Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 260235" data-attributes="member: 2013">Good question...Fair enough, I suppose.  I personally do not care for fiction where I have to read the character cursing every couple of paragraphs.  Yes, it is somewhat boring to read "so-and-so cursed foully" again and again, but it also loses its impact to see "bleep bleep bleep" every couple of paragraphs as well.I guess I am a great believer in the adage, "profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcibly."  IMO that doesn't always have to refer to the character - some authors have a tough time expressing themselves forcibly without such crude language as well.I will give you two examples of my opinion "proper use" of such dialogue from movies...1.) Amadeus - There is a scene in which Mozart is vulgar, telling dirty jokes, double entendre, innuendo, and so forth.  The narrative comment is something to the effect of "he was a dirty little man" and then the scene follows.  While the narrator complains later on in the film several times about how puerile Mozart is, we never have to see him cursing again - that single scene had the effect needed because it is in stark contrast to everything "genius" about his music.2.) Star Trek IV(?) - Whichever one it is where the crew goes back to the 80's to "Save the Whales" and Kirk starts swearing left and right at the locals.  Spock asks him about the sudden introduction of "colorful metaphors" into his language.  Kirk replies, "this is the 80's - nobody can understand you here if you don't use them every other word."  Spock nods.  The next time he speaks, he literally uses "colorful metaphors" every other word.  Kirk tells him to leave off the colorful metaphors and the rest of the movie proceeds more or less metaphor-free.  The little jab at contemporary society is (in my mind) effective - again because just enough is done to make the point.Bottom line - if done once or twice for contrast or to make a point, I can usually accept it.  If done constantly, it makes me wonder if the author is the one suffering from an inability to express himself forcibly and (to me, at least), takes much away from the reading of a work of fiction.  Piers Anthony had some great ideas, but the constant cursing wore on me and I can't read his stuff any more.  Isaac Asimov, just as imaginative in his own way, more or less refrains from this - and I can read his stuff because I'm not turned off by it.  Even if done just once or twice as a "normal part of the language use of the author" (i.e., not for contrast or to make a point) it turns me off as "the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcibly."  In other words, it's not necessarily the words and you are using so much as how - and more importantly, why - you are using them.This may be applicable to a huge market of exactly one person (myself), but there you have it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I'm not afraid to stand up and tell you how I feel - though by no means will I tell you that you have to feel the same way! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification