let me hear your voice tonight (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
alexseanchai) wrote2018-10-25 11:28 pm
alexseanchai) wrote2018-10-25 11:28 pm
Entry tags:
How to Write A Heroine's Journey course
This Facebook post by Heather Flores came to my attention via the PDX NaNo Facebook group. The course mentioned herein on the Heroine's Journey comes in mini and maxi; the mini version is like four days long and, while the suggested donation is $27, one can (I did) sign up for free. (I'm afraid to ask how much money the maxi is...)
I just finished day one, and I can already tell this is going to have intriguing consequences on my NaNo project. Because Flores is right: a feminist story doesn't reenact kyriarchal models.
I don't say that to shit on, for instance, stories where Cinderella is a trans girl and the story otherwise plays out as in Perrault, or stories where the action hero is a kickass lesbian. Gods know we need more of those stories too! And I'm not arguing there's anything objectionable enough to bar everyone from doing the thing about writing stories that do partially reenact kyriarchal models. Or indeed that fully reenact etc—though if you're reading me, then I have trouble imagining that you long for more stories written mostly by and mostly about cisallohet abled white American Christian men.
It's just that, you know the thing where second-wave feminism has been all about getting women into the workplace, bonus points for into the executive positions, and being a stay-at-home mom is anti-feminist? Which, there are valid points in there, of course—but that approach overlooks a few things, like "who takes care of a woman's kids if she's working outside her home" (see also: race, class) and "isn't this movement supposed to be all about women making their own choices" (and 'stay-at-home mom' is a valid choice; the problem isn't choosing that, the problem is feeling that's the only or the best choice available) and—
And the AU of RL in which the world's richest person is Jessica Bezos and nothing else has changed is not notably less oppressive than RL canon. In fact, that was a major critique of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign all along.1
And, well, think about it. If it's okay for a girl to aspire to the masculine-coded positions of doctor or CEO—or the historically exclusively male position of US President—but not so much for a boy to aspire to the feminine-coded positions of nurse or elementary teacher or stay-at-home parent, then the masculine > feminine dichotomy is still in play.
That right there? That is one of the big things second-wave feminism got wrong. Like. Feminism. You had one job!
And I can't say it's not okay for a girl to aspire to be a doctor, a CEO, or a US President and to reject being a stay-at-home mom. Nor will I say it's not okay to write kickass lesbian action heroes, or to write trans Cinderellas whose stories are otherwise exactly as in Perrault. I am so seriously not expecting anyoneexcept me to be a perfect opponent of the kyriarchy. Not least because I think a collection of anti-misogynist stories that put in some effort to be anti-racist and anti-queermisic, and more to the point exist, will do more to dismantle misogyny and racism and queermisia than a collection of stories that strive to be superbly anti-misogynist, anti-racist, and anti-queermisic and that consequently never quite get written.
I simply observe that Madam President, Mrs. and Mrs. Action Hero and Lady Love, and trans-Cinderella-following-Perrault are all reenacting kyriarchal models. Cinderella relies on class distinctions, and desires to challenge them only with respect to herself—and that mostly because Ella is a lot poorer and harder-worked in the middle of the story than at its beginning. Madam President is colonialist and capitalist. And the lesbian action hero solves her problems with violence.
That's one of the key points Flores is making. Out here in the real world, she says (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the gist), we—especially as women—can't solve our problems with violence.2 Which means stories in which the hero does solve her problems with violence might be good emotional catharsis3, but they're not very good role models for lasting change. And stories that contain problems for which violence is the solution, Flores observes, have the effect of desensitizing readers to RL violence.4 Which is to say, if we're looking for world peace, we should maybe not be writing stories that glorify war.
...So my NaNovel? Miraculous Ladybug fanfiction. I hesitate to say ML is a magical girl anime, but I can't picture ML existing substantially in its present form if Sailor Moon hadn't, either. Cartoon violence is pretty much part of the package.
But, you know, let's think about this. My outline's kind of light on the fourth quarter action plot anyway; I know how things play out emotionally, more or less, but in terms of character actions and dialogue, I'm a lot less sure. So I might could change my outline so that one of the fourth quarter realizations is that canon-typical violence won't solve this problem. So that the happy ending needs the characters to resolve things through cooperation and communication. So that the protagonists' motivations aren't what they want to obtain or to defeat, but what they want to know or to change.
*eyes canon* ...yeah, this is gonna be amusing.
But I think I can do it.
1 Probably also 2008, though I can't say as I was paying as much attention then. Certainly what attention I was paying was from a much less leftist-progressive perspective.
2 Yep, she's white. Or looks it, anyway. I bet she's cis, too. Which, all else aside, puts her pretty solidly in a demographic that just...isn't in as much danger from the fascist takeover of the US as, say, Janet Mock is. As![[twitter.com profile]](https://p.dreamwidth.org/e0caa790ec10/-/twitter.com/favicon.ico)
ItsDanSheehan observed,
3 Flores says catharsis through fiction tends to replace real-world action. I have insufficient data with which to either agree or disagree.
4 This is not their only effect. Like, to abbreviate my side of the current go-round on whether AO3 deserves to exist in its present form, CN rape: (skip) I have no business telling someone who's writing a story about a woman killing her rapist that she's Doing It Wrong. (I don't even have any business telling someone who's writing erotica in which the central sexual relationship is blatantly rapey that she's Doing It Wrong.) The someone may well be writing it to process her own emotions around being a survivor, and I will not say there is any problem with that, and I will not say she is obligated to disclose her survivor status in order for her writing that story to be Allowed. Also, for her to be able to safely process shit via writing that story kinda-sorta requires there to be people who aren't survivors who are writing similar stories, so that the fact of this survivor writing this story doesn't constitute her telling all and sundry she's a survivor. Which means I can't exactly argue that non-survivors writing such stories need to not! Because net positive effects of the existence of such stories, regardless of their authorship, do exist!
That said, among the things the "she kills her rapist" story doesn't do are (1) end rape (2) enact restorative justice in which either the survivor character's rapist or the survivor author's rapist admits his wrongdoing and works to make it right, or at least make it up to society even as society works to make it up to her. And among the things that story does do is suggest that interpersonal problems exist to which a violent response is reasonable, if not actively desirable. I refer you to the final sentence of footnote 2.
I just finished day one, and I can already tell this is going to have intriguing consequences on my NaNo project. Because Flores is right: a feminist story doesn't reenact kyriarchal models.
I don't say that to shit on, for instance, stories where Cinderella is a trans girl and the story otherwise plays out as in Perrault, or stories where the action hero is a kickass lesbian. Gods know we need more of those stories too! And I'm not arguing there's anything objectionable enough to bar everyone from doing the thing about writing stories that do partially reenact kyriarchal models. Or indeed that fully reenact etc—though if you're reading me, then I have trouble imagining that you long for more stories written mostly by and mostly about cisallohet abled white American Christian men.
It's just that, you know the thing where second-wave feminism has been all about getting women into the workplace, bonus points for into the executive positions, and being a stay-at-home mom is anti-feminist? Which, there are valid points in there, of course—but that approach overlooks a few things, like "who takes care of a woman's kids if she's working outside her home" (see also: race, class) and "isn't this movement supposed to be all about women making their own choices" (and 'stay-at-home mom' is a valid choice; the problem isn't choosing that, the problem is feeling that's the only or the best choice available) and—
And the AU of RL in which the world's richest person is Jessica Bezos and nothing else has changed is not notably less oppressive than RL canon. In fact, that was a major critique of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign all along.1
And, well, think about it. If it's okay for a girl to aspire to the masculine-coded positions of doctor or CEO—or the historically exclusively male position of US President—but not so much for a boy to aspire to the feminine-coded positions of nurse or elementary teacher or stay-at-home parent, then the masculine > feminine dichotomy is still in play.
That right there? That is one of the big things second-wave feminism got wrong. Like. Feminism. You had one job!
And I can't say it's not okay for a girl to aspire to be a doctor, a CEO, or a US President and to reject being a stay-at-home mom. Nor will I say it's not okay to write kickass lesbian action heroes, or to write trans Cinderellas whose stories are otherwise exactly as in Perrault. I am so seriously not expecting anyone
I simply observe that Madam President, Mrs. and Mrs. Action Hero and Lady Love, and trans-Cinderella-following-Perrault are all reenacting kyriarchal models. Cinderella relies on class distinctions, and desires to challenge them only with respect to herself—and that mostly because Ella is a lot poorer and harder-worked in the middle of the story than at its beginning. Madam President is colonialist and capitalist. And the lesbian action hero solves her problems with violence.
That's one of the key points Flores is making. Out here in the real world, she says (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the gist), we—especially as women—can't solve our problems with violence.2 Which means stories in which the hero does solve her problems with violence might be good emotional catharsis3, but they're not very good role models for lasting change. And stories that contain problems for which violence is the solution, Flores observes, have the effect of desensitizing readers to RL violence.4 Which is to say, if we're looking for world peace, we should maybe not be writing stories that glorify war.
...So my NaNovel? Miraculous Ladybug fanfiction. I hesitate to say ML is a magical girl anime, but I can't picture ML existing substantially in its present form if Sailor Moon hadn't, either. Cartoon violence is pretty much part of the package.
But, you know, let's think about this. My outline's kind of light on the fourth quarter action plot anyway; I know how things play out emotionally, more or less, but in terms of character actions and dialogue, I'm a lot less sure. So I might could change my outline so that one of the fourth quarter realizations is that canon-typical violence won't solve this problem. So that the happy ending needs the characters to resolve things through cooperation and communication. So that the protagonists' motivations aren't what they want to obtain or to defeat, but what they want to know or to change.
*eyes canon* ...yeah, this is gonna be amusing.
But I think I can do it.
1 Probably also 2008, though I can't say as I was paying as much attention then. Certainly what attention I was paying was from a much less leftist-progressive perspective.
2 Yep, she's white. Or looks it, anyway. I bet she's cis, too. Which, all else aside, puts her pretty solidly in a demographic that just...isn't in as much danger from the fascist takeover of the US as, say, Janet Mock is. As
Me three years ago: violence doesn’t work, we need to appeal to our enemies’ humanityThat said: for the vast majority of problems less vicious than Nazi US, Flores is pretty much right. Certainly on the individual level, any given typical woman is going to have a difficult time solving with violence any problem she has with any given typical man. And I can hardly argue with the notion that more stories with cooperative, communicative solutions, as opposed to competitive, violent solutions, need to exist!
Me now: if you break a Nazi’s arm he has 50% less arms to do Nazi stuff with
3 Flores says catharsis through fiction tends to replace real-world action. I have insufficient data with which to either agree or disagree.
4 This is not their only effect. Like, to abbreviate my side of the current go-round on whether AO3 deserves to exist in its present form, CN rape: (skip) I have no business telling someone who's writing a story about a woman killing her rapist that she's Doing It Wrong. (I don't even have any business telling someone who's writing erotica in which the central sexual relationship is blatantly rapey that she's Doing It Wrong.) The someone may well be writing it to process her own emotions around being a survivor, and I will not say there is any problem with that, and I will not say she is obligated to disclose her survivor status in order for her writing that story to be Allowed. Also, for her to be able to safely process shit via writing that story kinda-sorta requires there to be people who aren't survivors who are writing similar stories, so that the fact of this survivor writing this story doesn't constitute her telling all and sundry she's a survivor. Which means I can't exactly argue that non-survivors writing such stories need to not! Because net positive effects of the existence of such stories, regardless of their authorship, do exist!
That said, among the things the "she kills her rapist" story doesn't do are (1) end rape (2) enact restorative justice in which either the survivor character's rapist or the survivor author's rapist admits his wrongdoing and works to make it right, or at least make it up to society even as society works to make it up to her. And among the things that story does do is suggest that interpersonal problems exist to which a violent response is reasonable, if not actively desirable. I refer you to the final sentence of footnote 2.
no subject