Skip to main content

Jay Thinks About Villains

I recently read this post Over at Mysterious Matters, a blog about publishing mystery novels. (Disclaimer: I don't have any inclination toward publishing mystery novels. I barely read mystery novels, unless you count Agatha Christie and my new-found love of Tana French. I just like reading blogs. In other words, I have no expertise or qualifications to discuss what I am about to say, but I figure why should this topic be any different from anything else I talk about here? )

The post describes the publishers' reaction to a recent submission that they liked, but had some issues with, one of them being that the villain was a Muslim with ties to terrorism. It then goes on to suggest that asking a writer to change the ethnicity of a villain is "respectful of our readers' expectations" in part because "Genre mystery fiction isn't reality, and it's not supposed to reflect reality. Rather, it's supposed to offer an alternative universe that's real-ish. In reality, there are mean fat people, and crazy gay people, and villainous Asian people, and [insert negative adjective + minority group here]. But in escapist fiction--the goal of which is to provide refuge from reality--such types need not exist."*

Hmm.

Yeah, I don't know. It seems to me that we get in trouble when we use the "writing is not supposed to reflect reality" thing for suggesting that writers make changes. On one hand, I sympathize with the publisher, because you know what we don't need? A bunch more books where the Muslim with ties to terrorism is the villain. That's like making the Russian the villain in a book set in the Cold War. Or a Nazi the villain in a book set in WWII.**

But, on the other hand, if books don't need to reflect reality, then aren't we running the risk of leaving out non-normative characters altogether? Since we don't have any obligation to reflect the "mean fat people, and crazy gay people, and villainous Asian people," then aren't we just perpetuating the desexualized gay best friend, or the Magical Negro? Shouldn't the ethnicity of a villain sometimes be something other than white and straight?

Like I said, I don't write mysteries. But it seems to me that the villain should be something that adds to the story. If, for example, the only way that the story makes sense is for the villain to be a Muslim with ties to terrorism, then that's who the villain should be. If that stuff is just code for "Bad Guy!", then, yeah, the suggestion that it be changed is a good one. But the heart of the request should be, in my opinion, the demands of the story. Respecting the requirements of the story is, I think, respecting the expectations of the readers. As E.M. Forster says, a story "can have only one fault: that of making the audience not want to know what happens next." Once we have taken care of that, the rest of the issues are secondary.


*That's just one of three reasons the post gives for the suggestion.

**NOTE: I AM NOT comparing being a Muslim to being a Nazi! I am saying that, in US fiction set in contemporary times, making a Muslim the villain is as typical as making a Nazi the villain in a book set during WWII.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I think the publisher has "escapist" confused with some other notion. Simply because we read stories for fun doesn't mean the stories have no basis in reality. Even really good science fiction tries to be somewhat realistic every now and then.

I don't believe ethnicity should be treated any differently than hair color or other physical characteristics. Where does it end? Should detectives in noir fiction not smoke? Should ninety-nine percent of the women in literature not be smokin' hot? (You like that smoking connection? I thought you would.) Why stop there? Black people shouldn't listen to music generally favored by black people. They should exclusively listen to Barry Manilow.

I guess in future dealings with this publisher, authors should ask for the approved list of ethnicities for villians.

Popular posts from this blog

Monday Miscellany

1. I've been watching old episodes of The West Wing on Bravo lately, and have come to the conclusion that I love the character of Sam Seaborn. He's smart, he's earnest, he's a good writer, and he's played by Rob Lowe. What's not to love?* 2. I just bought the cutest jacket at Ann Taylor Loft. I know you care, but it's not every day that one can find a white denim jacket with styling reminiscent of Michael Jackson and a tailored waist. I'm just saying. 3. NaNoWriMo proceeds apace. There is no way that I'm going to be able to keep writing at this pace after this month is over, but I'm on track to finish. It's an interesting project...in some ways the speed is freeing and in other ways it's extremely limited, as to make the word count I have no time to go back and revise. 4. Alien and Aliens are amazing movies. Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection ? Not so much. 5. This week's Glee characterization inconsistency watch: Rache...

Why Are The Characters Friends?

Lately, I've been reading a lot of books where the main character and her best friend don't get along. This is confusing to me. Why is the main character friends with someone she dislikes, or is afraid of, or actually hates? I get that it happens--I've seen Mean Girls . I've read Queen Bees and Wannabes . Heck, I'm old enough to have been the prime audience for Heathers . But in order for this fractured best friend relationship to be convincing, it has to be set up. In both Heathers and Mean Girls , there's a reason why the protagonist is friends with a bunch of b*tches--she chose to be. She knows that they're jerks. In fact, she can feel herself becoming a jerk right along with them. It's part of the character arc, the point of the story, that being friends with these girls is not who she really is. But the relationships I've been seeing lately don't make that kind of sense. The protagonist doesn't have a reason to be friends with...

Jay Takes A Stand

Moonrat, still at Editorial Ass, is making me think a lot lately. She did a recent post here about sexualized violence in print ads, and connected the dots to sexualized violence in books and other media, which got me thinking about how I treat girls and women in my books. To be clear--I'm a feminist. I believe in equal pay for equal work and reproductive choice, and the whole ball of wax. I'm not going to go into detail about all that here because, frankly, there are people out there whose blogs are dedicated to that kind of thing (like Jezebel *) and they do it way better than I ever could. But that's my political orientation, in case you care. So when I was writing The Book, it was very important to me that my female protagonist S did not fall into any of those "heroine needs saving by the hero" tropes that so many books for teenage girls do. Sure, there's something very "romantic" about the hero swooping in and rescuing the heroine, right? ...