or not to cuss. That is the question. And it's a question most writers have to face sooner or later. Sure, it's probably "nobler in the mind" to cut loose with the obscenities and allow a character to express himself in a way that might be quite natural for him. Let the chips fall where they may. Like all artists, a writer has to establish some level of credibility with his readers or he risks being thought of as a hack, or worse, a sell-out.
But the dilemma arises when the writer realizes that "Hey! I have a great story here. Why isn't anyone buying it?" is bumping up against the wall of "We here at Magazine Magazine love all writers and all story types. We encourage writers to be creative and use words brilliantly in order to establish engaging, real characters. But no gratuitous cussing."
Of course, the problem is in establishing the definition of gratuitous. What's gratuitous to one person may be quite tame for another. What's gratuitous in one crowd is ordinary in rowdier one. And while the writer can try to figure out exactly where the line is for a given magazine by reading several back issues, it's often difficult to decide whether the lack of adult language is due to the policies of the magazine or the timidity of the writers. Zeroing in on "the line" is easy when coarse language is present; the barrier is much more difficult to find in the absence of an f-bomb.
I recently found myself wandering in this territory. The first-person protagonist in one of my short stories is a scrappy, somewhat angry twenty-something whose spirit of adventure leads her to be blindsided by misadventure. I decided to send the story to a well-established magazine with no guidelines regarding language, gratuitous or otherwise, using their on-line submission system. The guidelines said they are interested in stories that "take risks," yet another phrase that is problematic. Risk as in jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, or risk as in drinking milk three days after the expiration date? I'd read several stories, and found no compelling evidence one way or the other that the magazine had an unpublished "no cursing" policy, nor did I find a clear definition of "risk."
The story was rejected within one minute. The auto-mailed message that told my story had been opened was time-stamped at 9:33; the rejection, at 9:34. Perhaps there were other problems, but I can't help thinking that the reason for such a speedy turnaround is the use of the phrase "Fuck, fuck, fuck" as part of the girl's character-establishing inner dialogue at the top of the second paragraph. Just for the record, the phrase is used as a non-sexual expression of frustration.
Perhaps we will soon find out if my theory is correct. Yesterday I submitted the story to another publisher, this time omitting the triple f-bomb on page one. I did not, however, remove the reference to "fuck-me pumps" on page seven. After all, I don't want to be a total sell-out.
I don't think you have to mention the "fuck-me pumps" they speak the universal language of love.
ReplyDelete