To "Clean" or Not to "Clean"

This week I wanted to get caught up on one of the themes we've been slinging around Spacefreighters Lounge the last couple of weeks, by throwing out a crazy thought of my own.

And I've got a bit of news to share, too.

CLEAN READ: AN IDEA

Ever since Greta posted the first blog on this, Clean Reader--Censorship by any other Name, followed by Donna's thoughts ("Clean Readers?" Not Mine!) I've been giving it a lot of thought. Initially, I was on the fence. If readers want to read an "expletive deleted" version of novels, would that be so bad? Wasn't the important thing that they were, in fact, reading the books?

But then I saw the point raised that the books were being altered without the author's (or publisher's) knowledge or approval. That got my back up! That is NOT a good thing, no matter how you slice it.

Sharon also pointed out the potential problem with reviews. If readers are providing reviews of the "sanitized" version, they aren't really giving a fair, unbiased opinion of the novel the author published. That's not a good thing either.

So that got me thinking...

You know how movie producers often provide two versions of a film, the original screen-version and the "fit for prime time TV" version with either bleeps, overdubs (or alternate) dialogue, and sometimes even a few edited-out scenes of naughty-bits?

What if we, as authors, took charge of the situation and decided to do the same?

What if we started producing TWO versions of our books, the original "raw" version and a version intended for more sensitive audiences? What if publishers started doing the same?

Is that too far-fetched?

Let's look at the pluses. It would return the control to the author to present their work in a way they intend it be presented, and any changes would be made by their own hand, while still giving the reader a choice of whether to read the "Original" or "G Rated" versions. (Probably not that phrase, since G rated films have to go through a vetting process by an educated committee, but I'm sure a simple, universal phrase could be implemented that everyone would recognize.)

In that way, phrases like "Hounds of Heck" could be avoided (as per Greta's example).

What would be the drawbacks?

For books available in digital format, I think it would be pretty negligible:

• A final edit to alter dialogue and scene-language so it fits the G rating  
• A cover note (or seal?) to reflect the book is the author's G-Rated Version
• A bit more work on promotion and marketing to let the public know both versions are available

Not a huge deal, I would think. Unless anyone can think of a major drawback. Print might be a bit more labor-intensive, especially if the book is being published by a major publisher with tight timelines, but possibly still doable.

Advantage to the readers:
Readers would get to read the version they prefer. If certain words, phrases or scenes tend to make them uncomfortable, they'd have the option of choosing a "milder" version.

Advantage to authors:
Authors might have opportunities to reach a larger readership and less chance of bad reviews based on more adult or explicit scenes or "bad" language that some readers find objectionable.

There would have to be some sort of a standard reference developed as to what words or content would need to be banished from the "G-Rated" version. Opinions may vary, so this could lead to a lot of debate until these standards could be determined. And if it runs too far to the extreme on the "milder" end of the scale, it may not be doable at all for some authors. Adult situations are adult situations, no matter what language is used.

Or the decision could be left up to the writers, though this is bound to spark some controversy with readers over exactly what is or isn't "acceptable" for a milder version of an adult book. (Oy!)

So what do you think? Am I all wet or does this idea carry some merit?

IS MY NOVEL "CLEAN?"

I've also done some thinking about the Clean Read controversy as it relates to my first novel, INHERIT THE STARS.

Because the story takes place fifteen hundred years in the future, the language has changed a great deal. In all likelihood, many words would become unrecognizable in that far-flung future, but I had to keep it within the realm of understanding, so common phrases were shortened, words and names truncated, and slang phrases evolved with the times. Close enough that readers should get the gist, but just different enough to be a bit, well...alien to our speech patterns.

This applied to expletives, too, because the words we use today would no doubt morph into something else in the span of 15 centuries. So my characters use words like "fug" and "fuggen" (no translation needed), Hades is generally used instead of Hell, "giggadam" instead of "damn" and phrases like "Gods of Gellen" and "Empora's Hades" in the place of more recognizable oaths. There's even a silly composite word for an exclamation (rated "clean") Gerabunga!--a mash-up of Geronimo! and Cowabunga!

The love scenes are steamy, but lack "spicy" language (frank references to body parts or acts) or explicit description, though the bedroom door--or airlock--is most definitely not closed on these passages.

So now I ponder if INHERIT THE STARS automatically qualifies as "clean" because it avoids the use of "common" words considered to be bad language as well as explicit language in scenes of intimacy? I dunno. I think readers will have to weight in on that question.

Hmmm, this topic has generated a lot of "what abouts," hasn't it? Let me know what you think.

HERE THERE BE EASTER EGGS

I hope those of you who celebrate had a wonderful Easter holiday or spring celebration. (Or maybe Fall celebration in Greta's neck of the woods.) I have something fun to go with the holiday.

Easter eggs!

An "Easter egg" is a slang term (Clean Read approved) that's also known in the publishing world as a freebie or bonus material added to the back of a novel--something fun for readers to discover.

My author web site is throwing a little Easter celebration all week long by tossing in a few surprise Easter eggs for those who stop by for a visit. You're invited to go on an Easter egg hunt this coming Monday through Friday (April 6-10), to search for a few buried treasures. And while you're there, consider signing up for my newsletter which will provide a few Easter eggs, bonuses and exclusive material all its own when it launches later this Spring. Signing up comes with a No Spam promise. I won't be filling up your inbox with emails, guaranteed. I'll only be sending a newsletter once a quarter or if there's a special announcement. And speaking of...

ANNOUNCEMENTS

It's out! Woohoo! *happy dancin'* INHERIT THE STARS is now available as a complete novel on Amazon. Originally launched as a serialized novel in three parts for those who prefer shorter, more manageable reads on their Kindles or Kindle apps, the complete novel is for readers who want the entire epic all under one cover. The cover is the same as Part I: Flight, but identifies it as "The Complete Novel."

Next, for those of you who subscribe to or buy current issues of Romantic Times Book Reviews, there's a little surprise in the May issue. Both Donna and I share a page--along with two other Firebird peers--in a debut author spotlight. INHERIT THE STARS and UNCHAINED MEMORY are depicted in living color, along with our smiling mugs and mini-blurbs and bios.

And finally, congratulations to our own Pippa Jay for hitting #1 Best Seller on Breathless Press with her SFR, TETHERED. Yahoo, Pippa! Way to go! She was still on top at the time I wrote this blog, so you can take a peek for yourself on the Breathless Press site.

Have a great week everyone!

~~~ * ~~~

"CLEAN" READERS? NOT MINE!

 
I’ve been shaking my head for more than a week now over the very idea of the Clean Reader app Greta mentioned in her post March 25. I agree wholeheartedly with all the things Greta said and cheer along with her the CEO of Smashword’s decision to remove all of its publications from the grasp of this censoring tool. Here’s hoping that iTunes and Google will follow suit.

Of course, we as writers are understandably outraged at this attempt to sanitize our writing and strip it of meaning. That is what happens when you change the words we choose with great care to some other random words chosen by computer—the sentences lose meaning. The characters, forced to say things they were not intended to say, lose cohesion. The book falls apart.

As writers we understand this. Readers who love to read understand this, too. They may not have taken classes to learn exactly how a novel is structured (or maybe they have!), but they recognize well-written lines, well-drawn characters, pacing, tension, setting, tone. All those things depend on the words we choose.

In the backs of our minds as we write, if we have been in this business for any length of time at all, is a consideration for our audience. I envision my audience as adults with a taste for action, suspense, otherworldly elements and hot romance. I don’t write for teens, a Christian audience, readers of sweet contemporary romance or, on the other end of the scale, readers of military thrillers, tentacle romance or LGBT erotica. I choose my stories, my characters, my scenes and, most importantly, my words to fit my target audience.

I wouldn’t be doing my stories, my characters or my audience justice by limiting myself to PG-13 words or scenes. That wouldn’t be authentic, based on what I know (or imagine) of life in that kind of world. The people in my worlds curse, they have realistic sex, they react violently upon occasion—just like people in the real world. I need the proper words to express those things. I believe my audience appreciates my effort to find the appropriate words.

I don’t expect a teenager or younger child to be reading my books. And just because they want to is no reason they should be allowed to. They can wait until they’re mature enough to handle the language and other adult content. Bleaching the language will not mean they can understand the rest of what goes on. That’s why I still won’t allow my teenage grandson to watch certain shows on television even if the “bad” words have been bleeped out. The content is still more than he needs to see.

So the parents who came up with this censorious Clean Reader app would do better to simply say, “No, you can’t read that yet.” Or, discuss why certain words are used in certain books. And adults who prefer to avoid certain levels of language, sex and violence can simply choose to read other books. There are millions of books out there, after all. Why alter my book when you can just read another that fits your taste better?

One good thing that appears to have come of all this is that clearinghouses for publications, like Smashwords, have become aware of the insidious nature of the app and have refused to participate. Since authors have little say over what their distributors do in matters like these, it is well that Smashwords is leading the way. With any luck Clean Reader will join the thousands of other useless apps in the trash bin of history.

CONGRATULATIONS!

To all the RWA® Golden Heart® and RITA® nominees announced earlier this week! This is the beginning of an incredible rollercoaster ride for the unpublished authors of the GH competition and a recognition for much hard work for the published authors of the RITA competition. Congratulations and good luck to all of you when the winners are announced at the RWA National Conference in NYC in July!

Cheers, Donna

Clean Reader - censorship by any other name

I couldn't let this week go past without adding my two cents worth on the current storm over the Clean Reader app. My good friend, Diane Nelson, had a rant about the issue on her blog entitled Don't read my books if you need Clean Reader. She summarises the situation very well, with links to Chuck Wendig's Terrible Minds blog, among others. For those who have just emerged from beneath a rock, Clean Reader (as the name suggests) sanitisizes text by blanking out swear words, or replacing them with more "acceptable" alternatives.

Can you imagine a sanitized version of Chuck's writing?

Pause while we all have a giggle. There'd be an awful lot of blacked out words. Rather like a letter from the Western Front, censored to take out any information of potential value to the enemy.

It's heartening to see that Mark Coker, CEO at Smashwords, has added his voice to this one. Read it here. Essentially, he's saying that the app changes what the author has written, and that's wrong. Needless to say, I'm in complete agreement.

I have to wonder how people can give so much power to a word on a page, spoken by an imaginary character in a made-up story. I don't know about you, but if I had a child who came home looking sad about encountering a swear word in a book, my first response wouldn't be to get rid of the word. Why not just explain to your child that some people talk like that, it's a cuss word intended to have a certain effect on the reader? Coarse language is here to stay, folks. You'll find swear words in every language, in every culture. I talked about this in The dreaded F-word. What does it really mean?

But this Clean Reader app doesn't just root out 'fuck', 'shit' and 'cunt'. It famously changes 'bitch' to 'witch'. This is just plain ridiculous. Who decides what must be substituted, and what with? Let me illustrate my position with a true story.

I worked for a company that put a filter on emails arriving from outside. If the text contained words like the three mentioned above, they were stopped at the firewall and the intended recipient was informed that the mail from such-and-such wasn't delivered because it contained unacceptable material. But they didn't leave it at obvious cuss words. I sent my husband an email which was censored for no apparent reason. After we'd scratched our heads for a while, we worked out the magic word was 'tit'. To test the supposition, I sent an email which said, "I'm thinking of buying the statuette of a blue tit from that shop". Sure enough, it was rejected. For a bit of fun, I sent another email, "Jim has a big cock". That one went through. So 'tit' was rude, but 'cock' was fine. Ahem. I've read a few books where that wasn't really the case. I wonder if 'penis' would be acceptable. Or was it just that the company filter was misogynistic.  (See my raised eyebrow?)

Make no mistake readers, this is simply CENSORSHIP by any other name. Unlike the email filter I described above, people have to choose whether or not they use the Clean Reader app. But if they do, they change what the author has written. Personally, I'm NOT okay with that. Since I received a blistering review about my use of the "F-word", I've added a cautionary sentence to my blurbs. "This novel contains coarse language and sex scenes".  Take it or leave it. If the word 'fuck' upsets a potential reader, I'd really prefer it if the person found some other book more to their taste. After all, there's plenty out there.