I second @Tenderiser - bring the dog back. My heart melted just reading the summary so I can imagine in a novel it would be excellent. As for killing animals, I just realised I killed a bunch of war horses, except my antagonist only cares about his horse Kittera. This was supposed to be a positive thing from my good guys' side, of course.
I have a short story about a boy who grows up with a cat. The cat is his pal and the MC shares dialogue with him. The story jumps a few years at a time as he grows up. Considered having the cat die of old age at the end but I just couldn't do it. The MC does kill a person rather efficiently right before they both disappear into the sunset together though. I think the cat lived forever.
I think the "Sins" of writing need to not be taken too seriously. (At least certain ones) If I'm correct in guessing you may have read the same article I did a month ago. I think it's a stupid rule to not kill a dog. Old Yeller died in the end. It still makes for a great story. I would make sure with any character death despite it being humanoid or animal/pet that it has meaning and intention to drive the plot forward. Be unapologetic about it but relate it to the reader as well. Make your readers ball their eyes out like Old Yeller did to me. It stays with them for the rest of their life. Great books and movies have broken this rule time and time again. I think that article on not killing dogs is purely "that" writer's opinion. http://thewritersaurus.com/2015/06/17/3-unforgivable-character-sins/ All of the 3 rules are broken on a constant basis anyway. Look at a A Child Called It, that whole story was about child abuse. It's a true story too. Like I said opinion. Go forth and do!
@Xboxlover A Child Called It was a kick in the balls, and made me not feel so alone in my own childhood. Sad book yo. But still a good read.
WARDOG Scene 1, seats at rear of glider Sergeant Segar: You're gonna make it, Bronson. I can feel it in my bones. Bronson: (wears 'chute, licks dog bone on deck, raises mournful eyes, he whines) Glider man: Go go go! ... Scene 2, Aftermath of battle, smoke rises in a desolate forest, corpses include Pfc Bronson Labrador presumably dead, paws stretched over edge of crater. Segar limbers dog corpse to his Jeep, races through enemy lines toward MASH. ... Scene 3, Segar: Veterinary Captain, Veterinary Captain, please save me buddy, he Vet: Throw him over there with the others (camera pans to reveal huge pile of labrador & some collie corpses) Segar raises pistol to vet surgeon's head, 'click.' Vet: Well, I'll see what , I'll see what I can do. 3.1 LATER, exterior, vet mops palms Vet: The mutt will live, he'll have one hell of a headache. You weren't really gonna shoot me were you? Segar: (smoke rises from his lips) ... [from 'The Greatest Film Of 1977']
I don’t want to argue about this, but my point was that if reading the words will cause further trauma, then so will reading the warning, which kind of renders the warning pointless.
No. The word "rape" won't cause the same reaction as a detailed discussion, or depiction, of rape. The warning is not pointless.
I'm bloody obsessed with dogs. Obsessed. I worship them. And yet I've killed one fictional dog in a hunting trap....another one fell from a cliff and was gashed to her violent death below...I guess we write about our worst fears right?
Killed the antagonist's somewhat likable snake. I'm afraid that's it really. And it wasn't even permanent.
