Here is how it started: I wrote a play called "Modern Love," which is about how people deal with sex and relationships in the 90's. It's posted on the site here if you'd like to read it. I thought it was a pretty harmless piece of puffery, and in my rush to get it on the site I made two fatal errors. First, I didn't put my usual "Warning, there's swearing in this" disclaimer on the top, and secondly I said everyone on my Quote of the Day list should read it, which included my parents. They were less than pleased with it. Here's a brief excerpt from the letter they sent me:
"We read your play this morning, and we were both very disturbed.
The setting is pornographic, and where did you get the idea that Christians
should use the "f" word? Better check both the old and new testaments
on that one. It's not even good writing.
The play pushes the idea that sexual activity is okay, and the only
'wierd' people in the play are those that have a moral code.
Care to explain yourself on this one?"
I was surprised at the intensity of their revulsion and the personal nature of the attack, so I invited my quotes list to read the story and tell me what they thought, and that I would post all responses. Here are the results:
"So I would like to say - I did not care for the play. I felt
there was far
too much swearing, and unnecessary blasphemous exclamations "Christ
on a
crutch" "Jesus" etc. I'm guessing you feel it is something your
characters
would say, being true to the part and all. If so I say -- shame
on you for
writing those characters. There are plenty of types of media
out there that
deal with trash talking, blasphemous Generation X and Yers. Why
not explore
a more meaningful kind of person/situation/solution." -- Andrea Nite, my older sister
"Personally I enojoyed your little play...and it was
very aptly named...good job" -- Chelsea Miller
"Well sir, I just read your one-act play. As a whole, I found
it very
entertaining and amusing. Critically speaking, I think it could
use a bit
more work, in terms of how the dialogue flows perhaps. But to
the real
point: This play is neither pornographic nor anti-Christian.
It is about
emotion, relationships, and how our lives; the people we know, the
actions
we take, etc., create us. Art does not exist to espouse moral
standpoints
nor is necessarily a reflection of the artist. Art exists to
express
emotion, ideas, and imagination in particular. Perhaps, for those
who
assume a person is incapable of expressing views other than his or
her own,
we should keep in mind image of such things as dragons, unicorns, griffins,
chimeras: these do not exist in nature, yet somehow, somebody
created them;
sculpted, carved, sketched, or wrote of them. Hmm, food for thought." -- Jim Higuera
"I read the play, and thought it was fine. My opinion of fiction is
this :
Anything that deals realistically with the human condition is edifying.
Life is
not a joyous occasion for most of the people most of the time. To present
it as
such only further perpetuates the myth. As long as artists and writers
are
careful not glorify the negative but represent it truthfully I don't
think that
anyone should have a problem with it. It seemed like a scene that could
happen
to any of us that are living in the real world; conflict, obscenity,
tension,
but love finally wins the battle. Who would want to argue with that." -- Justus Humphrey
"WHY is it, that when someone creates a CHARACTER in a PLAY who is not
a
Christian...SOME STUPID fun-damn-mentalist has to say the WHOLE play
is
"anti-Christian"??? And how can anyone say this is PORNOGRAPHIC???.
. .
I think your play is almost like a "Love American Style" skit for the
millenium!!! (You DO know what "Love American Style" is? It was
a TV show
in the early '70s that consisted of 15 minute skits about relationships!
Your play fits the mold!! It was funny and insightful!!
Every
relationship has all this BAGGAGE to deal with...the trick is to overcome
it and get on with your life!" -- My favorite relative
"But, not only was I disturbed by the language and
scenes in your play but I think that the plot was immature and the
dialog was
not advanced writing.
It is not so much the language and content in the play, and
I think the
idea of the people comming along side the bed was really good because
the
people of our past influence us greatly. What desturbs me is
the whole
message of the play. What the play pushed was that people should
be able to
have free love and screw around with their sexuality, that people,
religious
people in particular but basically any one who had morals and values,
were
outdated." -- Evelyn Nite, my younger sister
"So maybe it is pornographic and anti-christian. Nothing wrong
with that.
Honestly, though, the artistic merit is a tad dubious. It certainly
gets
better by the end, but so much of their conversation reads like a cliche'.
I don't know. Maybe you have a feel for typical guyness; ignoring
foreplay
and cuddling, fear of commitment, etc...; but I can't relate.
Maybe it's
me. I began to get interested when they talk aobut faking orgasms.
far
from an original topic, but you handled it well. Everything
past that
point was better, and I actually liked the ending. You had something
good
to say there, it's just that the beginning read like a bad scene from
a bad
sitcom. It really seemes like rehash to me. Maybe it's
intentional to
start out with stereotypes and then reveal that they're actually characters,
but it didn't quite work for me. You did ask for comments.
Sorry" -- Will Meyer
"i really really liked your play. personally,i don't
think enough plays are written like this. It reflects
how society really works, none of this leave it to
beaver bullsh*t. it's real, and because of that, i
love it." -- Amanda
Feel free to read the play yourself and e-mail me your comments, and I'll continue to
add to this little site. Yes, I admit I'm shamelessly using the controversy to make more
people read the play, but ain't that the American way?