On Problematic Tropes

[rowyn]

I have a couple of conflicting principles that I don't know how to reconcile:

* Fiction at its best illuminates reality. This includes all genres, even the obviously fantastic and implausible. Fiction has the ability to make us understand one another better, to let us see through another's eyes. This is amazing and powerful and should be used wisely.
* Daydreams and fantasies are harmless fun. Fantasizing about things that are unrealistic, as long as you know that they're unrealistic and have no interest in making them reality, is fine.

There's no conflict between the two when one's fantasy is something socially-acceptable if impossible, like "having a telepathic bond with a friendly dragon".  Things where, if you could make them real, it wouldn't be particularly detrimental for the world at large.

But lots of fantasies are not socially-acceptable, nor a desirable/plausible reality. Twilight, for example, gets a lot of flak for its romance between a century-old vampire stalker and his 17 year-old love interest*. There's a novel I won't name about a romance between a Nazi concentration camp commander and a  Jewish prisoner that ends with him rescuing the internees and her converting to Christianity. Master/slave romances are commonplace.

I've named all romance tropes here because those are the ones I hear discussed. Maybe in horror circles they discuss whether their monsters are too monstrous or the events depicted too awful, and I just don't hear it. I hear occasional decrying of the Chosen One trope of fantasy, or more rarely, on the idealization of feudal societies and tyranny.

In general, I am talking about tropes that entertain but appear to do the opposite of illuminate: dehumanise, debase, disinform. Tropes that turn things that are devastating and awful in reality into light entertainment, or portray those things as acceptable and even enjoyable in the context of the story.

I believe in free speech, so obviously I think people should be allowed to read and write what they please regardless of whether or not I think it has merit. That part is easy.

But when I run into a trope that deeply offends me, I feel this conflict over whether or not condemnation is appropriate. How dangerous are fantasies? Does it make a difference if you draw on real history or use a fantasy world for the setting? (Eg, would the Nazi/Jew romance be less offensive if the same tropes were used in fictional countries with fictional religions?) How much does tone matter? I can't help thinking that tone has an impact, that some things are written as escapism and the author and readers are aware that it's Not Realistic, and that's different from a book written seriously. From one where the author's style suggests "this book is illuminating, resonant, true" and I am all D:

But I don't know. Maybe what I want is a bright line between someone's goofy dubcon fanfic and a mainstream novel glorifying rape, and maybe there can't be one. Maybe judging works case-by-case, and recognizing that what I think is offensive and repugnant may be someone else's harmless fantasy (and vice-versa) is inevitable.

I remain curious about how other people feel on the topic: Of the principles I opened with, do you find one one or the other unconvincing? If both are relevant, how do you handle the conflict?

* On this subject: I half-joked last month that 'I'm not saying it's not possible to write a good romance between a first-person young woman narrator and an ancient superpowerful male jerk. Wait, maybe I am'. But I remembered later that there's a book I liked which used this trope! N.K. Jemisin's The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms. So yeah, apparently I judge based on execution as well, even when I feel strongly about the trope.

Comments

[archangelbeth]

*ponders*

When I was, oh, around 15-16, I wrote... well, basically self-insert originalfic, with the teen and the fellow with a few extra zeros on the age. Though I never really wrote the part where they resolve the differences, plus there was a modified quasi-mysticbond thing going on, on one side of it, and... well, stuff. *waves hands* Had to explain some of the interest-at-not-quite-first-sight suddenness.

So I pretty much can't hate that trope. That trope does something for me. I think (at least in my case?) it's trying to make sense of the conflicting urges of many (most?) teens: being the special snowflake Interesting Person who can win the untouched (or at least untouched for the last few decades) heart; having someone who can provide some form of security when venturing into the whole "adulthood" thing, without a parental relationship; being mature enough to be the Special Snowflake Someone and have a Real Relationship, where the immortal/whatever has to also accept you as adult... The egoboo! The confidence of someone having your back who knows what the heck he's doing!

In my case, I apparently managed to consciously solidify my desires on the matter enough that when the Universe presented me with pretty much exactly what I'd written (no, seriously, I can expand on this and it's spooky), I glommed on with all my 17-almost-18-year-old might. (That was over 20 years ago. NOT SORRY.) ...should I mention that I met him when he was literally twice my age? Apparently what I wanted wasn't to be found in "callow youths." O:/

So... you're probably right in that there are no bright lines and probably can't be no bright lines.

That said, just because there's a gray, fuzzy line doesn't mean there can't be lines. The whole Nazi/Jew thing, for instance, may indeed be a fantasy, and a harmless fantasy for some, but it's wandered into the realm of Real Person Fic in many ways -- and I would thus hold it to higher standards of "will this hurt real people?" than, say, something with truly ancient dynamics, or fantasyland/SF ones. E.g., there's probably less of a problem if the lizardfolk of Zzoris are waging a genocidal war against the dragonfolk in their midst, and a dragonfolk female cuts off her hidden wings after getting into a dubious power-dynamic relationship with a high-ranking lizard military male. File off the history real hard, and consider giving the lizard some redeeming features, mind! A thinly-disguised allegory doesn't actually shift the situation.

But, well, if well-done, dubious power-dyanamic relationships are right there in my list of "oh, let's re-read that AGAIN! or at least the steamy bits." (There's one of Sharon Shinn's books that is pretty much 100% that. FAVORITE BOOK. >_> )

Or, well, as you say. It's complicated.

[rowyn]

It sounds like the male protagonist from your juvenilia was not a jerk? Because I've noticed a recurring theme where the male protagonist isn't just "ancient" and "powerful" but also a cretin. To be honest, "he's a jerk" is the part that bugs me the most.

But I was never one of the people who felt that "if you think Twilight is romantic you must be destined to get into an abusive relationship". I don't think that romance readers get nearly enough credit for being able to discern fantasy from reality. (For that matter, neither do porn consumers or people playing violent video games). It's a trope I don't like, and I think it's problematic for a bunch of reasons, all of which I am sure you already know.

I like lizwithhat's take on it above, that using a problematic trope in a way that explores why it's problematic is a good approach. I think self-awareness helps defuse it of the power it might otherwise exert over one's subconscious, if that makes sense.

[archangelbeth]

Well, the conceit was that he was the Evil Sorcerer (TM!) in a book where the (ostensible) hero and love interest were running around with, essentially, The Author's Blessing to make sure everything Came Out Okay. And the Self Insert Character (cough cough, I WAS FIFTEEN OKAY) falls through into the book. (Which was not a real book.) And is mostly going "oh crap, I know the plot and it's time to leave now"... And there is a Tragic Past for Mr. Ancient to explain some of his more jerky behavior (plus, by that time, a certain amount of "well, the fall-out for understandable but ill-considered behavior means you wind up continuing to do antisocial things like trapping all the other mages in your world in mirrors because otherwise they kind of try to kill you and that gets tiresome really fast")...

So... hm. Antagonist, but not jerk, in that sense. Definitely a dose of what would be creepy stalker behavior if it weren't for the whole set up of "if I trusted you more, I would not be running away because I have hormones, y'know." >_> (UST! It's what's for breakfast, lunch, dinner, midnight snack, and chocolate bonbons.)

...I actually have the thing lying around online somewhere, I think. Un-linked. With a marker in the middle where I was going to futz around more with it.


One of the things that made me much more ambivalent about Twilight was when someone explained what she saw in it -- and that she saw Bella having an amazing lot of agency. That, essentially, Bella eventually got what she wanted. (Now, arguably, what she wanted was perhaps not very nuanced. Hottie guy, kid, immortality and superpowers...) But that overall, there was a kind of empowerment thing going there.

I still think the trappings are problematic as heck, for reasons I suspect we share, but I think I can see the fantasy.

Also agreeing that being aware of the problematic is important. (It also may allow one to pick tropes that one wants more of in fiction, since it would be a terrible idea in real life. >_> )