First some clarification. Using the words "sex" and "gender" interchangeably is an increasingly common error. Properly understood, the former is a function of biology while the latter is a function of grammar. Living beings are male or female. Words (especially in Romance languages) can be masculine or feminine. Applied to characters, sex is intrinsic; gender is extrinsic (male and female people can have masculine and/or feminine qualities).
Besides the difference between "sex" and "gender", another key premise is the observation that men and women differ substantially in certain respects. Once considered a controversial stance, behavioral science now leaves little doubt that some psychological differences between the sexes are biologically derived.
What do these differences imply for writers? It depends on the literary field. Writing a female protagonist who exhibits traditionally masculine traits (or vice-versa) for the explicit purpose of challenging traditional gender roles works best in contemporary mainstream or revisionist historical fiction.
Unless one holds advanced degrees in women's studies, cultural anthropology, and/or medieval history, creating protagonists who defiantly transgress established gender roles is inadvisable in genre fiction. Only expert skill will prevent such stories from feeling heavy-handed and jarring.
Genre fiction (especially fantasy) largely relies on received understandings. Because fantastic tales draw much of their power from readers' vicarious experience of the story, it is helpful to make the main characters broadly relatable. Thus fantasy (and even science fiction) tends to invoke archetypes. Note that "archetypal" is not synonymous with "one-dimensional". The former concerns a character's cultural resonance, while complexity depends on the layering of internal conflict.
One may object that genre fiction deals in stereotypes. I respond, "Yeah. So what?" Stereotypes are simply preconceptions. They are morally neutral in and of themselves. It is only when they become prejudicial that stereotypes acquire negative moral value.
Some stereotypes are helpful. When I see someone in a blue uniform driving behind me in a car with sirens and flashing lights, I respond by pulling over. This is a stereotypical assumption since I don't know the vehicle's driver but rely on visual and audio cues that identify police officers. Stereotypes can likewise aid genre characterization by giving the reader subtle guides to character engagement.
That isn't to say that all male characters must be blood and lust-crazed brutes; or that all female characters must be shrinking violets. As always, strong characters should be people first and foremost. Avoid the twin excesses of treating men and women as identical or as wholly separate species. Sex shouldn't define a character, but it should have an obvious behavioral impact.
Readers should easily be able to tell a novel's characters apart. Sex is an important aspect of character differentiation. Whether or not one agrees that men and women bear certain fundamental differences, the fact is that a character's sex does affect the reader's reaction to him or her. The timeless themes and conflicts associated with motherhood and fatherhood cannot be overemphasized.
Now that we've seen the impact of sex on characterization, the question of how to put this theory into practice remains. I'll go into more detail later, but for now I advise against the following approach:
Posts
5 comments:
I once had to explain the difference between sex and gender to a professor. It was during a cultural diversity course. It's not that I think educational figures are all-knowing. I don't expect them to be infallible, or anything remotely like that. The fact that this particular professor was trying to teach us a three week segment on sex and gender at the time was a bit disheartening, though.
While I agree with much of what you say, I also think this is somewhat cultural. I mean, what of cultures where third, forth, and fifth genders already exist? And even in many societies where gender is popularly thought of as binary (the United States comes to mind) these roles are being actively challenged. That isn't to say I think writers should toss out the rule book, exactly. I do think that gender in literature is set to evolve, and has possibly already started to in niche areas.
Certainly many aspects of gender roles are culturally dependent. This is where the age old advice to know your audience comes in.
Nonwestern authors should and do adjust their depictions of gender accordingly. Look at Japanese comics and film, where gender roles are generally even more binary than in western fiction. I'd bet that the situation is reversed in works from the subcontinent.
The challenge posed to traditional gender roles is actually one of the forces driving western genre fiction. Even self-professed progressives are often drawn to depictions of a (supposedly) simpler time with more clear-cut social norms.
I'm not entirely certain I can agree that traditional gender roles are are the norm in genre fiction. While I certainly can't speak for statistics on this issue I can certainly point to numerous anecdotes where these themes haven't been challenged so much as long ago turned on their heads.
Robert Heinlein had the majority of pilots in Starship Troopers as female, though perhaps the greatest starship captain in genre fiction is David Weber's Honor Harrington. In terms of spaceship personnel Star Trek had ladies handling business, sure two of them were in more tradition female roles (nurse and yeoman[secretary]), however Uhura certainly broke through many stereotypes.
In fantasy novels it does seem like female characters more readily fall into traditional roles, often times even when they are the main character. There are however plenty of examples of women in fantasy being both feminine and breaking convention. Authors such as Ursula Le Guin and Marion Zimmer Bradley, started giving us these strong female characters as the sexual revolution was starting and mostly fringe. Later authors such as Mercedes Lackey up through Sara Douglass of today have continued the 'tradition'.
I think it's possible that many readers, especially male readers, are reluctant to read these works even though many have gotten serious accolades. I know that I'm one to pass on some of these books. I've enjoyed Le Guin and Douglass, and I've mostly been avoiding Lackey because of the intimidating breadth of her work.
Even if you shift away from novels written by women, you'll find that many authors treat their female characters not just as fleshed out characters, but have made them very influential and have clearly stated their needs, wants and desires. Even Robert Jordan, whose man character has three wives, has a large cast of strong female characters with significant amounts of POV time.
/End Rant
You point to a lot of good counterexamples, and I grant that many genre fiction writers are consciously trying to avoid the old stereotypes. However, I didn't intend to report on how genre writers as a whole portray sex and gender. I simply pointed out that genre stories (especially fantasy) achieve their goal of resonating with the widest audience when they avoid straying too far from traditional understandings.
The authors you cite do successfully bend traditional gender roles, but that's because they're really good writers. They're also the exception.
Traditional gender concepts are subtler in sci-fi, but they're rarely absent. Heinlein was really playing on his readers' gender preconceptions by showing women in combat. Star Trek actually sticks quite close to received gender roles. Look at Troi, Dr. Crusher, and Dax. Only Yar and Janeway have overtly masculine qualities, and they killed Tasha off (and Janeway should be in prison).
Finally, I see why you'd invoke Jordan, but Wheel of Time's rampant misogyny is the worst kept secret in contemporary fantasy. Far better critics than I have remarked on this fact. Jordan's female characters resemble nothing so much as the cast of Tenchi Muyo in their constant pining for and obsession with Rand. Seriously, go back and look. Every female character's actions totally revolve around Rand or some other dude. Their pseudo-feminist dialogue is just a lampshade for serious cases of damsel in distress/school girl crush syndrome.
Thanks!
While yes many of the female characters in Wheel of Time do spend an obscene amount of time obsessing over Rand, he likewise spends similar amounts of time doing the same. I don't think I'd ever try to argue that Robert Jordan is some kind of Progressive Feminist.He does show women, whose hands are tied by fate, strike a careful balance between traditional gender roles and roles as active power holders.
Perhaps some other time we can break down all of the characters in his books and peg them down, but for now sufice it to say that I generally agree with your original post. I don't think it's so much about a characters gender role or other sterotype so much as wether the character is relatable and understandable.
Post a Comment