Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.
– J.R.R. Tolkien, in reference to criticisms of The Lord of the Rings
Over at Heroines of Fantasy this week, our guest is Athena Andreadis, prolific writer of fiction and non-fiction, and author of the blog Starship Reckless.
I will be honest: Andreadis’ guest post is difficult to understand, but thought-provoking in its own way. Before you read it (or after), I would suggest visiting the blogs of Leo Grin and Joe Abercrombie. This because what Andreadis writes is essentially a criticism of the argument between Grin and Abercrombie, so to get a more-or-less full picture of the conflict, you may need to read all three posts.
Andreadis’ thought-provoking post on Heroines of Fantasy has had me. . .well, provoked in my thought.
Her primary criticism of Grin and Abercrombie focuses on the utter lack of women authors mentioned in their debate. A fair enough point, though I can’t help but think, with all due respect to Grin and Abercrombie, that in the end they are just a couple of guys (in the same way that I am just one gal), and that perhaps these two blog posts are not entirely representative of the full spectrum of dialogue on contemporary fantasy fiction.
But what really does not sit right with me is how Andreadis uses her displeasure with Grin and Abercrombie as a point of departure to discredit male writers of fantasy across the board. In her guest post, Andreadis portrays male fantasy authors as universally misogynistic, and argues that men offer little of interest to the genre as a whole. Her list of authors producing “bland [sexist] gruel” includes well-known and much admired names like J.R.R. Tolkien and George R.R. Martin, both of whom have produced novels that in my humble opinion deserve a somewhat more complimentary qualifier than “bland [sexist] gruel”.
So I don’t think I can follow Andreadis down this particular road, though her commentary does have me thinking about women writers, women protagonists and feminism in the context of fantasy in general.
Having worked as a scientist for more than twenty years, and taught a few of my own courses on women and science, I am not new to feminist discourse. The different schools of feminist thought provide some very powerful tools to help decipher the social constructs that characterize our culture and history. Unfortunately, a feminist analysis of any discipline is an immense topic that cannot be squeezed into a single blog post, and feminism in fantasy is no exception.
Still, as I’ve ventured into the professional world of fantastic literature, I’ve noticed on the one hand, that certain barriers that exist for women in science are also faced by women in fantasy. That if you ask a reader to mention his or her favorite authors, women will almost invariably be in the minority. That stories featuring female protagonists are often perceived as “girl stories”, while stories featuring male protagonists are acceptable reading for everyone.
So it would seem, from this and other less anecdotal evidence, that sexism is alive and well in the field, and that those of us who boast feminist sensibilities have our work cut out for us.
On the other hand, I have had the pleasure of reading a rich variety of fantasy stories about women, written by both women and men. I have met and interacted with a long string of fantasy authors and editors, men and women, who are invariably excited about female protagonists and the crafting of ever more complex roles for the women in our stories. I've noticed that on the blog Heroines of Fantasy, which often has an overtly feminist tone, our most consistent and enthusiastic commentators have been men.
And when I explore the topic of feminism in fantasy literature, I come across compelling quotes like this one from scholar Elyce Rae Helford:
Science fiction and fantasy serve as important vehicles for feminist thought, particularly as bridges between theory and practice. No other genres so actively invite representations of the ultimate goals of feminism: worlds free of sexism, worlds in which women's contributions (to science) are recognized and valued, worlds in which the diversity of women's desire and sexuality is honored, and worlds that move beyond gender.
So which is it?
Fantasy as a traditionally misogynistic endeavor where only the boys can play, or
Fantasy as the genre that actively promotes the goals of feminism like no other?
At this point in my journey with fantasy, I would say, six of one, half a dozen of the other.
I often claim to write in the tradition of J.R.R. Tolkien and George R.R. Martin. That’s probably a little egotistical on my part, but these are two authors among many (including many women) whose work I greatly admire and try to emulate, albeit through a strong manifestation of my own voice and vision.
I know, just like every other woman who has read Tolkien, that his reknowned epic is characterized by a glaring absence of prominent female characters. And while Martin’s world has more to offer in terms of women players, I – like many other readers – have had my complaints about the way he writes his women.
But does that mean I must then denigrate these and other male authors who have committed similar “crimes” as writers of hopelessly bland sexist gruel?
Or can I respect and learn from their legacy, even as I forge a new future for the women of my own stories?
I have, of course, already answered these questions for myself.
Now I invite you to answer them as well.
You may also wish to see my previous post on Women, Epic Fantasy and George R.R. Martin.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



10 comments:
I've always thought it strange that in most literary genres (eg especially Crime, Historical Fiction, Children's Books, Books for Teenagers) female authors are well represented, highly popular in terms of sales, and also have equal pegging with male authors in terms of awards, prestige, fan base, etc.
Yet in the genres of literary fiction, fantasy and science fiction (which are two distinct genres despite some small overlap) and probably thrillers too, that doesn't seem to be the case.
the question really being is that because of the sorts of readers those books attract (except the high number of female readers of lit fic would seem to knock that on the head as an idea) or because fewer women relatively speaking write in those genres (in which case there might be some reason for that that does not in fact hinge on evil men) or because some nebulous 'male authority' exists in these genres and in these genres alone that somehow oppresses deserving female authors (I think not, on the whole, else why would it not apply across genres, especially to Crime?)
Is it not much the same within the fantasy (and most) genre that it is in the world at large? Where do women authors excel? Children's literature and romance. We are still, in a way, relegated to being the teachers, nurses, secretaries, housewives and mothers our sex has been relegated to forever.
Women have made great strides in the world. There are a multitude of women doing things in other genres, in other CAREERS, but it is, unfortunately, still a man's world. We have to work twice as hard to get half the recognition. And yet look how well represented women were at the Nebula Awards this year. All but one of the nominees for best book were women!
I personally think the pendulum is getting dang near that equalized middle, but we're not there yet. All we can do is keep swinging.
David --
There is a parallel puzzle when one looks at the sciences, where women have made significant inroads in some fields (for example, Ecology, now dominated by women) while other fields (such as Physics)remain the domain of men.
One explanation that's commonly invoked is that the more prestigious the field (as judged by society at large), the greater the obstacles to women's participation. (And I should point out that not all obstacles are necessarily external or institutional; some obstacles are internal, limitations that women impose upon themselves on the assumption they will not succeed.)
If we were to apply this reasoning in a blanket fashion (that is, without thinking critically about the change in context) to the situation of women authors in fantasy, the implication would be that fantasy must be among the most prestigious genres of literature. An assertion that flies in the face of most genre hierarchies I've seen out there, but is somehow personally pleasing, in an admittedly ironic fashion.
All this to say, I don't have a straightforward answer to your question. But yes, given that women are well represented in other genres -- particularly when considering women's work and recognition in historical fiction, which shares many elements with epic fantasy -- it's just odd that we still don't see women readily listed next to giants like Tolkien & Martin.
It's going to happen, though. Of that much, I feel certain.
Terri --
Yes, I think you're right; the difficulty that women have had making inroads in fantasy as characters and authors is a reflection of the structure of society at large.
And I'm also optimistic looking forward; it's my impression this has changed a lot in the last 20 years and will continue to change, perhaps faster than any of us anticipate.
Thanks so much for stopping by!
'the difficulty that women have had making inroads in fantasy as characters and authors is a reflection of the structure of society at large.'
Okay, I'll buy that.
But explain the surfeit of prize-winning, bestselling female authors of Crime Fiction. Exactly the same societal forces should be battering them down as bash female writers of fantasy 9if indeed they do).
I think invoking male domination of society (which a cursory glance at history will confirm has never been weaker than now) is insufficient to explain the relative failure of female fantasy authors because it clearly does not apply to spheres like crime fiction similarly dominated by violent death.
There must be considerably more to it than that.
"There must be considerably more to it than that."
Oh yes, I agree; and please accept my apologies if I implied otherwise. As I said earlier, to really break something like this down with a feminist analysis would take much more than a single blog post (and the associated discussion).
I'm not sure how to respond to your comment without slipping into copious detail about how feminist inquiry has, for example, illuminated the structure of the academy, how that structure varies from discipline to discipline, and the implications of that variation for the participation of men versus women in the different fields of science.
More importantly for this discussion, I'm not sure if anyone has approached literature in the same way. I imagine it's been done, I'm just not familiar with that research. (Though I admit, I'm feeling more than a small urge to get familiar with it, and quickly...)
From what I have seen in the sciences, however, it is never a simple question of 'male domination'. All of society participates, to some extent, in structuring the academy. Women participate in that process just as men do; in the decisions we make, the actions we take, what we choose to fight for, and when we choose to remain silent.
So when I look at the success of women authors in, say, Crime Fiction or Historical Fiction, two thoughts come to mind. First, not only can women write as well as men, they are just as capable of achieving widespread recognition when the discipline is conducive to letting this happen.
The second thought, which follows on the first, is this: What then can it be about the endeavor of fantasy that leaves us with the impression that success and recognition is harder for women authors? Is it the way we write fantasy? The way it is vetted for publication? The way it is received by the markets and considered for awards?
More questions than answers, as usual. But however we measure it, it would seem something is qualitatively different when we step into the genre of fantasy, compared to other areas of fiction. And while it would be nice to simply blame the difference on domination of the genre by 'evil men', I do believe it is much more complicated than that.
So then we're left with the possibility that something about fantasy as a genre (also sci-fi, thrillers and lit fic) makes it harder for women to achieve success.
Possibly in the case of lit fic it is male-dominated prize panels (though the possibility that your raise that women impose their own glass ceiling by holding themselves to higher standards is equally possible and the two are far from mutually exclusive). Given though that the readership of lit fic is largely educated women I don't think we can blame the readers.
Which we might be able to do for fantasy, sci-fi and thrillers.
certainly thrillers are basically the male equivalent of chic-lit and so it's easy to understand the extreme genre bias operating in both those genres.
that might even wash for certain sorts of traditional sci-fi too.
But in fantasy whilst the likes of Zimmer Bradley rehashed Arthurian myth quite as effectively as Tolkien borrowed from Norse myth there still remains the fact that even the most talented of women fantasy writers have not matched the wide appeal of the men in terms of success (JK Rowling and possibly the Dragonlance authors being obvious exceptions)
We may want to revisit this discussion after you've read some of the names listed at the end of the (not really so difficult to understand) article.
The statistics about how women writers fare in terms of awards, reviews, popularity, visibility, etc, speak for themselves; ditto for the science pyramid, by the way, with which you and I are both familiar. The stuff I listed in the article is published by major houses; the more nuanced and/or imaginative works are either small-press or ends up self-published because "nobody will read it" (that is, it's not aimed squarely at the white male Anglo-American readership).
As for emulation, it's better if you copy from the best. To give just two examples: in the case of Tolkien, the Völsunga Saga is leagues better than his retread which became The Children of Húrin; in the case of Martin (who had formidable writing chops, so he has no excuses), Barbara Tuchman's justly famous The Calamitous Fourteenth Century is far more interesting and kaleidoscopic than his endless color-the-squares convolutions.
David & Athena --
Sorry it took me a while to get back to you on this. The day job got in the way of things, as occasionally happens.
David - Yes, well there are many measures of success, and when we hit on figures like Tolkien & Martin, I think the measure we are most interested in is "widespread appeal".
Rowling achieved it, but with YA works, which is a somewhat different game from epic fantasy. Marion Zimmer Bradley is well known, but her characters and their stories haven't become part of every day dialogue and popular myth/fascination in the way that, say, Frodo or Arya have.
Sometimes when the statistical mind kicks in, I wonder if it's just a matter of chance. Only a handful of people can achieve that kind of fame impact; maybe so far in epic fantasy the ones who've done it have just happened to be men.
Athena -- Thanks so much for your comment; I'll come back to it with some thoughts of my own later this afternoon; need to get to class at the moment...
Hi Athena -
With all due respect, your guest post on Heroines of Fantasy is not going to be easy to follow for every reader; in part because not every one is familiar with these aspects of the genre, or with the nature of the discourse as you undertake it.
More importantly, the multiple references to the debate between Grin & Abercrombie can confuse someone who is not familiar with these authors or the ongoing discussions between them.
I thought it was only fair to point this out to my visitors, and to encourage them to have a look at the Grin & Abercrombie posts as well as yours. (You also encouraged this, I noticed, with the links you provided in the guest post on HoF.)
That was pretty much all I meant by "difficult"; my apologies if I offended you with the use of the word.
I have read several of the names listed at the end of your guest post; I thought it an excellent list when I first saw it on Monday, and still think it an excellent list today.
I am less familiar with Tuchman's work; nor have I had the chance to read the Volsunga Saga. But I'll be happy to put those on the to-be-read shelf. I look forward to deciding for myself where they fit in relation to other works I've read, by both men and women; and to what extent they might be useful in informing my own journey as an author.
Thanks again for stopping by; your perspectives always make for interesting discussion.
Post a Comment