Transparency element: The graph’s perspective section is made up of opinion -based articles. This is the opinion and perspective of the writer.
The last semester, I had to register for an advanced script course for my creative writing minor. I usually take lessons that involve writing prose, and I consider prose as my strong costume, but I thought I would try something different while I had the opportunity.
As long as I worked in an unknown medium, I thought I would also try to write another story. Instead of doing something realistic or dramatic, I decided to write a story of science fiction for children.
I read science fiction from time to time and I have always liked to watch films of the genre, and one of the most fun elements, although difficult, was to do the appropriate research. I ended up googling how the robots are made, the parts of a spacecraft and lateor “water bear”, small animals that can survive in space.
Although my research was not very deepened, it made the writing process much easier, and the teacher of this class clearly indicated that research is often imperative for good narration. Research could arouse inspiration and provide feasible terrain for credible characters and plots.
Research is extremely useful for many types of fictional writing, and in some cases I would consider it necessary. It therefore surprises me that so many television shows and popular films are known to represent an inaccurate science.
The media surrounding professionals in the medical, scientific or even legal domains are particularly subject to this phenomenon.
Shows like “Grey’s Anatomy“”Criminal minds” And “Bone“Are also well known to overcome various professions, often throwing flagrant inaccuracies. “Bones” follows a medico-legal anthropologist while working on murder cases, and although it is not intended to be an educational show, it largely embellishes the capacities of scientists and computers.
I think that films and television sometimes benefit from a level of drama or unrealistic conflict, and fiction is in no way indebted to reality. I am not even particularly disturbed when I read bad science in these shows.
However, I also think that portraying a multitude of scientific inaccuracies is necessary to tell a convincing story, and in some cases, this can be harmful to history and even disrespectful. If an element of media is the range of promoting knowledge and is specifically focused on experts in scientific fields, it seems useless not to do so.
Fiction can be a very useful tool for transmitting information useful to the public. If an author can communicate science in an engaging and understandable way, public knowledge on a variety of subjects could improve at least somewhat.
The health sciences and psychological research are particularly protruding, especially since they are often used for writing without taking real people into account. Several films and television programs have pretended inaccurate representations of mental disorders for drama, when they could have favored useful information.
For example, programs like “Joy” And “Monk”Defain characters with Obsessive compulsive disorder (TOC). I think there is a certain nuance to the discussion, because some members of the public affected by TOC really relate to these characters, and even as a person with the disorder, I cannot speak for all people.
However, these two programs were also criticized for their too simplistic representations of TOC as a bad case of excessive hygiene and order. Personally, I think that “monk” is the best representation, because the protagonist presents the symptoms of OCD in addition to stereotypical cleanliness.
Especially at a time when disinformation is creeping online, I think that writers could be useful voices to fight it. Medicine, psychiatry, legal science and the law deserve their time and attention when represented in artistic mediums.
Of course, I do not expect the writers perfectly represent these subjects each time, and it is sometimes necessary to change the details for the narration. In the end, however, many common inaccuracies are not necessary, and if artists have the opportunity to spread knowledge and understanding, I see no reason why they should not.
__________________
Follow the graphic on X: @Peppgraphic
Contact Alyssa Johnson by e-mail: Alyssa.johnson@pepperdine.edu