Feo Takahari
Auror
On another site I hang out on, there was a bit of an argument over what constitutes fridging of a female character. I realized that my view on the subject is a bit different than usual, so I'd like to start a discussion here and get some input on how the line might be drawn. To start with, I'd like to outline some of the traits of the worst fridging I ever read.
Out of This World by Lawrence Watt-Evans is a story about an ordinary man tasked with saving two universes--one based on high fantasy and one based on space opera. It's the second-most-vicious
story I've read in the "deconstructive" vein, and it glories in its own hamhandedness. To give one example, most trapped-in-another-world stories star an annoying idiot who somehow accomplishes great things, so this one stars an annoying idiot who's ineffectual and accomplishes nothing. To give another, most space opera stars only white people and never explains where the other races went, so it's heavily implied that all nonwhites in the space opera universe were systematically exterminated. Getting angry at the story is almost beside the point when it clearly aims for a strong reaction--but that's a pretty big almost.
The protagonist's wife and daughter are major characters in the book, and since there's no cliche that mandates that they're annoying idiots, they're more likable characters than the protagonist. The wife's arguably better protagonist material, and the kid's, well, pretty decent for a confused and scared child. Towards the end of the book, every named female character except possibly the kid is raped, and the wife and the kid are killed afterwards. This leads into a climactic scene of the protagonist debating whether to formally join a resistance movement--in a story, it's cliche for the protagonist to rebel after the murder of his family, but he thinks this "isn't a story," and he's scared of dying himself. Will he join up? Read the sequel and find out!
I think there are two points that can be drawn from this. The first is that fridging isn't just killing off a likable woman. The reason this feels so mean-spirited is that there doesn't really seem to be a reason to get rid of the wife--her rape might serve a purpose, but all killing her afterwards does is give some angst to a character who's annoying anyway. The second is that self-awareness--knowing what you're doing and why you're doing it--is not in itself a protection against fridging. Watt-Evans clearly wants to comment on an existing trope, and he arguably succeeds in doing so. He just does so in a way that makes readers unlikely to shell out for book 2.
Do you think these are fair points? What else defines fridging? What determines whether a death is just fridging, or meaningful and appropriate?
(Off-topic, now you know why I rage so much about bad fantasy. I've pretty much cleaned the library shelves, so I've read a lot of rubbish like this.)
Out of This World by Lawrence Watt-Evans is a story about an ordinary man tasked with saving two universes--one based on high fantasy and one based on space opera. It's the second-most-vicious
story I've read in the "deconstructive" vein, and it glories in its own hamhandedness. To give one example, most trapped-in-another-world stories star an annoying idiot who somehow accomplishes great things, so this one stars an annoying idiot who's ineffectual and accomplishes nothing. To give another, most space opera stars only white people and never explains where the other races went, so it's heavily implied that all nonwhites in the space opera universe were systematically exterminated. Getting angry at the story is almost beside the point when it clearly aims for a strong reaction--but that's a pretty big almost.
The protagonist's wife and daughter are major characters in the book, and since there's no cliche that mandates that they're annoying idiots, they're more likable characters than the protagonist. The wife's arguably better protagonist material, and the kid's, well, pretty decent for a confused and scared child. Towards the end of the book, every named female character except possibly the kid is raped, and the wife and the kid are killed afterwards. This leads into a climactic scene of the protagonist debating whether to formally join a resistance movement--in a story, it's cliche for the protagonist to rebel after the murder of his family, but he thinks this "isn't a story," and he's scared of dying himself. Will he join up? Read the sequel and find out!
I think there are two points that can be drawn from this. The first is that fridging isn't just killing off a likable woman. The reason this feels so mean-spirited is that there doesn't really seem to be a reason to get rid of the wife--her rape might serve a purpose, but all killing her afterwards does is give some angst to a character who's annoying anyway. The second is that self-awareness--knowing what you're doing and why you're doing it--is not in itself a protection against fridging. Watt-Evans clearly wants to comment on an existing trope, and he arguably succeeds in doing so. He just does so in a way that makes readers unlikely to shell out for book 2.
Do you think these are fair points? What else defines fridging? What determines whether a death is just fridging, or meaningful and appropriate?
(Off-topic, now you know why I rage so much about bad fantasy. I've pretty much cleaned the library shelves, so I've read a lot of rubbish like this.)