Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
 I'm not about to knock idealism.
There seems to have always(?) been the belief that true art and commercial success are mutually exclusive. I think that the potential for self-censorship is where that belief comes from. There may be occasions where an idea's time has come, and it will gain commercial success without being specially written/painted/sculpted for acceptance by the wider public, but I think such occasions are the exceptions that prove the rule. The more usual situation, I think, is that where an artist has something they wish to express they have to choose between saying it the way they want to say it, and finding a way to say it in a way that may reach a wider audience. Personally I believe both forms of artistic expression are real and potentially very good, each with its own advantages, but often the two are mutually exclusive. I don't see this changing any time soon. |
I think you're probably right there - which is a pity in a way.
Quote:
|
However I wouldn't want to compare true artistic endeavour with the relatively crass commercial stunt of giving something an offensive title just to garner attention. "Rape" in a title is not necessarily offensive in and of itself, "How To Rape" is rather more confrontational, and if it's not an instruction manual it's hard to see why the title is appropriate.
|
Personally, I don't have a problem with the title even though it's clearly provocative.
I can even see a kind of artistic merit in the title depending on the story, but I do have a habit of using fairly harsh imagery in my own writing:
Although what I wrote wasn't completely over the top, I've decided people can choose whether or not they want to read it. The imagery is a little unsavoury.
Regards
Caleb