Skip to main content

The problem with women

Lately, I've been seeing a lot of lame female protagonists. By lame I mean that they don't do anything. They sit around and wait to be rescued. They whine, they moan, they complain, but they don't get up off their asses and make decisions about anything. They don't act - they are acted upon. (My undergraduate classes in feminist theory are snickering in the back of my head. "See," they're saying. "We told you!")

Look, if you're going to have a woman as a protagonist then I had better be able to understand her. This is not the same thing as "liking" her. I'm not a big fan of the "Your Main Character Has To Be Likable" school of thought. I think "likable" in that case is a stand-in for "relatable." I have to be able to relate to your female protagonist.*

One of the ways that a lot of writers do this is by making their female protagonists "kick-ass." This is cool. I like the Kick-Ass Heroine, especially in sci fi or fantasy. Big fan. Give me a woman who can shoot a gun or give a karate kick or fly a plane. Kick-Ass heroines are usually competent and professional women, smart and sassy, and Super Hot. These are all good things.

But these are not the only ways that a female character can be relatable.

Meg, for example, in Madeline L'Engle's A Wrinkle In Time, is a smart and sarcastic girl, but she's not Kick-Ass. She's not strong, or powerful. She doesn't have any weapons. But she does have an undying love for her father, and she uses that to save both of them (and the whole world, hell, the universe) from It. This is how she's relatable - her prickly personality is a result of how she's been hurt by the absence of her father and her outsider status, even in her own family. We get her, so we're willing to forgive a little sniping.

Muriel Pritchett, in Anne Tyler's The Accidental Tourist, is an uneducated, bossy, sexually promiscuous, former teenage mother, but she's also resourceful and determined and connected to the people around her. By the end of the book, we don't want the protagonist to go back to his calm and reasonable wife, but to stay with prickly, loud Muriel. She's not a superhero, and she's not Super Hot, but she's fun. She lives.

Your character can be naughty or nice, sweet or mean, Little Mary Sunshine or a bitch on wheels. All women (or all women I know, anyway, which is admittedly not a representative sample) are all of those things from time to time. That's cool. But I don't want to spend time with someone who never has a mean thing to say about anyone, or who never does anything kind for another living soul UNLESS (and that's a big UNLESS), I understand why she's like that. Your characters don't have to be kind or Kick-Ass, but they do have to be relatable.

*NOTE: I think this is true of ALL protagonists, but I haven't seen a lot of problems in my reading with male protagonists being wusses lately. Obviously, depending on what you're reading, YMMV.

Comments

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...

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? ...

The waiting is the hardest part

As I mentioned, I entered the Fangs, Fur & Fey contest over on their blog (there's a link in the sidebar). And the results are supposed to be posted on Monday, which when all the hook writers would find out whether they should send in pages or not. Cool, cool. But, as it turns out, some of the judges are really on their game, and have been turning in entries earlier. Which have been being posted earlier. Which means that for the last two days I've been checking the website obsessively in the hope of seeing my magic number - 121 - up there. Which it has NOT been. 122 has gone up, but not 121. I'm trying to take this as a good sign. ::fingers crossed:: The contest itself has been real eye-opener. Good hooks, bad hooks, good hooks for books I would never read in a million years, bad hooks for books that I think I would love ... it's really cool. I also love the comments that the judges are making, which are usually right, but which also point out just how mu...