Help me out here, internets
Oct. 21st, 2012 12:44 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kaberettSo I have finally got around to reading the Song of the Lioness quartet by Tamora Pierce - and, um, I am kind of horrified?
Like, I kept seeing it recced places because the protagonist is a woman who fights damn well, and who wants sex and who has it and who isn't shamed for it, and as far as it goes that's true, BUT.
... pretty much the entirety of the first book is a trans* narrative, and it barely touches at all on the dysphoria that induces (there are many things wrong with Self-Made Man but it does give some insight).
... the relationships between Alanna and George and Jonathan are REALLY SKEEVY AND COERCIVE AND PRESSURE-Y.
... I am part-way through the third book, and I am not off the top of my head recalling any convincing Bechdel passes. Maybe there have been some in the third book. Maybe.
...
... and that is before we get onto the racism. I mean, wow, these books are racist. Holy (literally) Magical Negro [TVtropes], my word. There is an entire race (yep!) who live as tribes (yep!) in the desert (yep!) and have no written history until whitey asks for it whereupon they deliver (yep!) and are described in character voice with the phrase "Your people seem to be wise and old" (!!!) and by the narrative as ~proud~ and as being ~walnut-brown~ and they have clearly Arabic-coded names (UNLIKE WHITEY WHO HAS ~FANTASY NAME~) and are explicitly identified as being distinctly in awe of at least one god who is explicitly described as having SPARKLING WHITE SKIN. In the book I am currently part-way through, colonial whitey prince is about to become the Voice of the Tribes - a kind of spiritual leader - having had approximately no contact with them... apart from when he & whitey protagonist ~fulfilled a prophecy~ in book 1 and delivered the Bazhir from an ~evil curse upon their lands~.
...
So now you know, and I hope never again to see an uncritical review of those books, because WOW I was not expecting any of that going in. Like, I'd be kind of fascinated to know what explanation people have for the uncritical recs apart from "BUT IT'S NOT RACIIIIIIIIIIST", but I sort of suspect there isn't one.
Like, I kept seeing it recced places because the protagonist is a woman who fights damn well, and who wants sex and who has it and who isn't shamed for it, and as far as it goes that's true, BUT.
... pretty much the entirety of the first book is a trans* narrative, and it barely touches at all on the dysphoria that induces (there are many things wrong with Self-Made Man but it does give some insight).
... the relationships between Alanna and George and Jonathan are REALLY SKEEVY AND COERCIVE AND PRESSURE-Y.
... I am part-way through the third book, and I am not off the top of my head recalling any convincing Bechdel passes. Maybe there have been some in the third book. Maybe.
...
... and that is before we get onto the racism. I mean, wow, these books are racist. Holy (literally) Magical Negro [TVtropes], my word. There is an entire race (yep!) who live as tribes (yep!) in the desert (yep!) and have no written history until whitey asks for it whereupon they deliver (yep!) and are described in character voice with the phrase "Your people seem to be wise and old" (!!!) and by the narrative as ~proud~ and as being ~walnut-brown~ and they have clearly Arabic-coded names (UNLIKE WHITEY WHO HAS ~FANTASY NAME~) and are explicitly identified as being distinctly in awe of at least one god who is explicitly described as having SPARKLING WHITE SKIN. In the book I am currently part-way through, colonial whitey prince is about to become the Voice of the Tribes - a kind of spiritual leader - having had approximately no contact with them... apart from when he & whitey protagonist ~fulfilled a prophecy~ in book 1 and delivered the Bazhir from an ~evil curse upon their lands~.
...
So now you know, and I hope never again to see an uncritical review of those books, because WOW I was not expecting any of that going in. Like, I'd be kind of fascinated to know what explanation people have for the uncritical recs apart from "BUT IT'S NOT RACIIIIIIIIIIST", but I sort of suspect there isn't one.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 12:39 am (UTC)I think it was initially written in the 80s and there wasn't as large a social justice scene back then to say "hey, this kind of trope is not ok". The Bazhir are rather two-dimensional in the SOLT quartet and get fleshed out a little bit more in the successive books as Jonathan's kingdom/empire expands. That part always bothered me, but when her book was classified as YA by the publisher it got split into 4 and there was a length limit imposed, so some things got a bit squished in the process. I'm not sure if she would have expanded upon them otherwise, like she starts to some in 3/4, but to a large degree authorial intent doesn't matter nearly as much as the finished product. I don't have any doubt that she intended it that way, but... yeah, I can definitely see that being there nonetheless. (I read it as a kid so that kind of thing wasn't on my radar back then for sure, and that is likely to be the case with many people recommending it as well.)
I don't necessarily see it as a trans narrative, because Alanna isn't a boy, and doesn't want to be a boy, she just wants to be something everyone is insisting only a boy can be. She deals with the uncomfortableness of the breast bindings and hiding her sex from the other pages/squires, but also learns how to be comfortable as a woman from George's mother, from dealing with periods to dresses and such. She's always been a tomboy, doing what she's doing as a knight in training, and actually has a harder time accepting how to be a comfortable in her skin as a beautiful woman than acting like what people expect out of a man. I think that this is also a more prominent theme in books 3 & 4. However, that's my viewpoint and I very well may be wrong. I do believe that it was intended as a narrative about gender equality rather than gender identity, but again, intent isn't always what matters.
Jonathan is an entitled prat; I never really liked him and Alanna. (Though his eventual wife does end up putting him in his place, but I think that's either book 4 or a later quartet.) The way that I read things between him and Alanna is that he was an example of what's not ok in a relationship, and how it's easy to fall for someone that really isn't good for you-- and an example of when to say "no, I will not change who I am to become who you want me to be". I think that might come to surface in book 4, though; I can't remember when she leaves him and goes to George.
All that said, her later books are better in terms of social justice aspects, I believe. Alanna's series is just often pointed out because it was a strong feministic character at a time where there weren't many to be had. There's actually a blogger that is doing a blow by blow review as he reads through them, and Tammy has been wincing at some of the appropriate critiques he's been raising... critiques that she's agreeing with. I do believe that many things would be different if she had a chance to go back and do a rewrite of the series.
I'm trying not to come across as defensive, as it's a series that I love by an author that I love, but you're right that it has issues and it falls under the category of "liking problematic things".
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 12:44 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 12:50 am (UTC)What I won't forgive - as I said to Josh, above - is the entirely uncritical reviews published in Bitch magazine in 2010, and every other person I've seen in the realms of social justice in the last 3-4 years recommend Songs of the Lioness without a "btw it's really racist and stalkery" every time people have asked for fantasy that actually features female characters.
Re trans* narrative - I agree that she isn't a boy, and doesn't want to be a boy - but as per Self-Made Man, people put in that situation do tend to experience pretty severe dysphoria, and that doesn't seem to be dealt with at all. And, again, book written however many decades ago - and honestly that's a pretty mild grump and if it were all that was wrong with the book I would sulk slightly but not think too much of it. However, given that this post is basically a catalogue of "WOW THIS IS FUCKED UP", I didn't feel like leaving it out ;)
Thanks for your detailed comment - I know it can be really hard to engage thoughtfully rather than defensively with critical readings of things we love, and I think you've done a fantastic job of it.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 12:58 am (UTC)(also, insert possibly inappropriate squee at you being friends with an author that I have always looked up to as a young writer, problematic material or not! That's awesome!)
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 01:02 am (UTC)