Quote:
Originally Posted by Thadlerian  Thank you for enlightening posts, dustinzgirl and Pelagic Argosy. There is, however, another aspect to the gender issue of WoT which I wonder if you would like to consider. Strength and general sexism aside: At large, it seems to me that male characters appear far more sympathetic than females - more likeable as characters. This seems to be pretty categorically.
What I'm trying to figure out is whether this is a matter that can be relatively universally agreed upon, or whether I as a man perhaps am inclined to react more negatively to female than male characters. |
Personally, I'm not mustering much sympathy for any of these characters, male or female. Mostly, I'm enjoying these books for the world building, which is what I'm into right now. And I find The Great Hunt to be suspenseful, considering how slow the pace was in
Eye. I can't point to any of these characters as my favorite. I suppose I like Lan too, but only because he has a sexy, aloof, Aragorn-y thing going on. But that's just another big, fat fantasy stereotype. Rand and Mat both seem like idiot men-children country boys. I guess Perrin doesn't annoy me so much. As for the women, it seems the only way Jordan knows how to portray them as "strong" is to give them magic powers and/or feisty tempers. And it's not a good sign that you can summarize an Aes Sedai personality by what color Ajah she's in. Rather than explore characterization, Jordan simply gave each of his characters about two moods, demonstrated through annoying nervous ticks.
I agree with what you said here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thadlerian However, it should also be noted that Jordan does nothing new, he just emphasizes a trend that has become common in SF/F (and mainstream media as well?), most likely as a half-hearted attempt to satisfy feminism, in which the formula has become the following: Female strenght = Power. Male strenght = Propensity to do objective good. Use of this formula can be found with writers as diverse as David Eddings and Kim Stanley Robinson.
The "damsel in distress" is no longer accepted; she has now been replaced by the "incompetent tomboy". |
The "damsel in distress" has been replaced by Xena. Maybe writers these days are afraid to give female characters any genuine, compelling weaknesses and risk being accused of creating "weak" females. So, they fall back on types.
Could a writer these days get away with creating a female lead character who is happy as a farmer's wife? Could I admit sympathizing with such a character?
dustinzgirl: I do appreciate your point that feminism is more complicated than the politics and history would make it seem. I'm perfectly happy as a wife, a mommy, and a secretary. And I'm equally happy to carry on my feminist rants anonymously online. If you'll excuse me...my man needs a sandwich.
I also appreciate a good discussion about fantasy and feminism. I just don't know if the WoT series is worth it.
