Multiple POV story - Lack of female leads

[Fyle]

Okay, we are well of the point I was trying to illustrate which was:

The Hobbit added a woman to the movie because JRR Tolkien lacked women in his writing, this is not up for debate, it has been stated by Peter Jackson that JRR Tolkien "was not good" at writing women so he added Tauriel (or that heavily implied the reason he did).

Did she improve the story ? If so, how?

Admittedly, this is off track to what the OP is saying, he wants to change a characters gender, not add one into the story...

But, the nature of the argument at least shows how touchy this issue gets, so a change will cause a reaction.

The OP does ask: "Do you think it could be offensive?" (meaning 3 men as MCs)

And the answer to that is no. Having three men as the MC in no way shape or form can be "offensive" if the offense is them simply being men. Also, there is a ton of popular offensive work out there if that's the case.

 

[Tom]

Okay, we are well of the point I was trying to illustrate which was:

The Hobbit added a woman to the movie because JRR Tolkien lacked women in his writing, this is not up for debate, it has been stated by Peter Jackson that JRR Tolkien "was not good" at writing women so he added Tauriel (or that heavily implied the reason he did).

-Eowyn
-Arwen
-Luthien
-Galadriel (who is a total badass)
-Lady Haleth (also a badass)
-Nerdanel
-Goldberry
-Idril Celebrindal
-Varda
-Yavanna
-Nessa
-Aredhel
-Ioreth
-Celebrian
-Elwing
-Finduilas
-And many more...

Women of Middle Earth

 

[Nimue]

Nobody here thinks male characters are offensive. Gonna quote myself from earlier, I guess:

I don't think it's offensive to just not have a female POV protag, except maybe to a select few people. But the fact of the matter is that for a lot of female readers (myself included), having a female protagonist helps them get into the book. Generally, broadly, people like to read about characters they can identify with--hence the profusion of bookish everyman protagonists. Yes, women will read about men more often then the reverse happens, but that's more through necessity than inherent appeal, isn't it? I do think that the voice of the character should come before tailoring for an audience, but it's something to think about. Half the planet, there.

 

[Fyle]

-Eowyn
-Arwen
-Luthien
-Galadriel (who is a total badass)
-Lady Haleth (also a badass)
-Nerdanel
-Goldberry
-Idril Celebrindal
-Varda
-Yavanna
-Nessa
-Aredhel
-Ioreth
-Celebrian
-Elwing
-Finduilas
-And many more...

Women of Middle Earth

I didn't say he wasn't good at writing women, Peter Jackson did in an interview.

Now, thank you for the list, which helps my point i tried to make in Chit Chat a while ago, instead of someone who is far less talented as a creator than JRR Tolkien (Peter Jackson and his wife who he claims had a hand in Tauriel's creation), why not take a character from the list above and add her in? Why add your own original creation into someone elses well established world? Respect the original piece of work, don't doddle all over it.

This is why people are less hard on Legolas, because at least he is a character created by Tolkien.

-Galadriel (who is a total badass) YES. So, give Galadriel a bigger part!

Although, I would agrue 90% of the characters on that list are not MC that the Hobbit or the Lord of the Rings revolved around. Whether JRR Tolkien was good or not at writing women, is an opinion, what is fact, is they were not included as MCs in the novels.

 

[Tom]

-Galadriel (who is a total badass) YES. So, give Galadriel a bigger part!

Actually, I think they did. In Battle of the Five Armies, she banishes the Necromancer from Dol Guldur.

Galadriel is probably the most amazing woman I've ever read about. Not only is she a badass, she also has complex characterization, conflict, and real flaws. Awesome. We need more female characters like her.

 

[Ireth]

I didn't say he wasn't good at writing women, Peter Jackson did in an interview.

Now, thank you for the list, which helps my point, instead of someone who is far less talented as a creator than JRR Tolkien, why not take a character from the list above and add her in? Why add your own original creation to a well established world? Respect the artowrk, don't doddle all over it.

This is why people are less hard on Legolas, because at least he is a character created by Tolkien.

-Galadriel (who is a total badass) YES. So, give Galadriel a bigger part!

Technically PJ did give Galadriel a bigger part than she had in the books. Her badass moment in Dol Guldur and her involvement with the White Council was covered in the appendices of LOTR and possibly Unfinished Tales. The majority of the other women above are either dead (Lady Haleth, Luthien, Idril, Aredhel, Finduilas) or uninvolved in Middle-earth stuff (Nerdanel, Celebrian, Elwing, Varda, Yavanna, Nessa, the rest of the female Valar) at the time of the movies, and the rest are very minor characters who have little to no bearing on the plot at all (Ioreth, Goldberry), and whose parts it wouldn't make sense to expand.

 

[Tom]

Bah. When are they gonna make a Silmarillion movie? I want to see all those badass First Age women in action.

 

[Fyle]

Actually, I think they did. In Battle of the Five Armies, she banishes the Necromancer from Dol Guldur.

Galadriel is probably the most amazing woman I've ever read about. Not only is she a badass, she also has complex characterization, conflict, and real flaws. Awesome. We need more female characters like her.

I know. Thats not what I mean.

I mean give her a BIG part to fill in the absence of a MC who is a woman.

Galadriel had like one scene in Battle of the 5 Armies ? Not what this discussion is about, it is about women in lead roles.

 

[Velka]

The Hobbit added a woman to the movie because JRR Tolkien lacked women in his writing, this is not up for debate, it has been stated by Peter Jackson that JRR Tolkien "was not good" at writing women so he added Tauriel (or that heavily implied the reason he did).

Tolkien, indeed lacked women in The Hobbit (which has been been the inspiration of many theories, ranging from Tolkien had no grounding for including women in a largely military setting, to Bilbo had therapy-rich issues with mama Belladonna Took, to the idea that the story, being told by Bilbo, who a "confirmed bachelor" and avoids women and sees them as the 'unknown', simply doesn't 'see' them in his world, and therefore omits them from his story).

JRR Tolkien lacked women in his writing, this is not up for debate

I will debate your assertion that he lacked women in his writing as a whole. It was Peter Jackson who committed a huge crime against one of Tolkien's strongest women characters in The Lord of the Rings: Eowyn.

(Disclaimer: Everything that follows is purely the opinions of the poster, take or leave what you will)

While she was somewhat accurately portrayed in Two Towers (I say somewhat due to the fact that most of the nuance in the book was left out - her wanting to be more than her gender would allow her in her society - how Gandalf made Eomer realize that there was more to his sister than he thought - how when Theoden is cured no one continues to care about what she wants - I could go on), the whole simpering woman falling in love and being a complete and utter fool over Aragon is crap.

In the film, when Aragon tells her she can't come with him on the Paths of the Dead because (basically) she's a woman and her place is at home she gets all gooshy and simpering and argues out of love. In the book, she is fierce:

“All your words are but to say: you are a woman, and your part is in the house. But when the men have died in battle and honour, you have leave to be burned in the house, for the men will need it no more. But I am of the House of Eorl and not a serving-woman. I can ride and wield blade, and I do not fear either pain or death.”

She calls him out on his sexist bulls---. She loves him, but she's willing to stand up to him. Do we get this in Jackson's version? No.

(I don't have the wherewithal to get into the fact that Jackson doesn't acknowledge her gender-bending as Dernhelm and being the one who brings Merry along who was also told to stay behind.)

Then, when Eowyn faces the Lord of the Nazgul, what is one of the strongest pieces of her character, (and dare I say, the book) is reduced to a one-liner.

This is a being who is Sauron's lieutenant, he stabbed Frodo, he reduces armies to pants-pissing, and he has just seen her uncle struck down, and Eowyn, what does she do? She pontificates the s--- out of him:

“Begone, foul dwimmerlaik, lord of carrion! Leave the dead in peace!”

A cold voice answered: ‘Come not between the Nazgûl and his prey! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness, where thy flesh shall be devoured, and thy shriveled mind be left naked to the Lidless Eye.”

A sword rang as it was drawn. “Do what you will; but I will hinder it, if I may.”

“Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!”

Then Merry heard of all sounds in that hour the strangest. It seemed that Dernhelm laughed, and the clear voice was like the ring of steel.

“But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Éowyn I am, Éomund’s daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him.”

She stands in the face of the ruiner of worlds, and Peter Jackson gives her the line" I am no man.".

/facepalm

Then she stabs him in the face. (Yes, yes, Merry helped, but she was the one responsible for Merry being there and she did the face-stabbing, so there.)

Still with me? Good.

Then, Peter Jackson commits an even more heinous crime.

She has just defeated the witch king, and then is then noticed by an orc (who in the corporate ladder of evil is an intern compared to the CEO of evil Nazgul). Why? Oh of course, so she can be rescued! (I know this was a fleeting moment, but cinematically it was totally set up as her reaching for the sword and Aragon (somewhat unwittingly) chopping his arm off to then be dual stabbed by him and Gimli).

Don't even get me started on how the equal partnership her and Faramir share is left out of the movie (although I understand it is slightly expanded on in the extended version).

Were female characters underrepresented in Tolkien's work? Yes. However, (taking in consideration the time he was writing) there were shining example of proto-feminism in his work that should not be discounted.

And to leave this on a light note:

 

[Fyle]

My point here is, whose fictional world is it? Not Peter Jacksons.

So, this is why I do not like add ins of Peter Jackson's own creation, no matter who they are, what they say or what they do. In the case of Tolkien, who modern fantasy has been influenced by, the source material should be respected.

Tolkien's work is part of literature's history. It's not just another book on the shelf that say this that and the other thing about characters.

She stands in the face of the ruiner of worlds, and Peter Jackson gives her the line" I am no man.

This is just a case of dialogue being dumbed down for the audience who needs to remember for 20 minutes the Witch King said "no man can kill me." Most likely not because they wanted to take away from a woman character.

We are now way off topic from the OP, and may as well continue my Chit Chat post named "Tauriel." This is bickering about details at this point. I guess this gets heat everytime.

 

[Gryphos]

Tauriel aside, as I think this topic relates more to original fiction rather than adaptations, I think it would is essential to draw a big distinction between issues of diversity and dodgy writing. When people complain about a character being shoved in, when that character is badly fleshed out and doesn't affect the plot, thats not because of whatever sex they are, it's because of the authors failure to make a good character, full stop.

Fyle asserted that an author should always follow their gut with regards to story and not be swayed by outside influences. I'm sorry, but this is a terrible idea. As has been stated, if some people just followed their gut they'd end up with a cast of all white men. I don't know how some people write, but for me, I think about what I'm writing. I don't follow my gut, I follow my brain. My brain tells me that there is a history of marginalising women, and my brain wants me to therefore write a good amount of interesting female characters. So yes, I am most definitely swayed by outside influences when I'm writing, but I would not have it any other way.

 

[Fyle]

Tauriel aside, as I think this topic relates more to original fiction rather than adaptations, I think it would is essential to draw a big distinction between issues of diversity and dodgy writing. When people complain about a character being shoved in, when that character is badly fleshed out and doesn't affect the plot, thats not because of whatever sex they are, it's because of the authors failure to make a good character, full stop.

Fyle asserted that an author should always follow their gut with regards to story and not be swayed by outside influences. I'm sorry, but this is a terrible idea. As has been stated, if some people just followed their gut they'd end up with a cast of all white men. I don't know how some people write, but for me, I think about what I'm writing. I don't follow my gut, I follow my brain. My brain tells me that there is a history of marginalising women, and my brain wants me to therefore write a good amount of interesting female characters. So yes, I am most definitely swayed by outside influences when I'm writing, but I would not have it any other way.

You follow everything.

There should never come a point in time where writers feel they *should* do something.

Its about your freedom of choice, not that you should feel you have to do something. Because once writers start feeling like they have to do certain things, they lose a sense of freedom in how they write.

So, this is about women, but after that, the next group will say, hey wait, we arent represented either！And this process repeats until you have such a lose of creative freedom, you feel obligated to insert x, y and z when you might only want z.

And yes, you use your brain, but the way in which you use it is not the same as solving a math equation where all the pieces have to fit or its flat out wrong. There is not wrong and right in writing in the same way there is for other mediums.

By the way, the OP claims he has a successful book out already, he only has 2 posts here and he hasnt chimed in on any responses yet. Seems he is more qualified to answering his own question as many of us here... Just saying, figured since we are going back and forth playing hardball here, the OP woulda responded？

By the way, i do not think i said *always*

I cant think of something creative you should *always* do.

 

[Nimue]

Maybe, but you keep on saying "never".

Man, it'd be a terrible world where all kinds of people are represented in fiction! You might have to pick up the second book you see to find yourself mirrored in the main character. So tough.

OP has responded, and he's interested in including a female POV but has reservations based on his specific scenario and the story that he's working with has good female representation in other ways... Not sure what you want from him, more debate?

Look, nobody's forcing anyone to write anything! Writers who don't want to write diversely aren't freaking martyrs. You are free to write whatever you want. Other people are free to criticize it. "Free speech" works both ways.

What you're angling for is the ability to write whatever you want and have nobody object to your choices. Only praise. Sorry, but the world doesn't work like that.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

I suspect the reason there's a debate is that we all have different ways to create characters.

@OP, go ahead and change your character to a woman. It's something you want to do, and you'll do it well.

@me, don't do that.

Why not? When I create a character, there's a first step for me that maybe not everyone goes through, or not in the same order. Conception, for me, is a mental picture. My huntress is not a woman. She is a red-haired, green-eyed, freckle-faced woman. Don't ever tell me to make her male, or make her dark-haired, or make her tall and lanky, or make her "hawt." It's not her. If you want a tall, dark and handsome beefcake hunter, that's a totally different person. He doesn't get to speak Addison's words or replace her in her story. He can go find his own story and someone else can write him because I don't give a damn about this guy. His image didn't pop up in my mind, and even now as I describe him, the image is fuzzy. He's a stranger.

Addison came with three other women. The images were clear. I drew them first. I'm glad Devor convinced me to stick with the Heroine Pack for my art project because I want these four characters to finally be in a single work of mine (even if it's not a story, but just illustrations). That actually has meaning for me, to write them or draw them. They belong together, and that I've yet to write all four into a story makes me feel as if I've cheated them. That's stupid, I know, but I do feel that.

So given what steps I go through to create characters, it's not as simple as, "Make him female. Your book'll sell better." And to anyone who wants to say "kill your darlings," that's not the answer. I do cut characters from stories when I can see that character isn't working out. (It's the reason Addison hasn't been in a story with her female companions yet.) I can't change the character's gender because it's not the way I create. I can cut one character and add another, but that character will make different choices. There will be a huge rewrite from the moment the new character enters.

I know this for a fact. My most recent short: I made a non-POV character into a POV character. It changed the story considerably--and for the better! I'm glad I did it, but what I did was take a 6000-word story, scrap all but the first 2000 words, and I ended up with a much better 8000-word story. New ending, new antagonists, a different fate for the second POV character, more action, more humor, and more enthusiasm on my part.



So, sorry this went waaay longer than I thought. But unless that^ got TL;DR'd, I hope sharing my creative process explains why "change the gender" is an easy change for some creators and an undesirable change for others. It's not about not wanting to write a woman--not for me, and I suspect not for Fyle either--but about how we go about creating the characters we want in our stories.

 

[Gryphos]

To be honest, I don't really care how an author creates their characters, so long as the end result is good. So I can't and wont judge people or their inability to genderswap, but I can definitely judge them on the characters they end up with.

Do what works for you, so long as it works.

 

[Devor]

I'm glad Devor convinced me to stick with the Heroine Pack for my art project . . .

I mean, it's not like you needed a lot of convincing there. :wink:

 

[Devor]

Tauriel aside, as I think this topic relates more to original fiction rather than adaptations, I think it would is essential to draw a big distinction between issues of diversity and dodgy writing. When people complain about a character being shoved in, when that character is badly fleshed out and doesn't affect the plot, thats not because of whatever sex they are, it's because of the authors failure to make a good character, full stop.

I just want to chime in briefly here. The world isn't divided into good writers who get everything right and bad writers who screw everything up. Most of us can only handle "so much" with our writing. I don't know about others, but I tend to fill that capacity or even overreach my abilities sometimes. If you take an author who's working with a story like that, and try to push more into it, such as diversity, it can sometimes lead to problems.

I don't personally think I do all that badly with diversity. But I can definitely sympathize with someone who wants to resist putting the extra pressure on their work, especially for those of us in a setting like Mythic Scribes, where we're still working on our first stories and struggling in our own ways to figure all this out and put things together.

 

[Gryphos]

I just want to chime in briefly here. The world isn't divided into good writers who get everything right and bad writers who screw everything up. Most of us can only handle "so much" with our writing. I don't know about others, but I tend to fill that capacity or even overreach my abilities sometimes. If you take an author who's working with a story like that, and try to push more into it, such as diversity, it can sometimes lead to problems.

I don't personally think I do all that badly with diversity. But I can definitely sympathize with someone who wants to resist putting the extra pressure on their work, especially for those of us in a setting like Mythic Scribes, where we're still working on our first stories and struggling in our own ways to figure all this out and put things together.

Fear of failure is no excuse not to try. If a writer doesn't add diversity out of fear of getting it wrong, how are they ever going to improve? And I'll just say, from my experience at least, diversity (in a fantasy setting especially) is easy. All it takes is some imagination, self-awareness, and a little research. And the reward you get from that is a story that will make a whole lot more people a whole lot happier.

 

[Devor]

And I'll just say, from my experience at least, diversity (in a fantasy setting especially) is easy. All it takes is some imagination, self-awareness, and a little research. And the reward you get from that is a story that will make a whole lot more people a whole lot happier.

In this very thread I just made the mentor in my story concept into a woman and to avoid the pitfalls I had to reconceptualize the entire piece. It'll be a better story and I'm very glad I did, but easy it was not. It's going to have ramifications on the entire story. I don't see how denying that works towards anybody's favor.

 

[Russ]

While I am not sure how hard writing diversity is (never really thought about it) I would agree with the sentiment that an aspiring writer should know their own limits and stay within them most of the time.

Hopefully that person will know when it is time to push their limits and extend their reach.