Venting a bit

[zodiacal_light]

You know one of the argument techniques that drives me nuts? When you make an argument - Good women in Tortall fight, say - and someone throws out a minor character who doesn't (that we see, anyway), and declares that this makes your argument invalid.

Um.

Look. When I'm arguing a trend exists, pointing to very minor characters as exceptions to the trend doesn't mean the trend doesn't exist. If anything, it proves my point, when the only characters you can find that don't fit the trend I mentioned are incredibly minor - or when you have to twist facts to have examples.

Also, I am really wishing people on glake would verify their facts before spouting off at the mouth. Uline does like to fight, folks, she's one of the Queen's Ladies.

For the record, the following characters do fight (or are known to) in canon: Eleni, Winna, Nuritin, Sarai, Dove, Lalasa, Uline, Maura, the refugees. Varice and Sarra are not exceptions to the trend, because the text is explicitly condescending to both of them. Kara and Kourrem are implied to fight later, because one of the specific jobs of a Bazhir shaman is to fight off attacking mages - this is specifically stated in the text, though admittedly, since we never see Kara and Kourrem as shamans on their own, I don't think we ever see them fight. But, incidentally, the way their magics are described, we know damn well they both can.

ETA: carmarthen has just reminded me that Kara and Kourrem help Alanna fight off the hillmen. So no, they're not exceptions to the trend, and no, you can't argue that they only do it under duress, given that this is a recognized part of their job.

Characters who are too minor to really buck the trend: Adalia and Oranie.

If I have to explain this again, I am going to blow a gasket.

Comments

[carmarthen]

I am willing to grant Lalasa as an exception, personally, because she fights solely in self-defense, and what we see tends to be the "break their hold and run away" method of self-defense, which I personally do not think of as fighting. I don't think that one has to be able to defend oneself to be a good person, but I also don't put minimal, reluctant self-defense in the same category as fighting bandits. Lalasa does not have the mentality of a fighter; she does not want to fight, and never would if no one attacked her.

since we never see Kara and Kourrem as shamans on their own, I don't think we ever see them fight.

Actually, we do--they help Alanna fight off a hillman attack with magic. They may not fight physically with weapons, but they certainly do with magic.

There are a few other extremely minor non-fighting women (e.g. Cythera), but we have even less characterization for them than for Adalia and Oranie.

[zodiacal_light]

The Lalasa thing bothers me for other reasons, that do tie into this glorification of fighting, though I can see how she could be an exception. Still doesn't buck the trend, though, and I'm a bit sick of folks on glake throwing out random female names as if the fact that one doesn't fight means the trend isn't there.

Ah, and see, that's why I should reread WWRLAM. I for some reason forgot they were there, which makes the comment on glake I was responding to even stupider; Winna, Nuritin, Uline, Eleni, Kara, and Kourrem are not examples of women who don't fight.

[carmarthen]

Yeah, even though Lalasa's reluctant about fighting, that's still not enough to buck the trend, especially with the numerous other issues with her character (and the text DOES go from being pretty condescending towards her to "Lalasa is awesome businesswoman!" quite noticeably).

[zodiacal_light]

And all this is making me more certain that my issues with Lalasa, and my conviction that she's not an exception, isn't so much with her, or the Platonic Ideal of Lalasa, but the way Kel's teaching her to fight, and Lalasa's teaching of the other women to fight, is written.

It is explicitly written as learning to fight, too - that word is absolutely used in relation to the lessons (both the ones Lalasa gives and the ones she received).

And, frankly, I don't see why I should make an exception for Lalasa when I don't for Shinko and Yuki and the other Yamani ladies who only learn the glaive to protect their honor.

[carmarthen]

I guess I draw a distinction because of attitude--Lalasa doesn't really enjoy fighting for its own sake, and she doesn't show any interest in hearing about Kel's ass-kicking exploits, whereas the Yamani ladies seem to enjoy glaive practice and all want to hear about Kel killing bandits and what-not. Honestly, the fact that everyone finds tactics and war stories RIVETINGLY INTERESTING bugs me even more than the expectation that everyone can defend themself in a pinch (I would be unsurprised if Baird didn't have sword lessons as Neal did, for example). There's a difference between learning to fight in some capacity because your culture expects it (the Yamani) and everyone being fascinated with fighting because it's so innnnnnteresting and romantic or something, and if you're not interested, it's because you're silly and useless.

[zodiacal_light]

Honestly, the fact that everyone finds tactics and war stories RIVETINGLY INTERESTING bugs me even more than the expectation that everyone can defend themself in a pinch

Me too, but I think the way Pierce has to have her good characters, esp. her good females, know how to fight reinforces that kind of glorification.

Honestly, the other thing that bugs me really really badly is how Jon and Raoul and all's bullying of Ralon is written as them defending Alanna. Pierce really does glorify all forms of violence, except any turned on her heroines/good characters.

I am not joking when I say I'm at the point of not recommending these books to children, not unless they're old enough for serious discussion of these warped aesops.

[carmarthen]

Me too, but I think the way Pierce has to have her good characters, esp. her good females, know how to fight reinforces that kind of glorification.

Yeah.

As for recommending them--I don't think I am at that point, because we're examining the books on a ridiculously tight level. The average kid--or adult--is going to read them, go "that was a fun story!", and go on to the next book. And they're not going to get that same message from everything they read.

Heck, I loved them as a kid and didn't internalize those messages, and I didn't internalize the even worse stuff in some of the adult fiction I read (*cough* Piers Anthony *cough*).

[zodiacal_light]

Yeah, I get that. I just, argh. Judging by the people on glake swallowing it all uncritically or saying this stuff is good - I dunno. And there's stuff like the Ralon stuff or WWRLAM (or, now, the Trickster books) that I do think is problematic enough to actually mention to a kid; that bothered me even when I first read SotL in ... crap I don't remember. Ages ago, when I was a kid, but I didn't have a way to put into words my discomfort.

I think I wouldn't recommend them because these issues knock them further down my list, and so there are better books and series above them, not so much that I want Tortall banned.

I don't think we necessarily absorb all messages we read; it's pretty obvious we don't. But we do absorb messages we read, and stuff like, oh, the Lalasa stuff reinforces dangerous cultural messages, and revenge fantasies like the Ralon thing aren't really helpful either, and the white-savior racism of WWRLAM and DotL aren't stuff I want to reinforce in children either. So I think I'd only recommend the books, like I said, to kids with a good head on their shoulders, who I can trust to read critically or learn to do so.

[carmarthen]

I think the fans who will go join an author-specific message board are in a small minority, and honestly, I think mostly it's that they hadn't thought of these things until someone pointed them out and now they feel compelled to defend the thing they love.

Oh, yeah--the Trickster books I definitely wouldn't recommend.

But we do absorb messages we read, and stuff like, oh, the Lalasa stuff reinforces dangerous cultural messages, and revenge fantasies like the Ralon thing aren't really helpful either, and the white-savior racism of WWRLAM and DotL aren't stuff I want to reinforce in children either. So I think I'd only recommend the books, like I said, to kids with a good head on their shoulders, who I can trust to read critically or learn to do so.

Makes sense.