[more on reading & the identity wars]

[reenka]

Apparently there's a misogyny/we-need-more-strong-females debate in fandom -again-, and an offshoot about identification specifically & who we've found ourselves identifying with in stories, growing up & such. Um. Some say men, some say women... I say... uh... the pov character :)) Haha, seriously, I mean, yeah-- I particularly enjoyed & bonded with a girl I particularly liked or identified with the attitudes & emotions of, and maybe I'd be a little more attracted rather than just identifying with a boy I liked & identified with the attitudes of-- but I can still guarantee you I'll care and fixate more on the pov character, even if the other (female or male) one is more on my wavelength. I particularly do enjoy when a main/pov character is heavily on my wavelength (like Bastian in 'The Neverending Story', for instance, if we're going for gratuitous over-similarity), but maaaan, wouldn't it get old to always be stuck with the same preferred fictional self/personality/body? So it was long ago that I learned to umm, 'play pretend', and try on other characteristics/beliefs for the duration of my reading.

This whole idea of keeping yourself and your day-to-day identity fully intact while reading is a bit alien to me, actually, as a fantasy/romance reader. It's like... I wouldn't necessarily say I read for escape, but I do read for exploration and wonder and experiences I wouldn't otherwise have; I love to be grounded and connected emotionally within the story, to -care-, but there are lots of different bodies and mindsets a good writer can connect you to as the reader. It's like, whether you 'naturally' gravitate towards male characters or female characters, you're still a basically different type of reader, I guess; or maybe it's just that I think everyone may look for someone that's their 'reflection' in a story (color, gender, personality), but to me that 'reflection' is more to do with what I think of as my 'self'-- not my gender or color or even the beliefs I have but my deepest emotional resonances. Hmm. I guess I can't imagine reading about a boy having fun adventures and thinking, 'but I can't, because I'm a girl' o_0 That would... never have occurred to me as a child. Of course I could do anything I wanted (...um, maybe you could say I was a spoiled only child) :D

So like, yeah, a lot of people say they gravitated to boys in stories 'cause it's boys that did the fun things & had the adventures (implying girls didn't), while I suppose those that gravitated to girls accepted their roles in society & wanted them validated(?) Or conversely didn't accept their roles & wanted to read stuff that supported their choice to be badass and independent. Or something.


And first of all, doesn't that reeeeeally depend on what you read? Even in (especially in?) the fairy-tales of my childhood, about a third of them had the girl saving the boy or going on the quest. And in grown-up sci-fi/fantasy, unless you read those super-epics the boys prefer (Dune?? Ender's Game??), I'd actually say I'm biased in the other direction since I read so many women writers with girl protagonists who kicked much supernatural ass :D And when it was a boy (like in Joan D. Vinge's Cat series), let's face it, it was often a satisfyingly emo boy :D Like I said, it's really about what you read, and I just generally don't -read- stuff that'd bother my inner feminist by sheer instinct. Besides, there's literally tons of women who have adventures or have male roles thrust upon them in fantasy lit.

Secondly, I guess it's not so important to me what a character does or what their role is in their society-- I mean, I like underdogs, but that's a role in the narrative, 'cause you could have an underdog prince. Like, I can appreciate a really cool occupation (superheroes are fun, so are scientists and assassins and pirates) but... it's really up to the writer to make a role or activity interesting to me. I mean, I've read traditional romances where the woman just wanted to marry and have kids, but she was an interesting woman-- and that same woman would annoy me in the hands of a bad writer. Same with superheroes. I love the idea of 'superhero', but the way most comics portray it (repetitively, on a surface level, conservatively) just leaves me going 'meh'. And need I mention the oodles of badfic about assassins and pirates??

I was thinking about the comparison in that post by wemblee about identifying with Maid Marian vs. Robin Hood-- and obviously Robin had the better gig. I mean, basically Marian just sat there & waited, right...? But here's where the writing comes in, 'cause there's this awesome novel by Jennifer Roberson called 'Lady of the Forest', which retells the same old Robin Hood story from Maid Marian's pov. (Though I read it more than 10 years ago, when it first came out, and according to other readers on Amazon it is, of course, horrible & the Marian a pathetic loser, so.) Going on what I remember thinking back then, it doesn't make Marian any 'cooler' or more important-- it just makes her an interesting character with her own strength. Every role can be an interesting role, basically, with its own adventures, its own intensity and courage and dignity, but especially any male-dominated story told from the female pov. But then, this would go for a female-dominated story told from a male pov as well.

Regardless of that book's merits, though, my point is that I always felt like the point of good stories is to mess with our preconceptions. Having plot/character-kinks and looking to fulfill them is valid too, of course, but this can actually coexist with being surprised or there being unexpected elements too. I hope.

Anyway, um, I can't imagine tallying up the number of requisite elements in an original fic (strong women? check. short guys with blond hair? check. evil overlords with nice accents?? DOUBLE CHECK). Fanfic, yeah: you're automatically going to compare it to something, fanon if not canon. But for me, there's really a limit to the meta info I can stand having in my head while I read unless the story is directly annoying me (like it's badly-written or just stupid somehow).

And the whole idea that who you identify with has anything to do with being a feminist(!!) sort of boggles my mind. Like, I'm definitely a feminist, yeah, because I care about women's issues & I think patriarchal oppression sucks & equality is the way to go, but-- what does this have to do with what sort of characters I like in fics? I mean, I like strong female characters, sure, because they're cool, not because they're feminist. Like, okay, I adore Tank Girl, for instance. But it's not like I love her 'cause it's the feminist thing to do or something. I don't like Wonder Woman as much; so what?

I think being feminist also means you can enjoy whatever the hell you want, be whatever kind of woman you want, and it's not going to make you 'less womanly' or less hardcore because RAWR! You are woman! You define it, it doesn't define you. So if you're a woman who identifies with badass guys? More power to you! And if you're a woman who identifies with Anne of Green Gables? You are also awesome. And feminist. Me, I'm a woman who identifies with emo freaks, but whatcha gonna do, right?

Comments

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

You know, what really strikes me is something you reference near the beginning, about the writer being the one to bring you in. Because I'll bet a lot of the time we *think* we're identifying with a character because of whatever reason when a lot of it is down to the writer being persuasive enough to draw you into their headspace so much that you almost can't help it.

Like, for instance, when I read James Ellroy I sometimes feel a little outside because there seems to be things that make sense to him and while he can show them to me he can't really draw me in so that I feel them emotionally with the character. I sometimes wind up feeling like the person's just sort of bizarre. While another writer might do the same story and have you feel like it's realistic and only after you finish it you say, "That was fucked up, right there!" Or it's like arguments we used to have in LOTR fandom where people would claim that if you wanted to write "realism" for the hobbits (because hobbits/realism, err...OTP?) they had to be raping and killing each other, as if two people picking mushrooms and enjoying them in a strew was just far too fantastical schmoopy to ever happen in real life.

So yeah, probably the danger is in the way that people so often start judging female characters and tossing them out based on things that are probably beyond their control. Or make it so that there's only one way to be a strong female--so that if you're writing about the past the girl *must* be totally anachronistic or else she fails at life (similarly, presumably, any minority characters must also have modern attitudes about their situation, which seems kind of disrespectful to the people who actually struggled under those conditions).

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Well, yeah, that's how it is for me-- I can't help it, I'm just drawn in to the headscape-- but I really wonder about 'most' people. From what I hear, it seems like 'most' people have a consistent pattern of who they like, as in a certain type of character or a male vs. female, and they stick to it, and if a particular story doesn't deliver in that arena, it's just not a story that personally touches them. Like, people will tell you that they identify with boys more because there are more boys, but like I said, that's just not true-- or like, can they really be that lazy in finding reading material? There definitely seem to be a lot of people who have some preset preferences; like you were saying in your post about girls making you over-identify, right? Presumably, a really good writer could only make that problem more, not less (me, I like getting lost in reading, if not in writing) :>

My favorite writers definitely take me inside the character... it just feels lonely and cold being too objective, but I suspect that's my personality type breaking through :> Maybe other sorts of readers would be more comfortable with that analytical distance, or they'd -always- feel a person is 'just bizarre' and could never reach the 'fucked up, wow!' thing only later on after being carried away. Like, that seems something connected with how given you are to empathizing with fictional characters in the first place (unless you automatically understand their type).

People do project onto characters though, in order to understand them better-- it's not like they quite think they must've been like that so much as they can't really put themselves in that headspace otherwise, maybe? Plus it's a lot more difficult to write from the pov of a really alien cultural mindset, so most writers aren't good enough :> I don't even go so far as to judge 'strong female' vs 'weak female'-- I just go by whether I think a girl character type is cool or I like her, and it's incidental that I happen to like more feisty, badass girls so I'll generally like strong females (and just naturally dislike/get bored by characters who're not v. willful or headstrong, regardless of era, though it's not as if I -blame- them-- I just don't particularly admire them, but then I don't admire 99% of human beings) :> But the mindset that people are looking for some token strength to fit their principles is just too alien to me, y'know?

[malafede.livejournal.com]

So yeah, probably the danger is in the way that people so often start judging female characters and tossing them out based on things that are probably beyond their control. Or make it so that there's only one way to be a strong female--so that if you're writing about the past the girl *must* be totally anachronistic or else she fails at life (similarly, presumably, any minority characters must also have modern attitudes about their situation, which seems kind of disrespectful to the people who actually struggled under those conditions).

The other day I was reading a rant about historical AU and how horrid of a writer it was to bring people back in times when prejudice and oppression was the norm, and not automatically make the good guys freedom-fighters. I think it'd be weird if a normally comformist character started assumed almost unheard-of subversive positions, even thought they're good people at heart. But it must be that weird thing about people needing to be 100% comfortable with the morals of their hero.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

But it must be that weird thing about people needing to be 100% comfortable with the morals of their hero.

That sounds totally like what it is. Which is so boring--no matter what the character or what the story, as soon as they go back in time they have to all do the same thing--even though they know that a) the actions of one or two people probably won't change anything b) because they're from the future they're probably not really able to be convincing and c) these people in the past are far more able to deal with their own situation and culture than the people in the future.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I say... uh... the pov character

Fascist.

This whole idea of keeping yourself and your day-to-day identity fully intact while reading is a bit alien to me, actually, as a fantasy/romance reader.

Ahaha. For me it's the opposite. I can feel a strong emotional connection with a character, but I'm very, very wary of over-identification (ie, 90% of the time it means you're misunderstanding what's going on) and I'd go as far to say that the situation of identity loss you're describing sound thouroughly threatenting to me. I'm obsessing with typology lately so I want to say it's a personality thing: I feel the need for constant vigilance (is Moody an INFJ?) or to be less over the top, to be watchful and catch things. Like:

I guess I can't imagine reading about a boy having fun adventures and thinking, 'but I can't, because I'm a girl' o_0

It's not so much that they say girls can't, it's that they protest the misrepresentation of girls. It's more an issue with society (and art as a product of society) than anything else. Catching these things is not really a matter of not having an emotional connection, btw, just that the emotional connection isn't so strong that you lose your identity as a reader -- a critic, even if part of you is completely lost in the fictional universe. Actually something that's very frustrating to me is the reaction thise sort of criticism gets from die-hard fans, that you want to harsh their squee or can't see the good. Feminist criticism is not incompatible with admitting there are other good things about a text, and that seems obvious BUT I think if someone is too lost in an universe, they just don't see the bad things, so why are these other people complaining? Though I don't think all the backlash from fans is so genuine, because sometimes people become very invested in a narrative for self-serving reasons. The story validates them, and criticism attacks that.

Anyway, in all this I have to say that what I want for female character is narrative power. I don't need them to be strong as persons, I need them to be strong characters -- ie well-written, sympathetic, human, meaningful. They can be comformists or rebels or spunky or timid or good or villains, but I would go as far as saying that writing a female character well is feminist in nature.

Going on what I remember thinking back then, it doesn't make Marian any 'cooler' or more important-- it just makes her an interesting character with her own strength.

Exactly.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I guess I'd agree that writing women well is feminist, but at the same time it's just good writing, and I can't think of any story I'd thoroughly enjoy the male pov/reading experience of if the women were just unrealistic or caricaturish. Ideally, I identify with the pov character, sure, but I didn't say I got totally lost to the point where I didn't recognize the existence or importance of other characters-- I just tend to pay the -most- attention to the ones the pov pays attention to, and I -can- analyze it more objectively, too, just -later-, after I finished reading. I don't see why I'd have to be closed to feminist criticism if I just don't step back enough to do it -while- I read (unless the text has serious problems that throw me out of the story).

I don't get that emotionally attached to or identify strongly in stories that would attract serious feminist critique, I think, though of course there are degrees to these things. I just like well-characterized things, whether there are more males, females or aliens :> To me the issue of 'society' is valid, but at the same time the sort of story that'd be a clearcut product of current social norms isn't the sort of story I'm too interested in. I like stories that are unique, that challenge me, that make me think-- maybe not the sort of analytical distant thinking other people think is best, but I do often pause to think or reflect or daydream while I read-- it's one of my reading pleasures. But the 'tone' of the thinking is inspired by and sort of bonded with the narrative. I don't really lose my identity(!) unless the character is uber-close to me and the story is pure fantasy-fodder material that goes straight to my subconscious the way good porn goes straight between your legs :> Even though all porn kinda meanders there, mostly it doesn't hit it with a jackhammer, know what I mean? :> So the lostness is in degrees, but the preference towards pov characters remains 'cause I -am- a lazy meandering reader-- not a brainwashed reader, though. I have enough confidence in my utterly mulish mental blocks to feel relaxed about that. Heh. If anything, it's too hard to influence me like that for my own good :> So 'over-identification' is just a product of empathy-- it doesn't threaten me or entrap me (usually) 'cause I'm sort of built for it & have the native mental blocks already set up to prove it, haha.

You do bring up valid points, it's just that I wouldn't say they're about people 'like me', y'know? :>