Any human being have some set of thinking and behavioral patterns.So as writers how often you insert the in stories?Do they overshadow overall emotion or message of storie,or they are more like hints and fragments that you can find through storie?What works for you?
I insert it into my story all the time. I don't think it overshadows the emotion as much as complements or intensifies it.
I only insert philopsophies into my writings if my characters share them lol My characters often behave in ways this old prude does not approve
I don't really know... I'd say that it should just come out in the way you write - if you're writing a character who either agrees with you or embodies your beliefs, they'll generally be treated more favourably. No one would write a novel where the Mary Sue of themselves gets repeatedly beat up to no reward. Of course, I try to make everyone characters on their own merit, and not whatever they're embodying, but it can be difficult if it affects their whole life. I've written plenty of liberal or conservative characters whose politics never came into it because if your characters are taking time out to argue over the coalition government in the middle of a romance, you're really writing the wrong sort of thing. But the moment you have a gay character, if you want to develop them as a good guy or bad guy, the stupid label gets stamped all over them and you might as well just stick "gay" as an adjective/adverb to everything they do, and they carry around a little banner that says, "Hey! over-analyse everything I do to see if you can figure out the author's motives in writing me!" It's easier in writing fantasy because the philosophy is a lot more broad, and mostly the world-building covers it ("Oh right, this guy's written a novel where the main religion resembles Christianity and is evil/awesome... I see!") ("Oh, this evil king's gone and invaded a place on false pretences to get at a valuable resource... This person has an issue with the Iraq war!") Mostly I try not to think about it, though, unless I get to a point where I'm thinking, "lolwut, I got so caught up in the story that now I seem to be contradicting my own beliefs for the sake of the character's... Either I'm THAT good, or everyone's going to think I'm a racist nazi! Wooo!"
I always have philosophy behind my writing. It might not be my own view, but there is always a theme based in philosophy. That's what literature is all about.
The largest theme in my stories is philosophy of some kind. I would write a romance/adventure for example, and make the characters have something that we hold dear in society pushing them apart, such species, or social barriers. Or I make the protag and antag both good from their pov, to show that nobody is just evil with no gray chunks. I like dividing the audience between those who love the story, and those who think it's weird. fyi, by species I mean imaginary intelligent ones. It's a race message.
...i don't know that could be called one's 'philosophy' which i think is more one's set of beliefs/values and personal outlook/viewpoint... but i'll assume what i've mentioned is what you had in mind... so, as far as 'philosophy' goes, i don't merely 'insert' one into my work [none of which is fiction], but fully demonstrate my take on it* in all i write, as i'm a practicing philosopher and what i write is 'philosophy for everyday use'... [* in the sense of "the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct." --dictionary.com]
All of my stories are about some idea I think is important and the surface details are the fun way to present it. Beyond that, any writer is fueled by his own psychology and cannot write objectively no matter what. If I took a huge number of people and asked they to write "One/1" on a page some would write "One" others "1" and many would place it on various parts of the page. The result would be part of their individual belief system.
I don't exactly put philosophy in what I write, but my outlook on life often shines through. For example, the fictional worlds I create are usually very large and open; the main characters are just a small part of them, and will never, ever be able to explore all. There is always something unknown around the corner or on the next continent. History is full of mysteries and events that will never be fully known. This reflects my belief that the world is too big for any human to fully grasp, and also the joy I find in exploring.
For beginning writers, just write. You're thoughts about the nature of life, the universe, etc will naturally come through. If you consciously try to do so, it can come across as heavy-handed or just plain blah. As you get more comfortable writing, then it will get easier to make such things seem natural. -Frank
On the one hand, I think it's fine to put your own philosophy out there, but it's important to know how to do that. Some do it way over the top, and way too simplistic, and characters who hold the "wrong" views are often jerks, or otherwise shallow. It's too easy. I like putting my own philosophy out there, but also battle with myself, and show philosophies different than my own in a positive light, and maybe present criticisms about my own worldview in a fair light. I'm extremely influenced by Jurassic Park, where you could read the inner thoughts of two scientists, Malcolm and Arnold. One was certain that the park was doomed to fail, and had the science to back it up. The other was certain the park will remain safe and successful, and had the science to back it up. Each one of them had his own world of analogies and logic. I'm writing characters of people from opposed political parties, and there is something good about each one of them. They both care about their country, and don't want the other side to destroy it. It's good because it helps me with self reflection, with questions I ask myself about my own side. Ask yourself this: whether you're a republican, democrat, or whatever, could you write a positive character that believes the opposite of what you do? Can you write that character in a believable way? When the writers of 6 feet under, who are obviously liberals, wrote a positive conservative character (Ted), I think they completely messed up, having his motivation go between shallow bumpersticker throwaway lines, and some complicated overphilosophical bunch of nonsense about supporting the war because human nature is violent, etc. Kudos for their try to write a positive character that disagrees with them, but they screwed up big time.
It's true, it can be really difficult to get the motivations of a character who disagrees with you right and write them realistically. I've seen some real bloomers done by some pretty big names. I'm particularly tired of religious characters written by non-religious people... a good, accurate portrayal is very hard to find. That actually goes for non-religious characters written by religious people, too...
Its easier when you let the characters breathe - there was a lot my MC did in my current book I do not approve of, his actions shocked me at times. However he did something amazingly terrible and brave that kind of won me back. As a parent I know when to pick battles with my kids, it is the same with characters, if you follow them only reigning them in when it is dangerous then they generally make good choices.
