Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#61

Commander Wrote:
precinctomega Wrote:
Quote:Wait, what? A woman who gets into an abusive relationship and the book treats it as a good thing? NO WAAAAAAY!



It's far worse than that, sadly.

Goodness gracious.

I had honestly no idea that it was that bad. I just heard good reviews about the series. In the end, since there are people with experience talking about the lows of the book, it is better to listen to them. 


One of my favorite heroines, although she is the second main character in later books, is Reiko from the Sano Ichiro Novels (Best and coolest love story ever, if you have nothing against romance. Still, the ladies is kickass when she is introduced in book 3, so it is a highly recommended read.). Otherways, a cool female protagonist from the animation department is Rayla from "The Dragon Prince".

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#62

My attitude is just to do what you want to do. If it is good, then it will find an audience. Pandering is never a good idea, and shoehorning in any particular ideology, just for the sake of ticking the correct boxes, transforms a story from entertainment to propaganda. If you want to write propaganda, knock yourself out, but I have zero interest in reading it.

In my story, the MC is mixed race. However, I never mention that once in the story. I hint at circumstances a few times, but it isn't relevant once the character leaves Earth (which is nearly immediately). Another of my characters is pansexual, which makes sense since she is a succubus, but again I don't make it a big deal because it just isn't. In that context, you could say I am using a "diverse cast". However, it really doesn't change the story in any meaningful way because the larger issue is most of these characters are not even human. So whatever human "social justice" baggage that might have been carried into the story gets jettisoned at the door.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#63
Personally, I don’t care about diversity at all in a story. You can have everyone look identical if you want as long as the premise is good and the characters keep me interested.

I hate stories that feel they need to be inclusive with everything. Literally nothing in the universe cares about a person’s race, gender identity, or whatever else but themselves. So to have a story be the focus of it unless it’s BLATANTLY apparent the story is focused on it just throws me off. 

I don’t care if your MC is black, white, asian, an alien, gay, straight, or likes to fuck animals (I’d be a bit weirder out though with the last one). Long as you don’t constantly shove it in my face and make the story good, I’ll be fine.

Then again, I refuse to read 1st person stories because I don’t want to BE the MC. I want to spectate their adventure. Because I’m spectating and not forced to think I’m them every time I see “I” in a fiction, I couldn’t care less about their preferences. 

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#64

Apocryphal Wrote: Personally, I don’t care about diversity at all in a story. You can have everyone look identical if you want as long as the premise is good and the characters keep me interested.

I hate stories that feel they need to be inclusive with everything. Literally nothing in the universe cares about a person’s race, gender identity, or whatever else but themselves. So to have a story be the focus of it unless it’s BLATANTLY apparent the story is focused on it just throws me off. 

I don’t care if your MC is black, white, asian, an alien, gay, straight, or likes to fuck animals (I’d be a bit weirder out though with the last one). Long as you don’t constantly shove it in my face and make the story good, I’ll be fine.

Then again, I refuse to read 1st person stories because I don’t want to BE the MC. I want to spectate their adventure. Because I’m spectating and not forced to think I’m them every time I see “I” in a fiction, I couldn’t care less about their preferences.

I find it weird that people think of first-person this way. Personally, I've never really gotten into a MC of a story that way. I know I'm reading about them and I don't really care which pronoun the author uses to represent their MC.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#65

Commander Wrote:
Apocryphal Wrote: Personally, I don’t care about diversity at all in a story. You can have everyone look identical if you want as long as the premise is good and the characters keep me interested.

I hate stories that feel they need to be inclusive with everything. Literally nothing in the universe cares about a person’s race, gender identity, or whatever else but themselves. So to have a story be the focus of it unless it’s BLATANTLY apparent the story is focused on it just throws me off. 

I don’t care if your MC is black, white, asian, an alien, gay, straight, or likes to fuck animals (I’d be a bit weirder out though with the last one). Long as you don’t constantly shove it in my face and make the story good, I’ll be fine.

Then again, I refuse to read 1st person stories because I don’t want to BE the MC. I want to spectate their adventure. Because I’m spectating and not forced to think I’m them every time I see “I” in a fiction, I couldn’t care less about their preferences.

I find it weird that people think of first-person this way. Personally, I've never really gotten into a MC of a story that way. I know I'm reading about them and I don't really care which pronoun the author uses to represent their MC.

It’s hard to explain, but I didn’t used to think like this either. I recently realized, though, that when I read 1st person I kinda zone out as I read and wound up autopiloting. It kills the immersion more often than not because every time I see something like “I do X and Y” I go “what? No. I wouldn’t do that.” Or something and just wound up dropping it.


If I’m reading a 3rd person story I don’t have that problem, because I can’t control what other people do. If the MC makes a stupid decision, I get to watch them suffer like a god. 

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#66

Commander Wrote: I find it weird that people think of first-person this way. Personally, I've never really gotten into a MC of a story that way. I know I'm reading about them and I don't really care which pronoun the author uses to represent their MC.

Yeah, I never really understood this particular 'reader quirk' either. I always wondered if the same issue would appear for them when they are listening to an audiobook. 
I mean, first-person is the most used in oral storytelling. 3rd-limited is something very written-story-specific, I think? peoconfused

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#68

Apocryphal Wrote: It’s hard to explain, but I didn’t used to think like this either. I recently realized, though, that when I read 1st person I kinda zone out as I read and wound up autopiloting. It kills the immersion more often than not because every time I see something like “I do X and Y” I go “what? No. I wouldn’t do that.”

So... It's like you're slipping into a more or less automatic self-insert, when reading first-person? Interesting. 
For me, it's always as if someone is telling me their story directly instead.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#69

carebear90 Wrote:
Apocryphal Wrote: It’s hard to explain, but I didn’t used to think like this either. I recently realized, though, that when I read 1st person I kinda zone out as I read and wound up autopiloting. It kills the immersion more often than not because every time I see something like “I do X and Y” I go “what? No. I wouldn’t do that.”

So... It's like you're slipping into a more or less automatic self-insert, when reading first-person? Interesting. 
For me, it's always as if someone is telling me their story directly instead.

Yeah, basically. The usage of “I” is so ingrained with me thinking I’m talking about something that I do that it drags me into self-inserting, which directly contradicts why I enjoy reading fantasy (to spectate adventures) and it creates a dilemma.


So I just avoid it entirely. Makes it so much easier to not care about the MCs preferences and stuff.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#70

Half Wrote: This is getting pretty far off topic, but I have never understood how a 3rd-person style would logically have access to the thoughts of the characters. I think of 3rd-person as a camera (like film), so the internal thoughts of the characters should be off limits. When I see a 3rd-person that dives into the thoughts of the characters I see that as cheating and/or poor writing.

3rd person isn’t a camera view, though. It’s akin to omniscience. You can peek into the minds of a character because from your viewpoint you’re basically a god outside of that world that can see everything.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#71

carebear90 Wrote:
Commander Wrote: I find it weird that people think of first-person this way. Personally, I've never really gotten into a MC of a story that way. I know I'm reading about them and I don't really care which pronoun the author uses to represent their MC.

Yeah, I never really understood this particular 'reader quirk' either. I always wondered if the same issue would appear for them when they are listening to an audiobook. 
I mean, first-person is the most used in oral storytelling. 3rd-limited is something very written-story-specific, I think? peoconfused

Who the heck writes in 3rd person limited? I do 3rd person omniscient.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#72

Apocryphal Wrote:
carebear90 Wrote:
Apocryphal Wrote: It’s hard to explain, but I didn’t used to think like this either. I recently realized, though, that when I read 1st person I kinda zone out as I read and wound up autopiloting. It kills the immersion more often than not because every time I see something like “I do X and Y” I go “what? No. I wouldn’t do that.”

So... It's like you're slipping into a more or less automatic self-insert, when reading first-person? Interesting. 
For me, it's always as if someone is telling me their story directly instead.

Yeah, basically. The usage of “I” is so ingrained with me thinking I’m talking about something that I do that it drags me into self-inserting, which directly contradicts why I enjoy reading fantasy (to spectate adventures) and it creates a dilemma.


So I just avoid it entirely. Makes it so much easier to not care about the MCs preferences and stuff.

I think my kind of personality makes this a non-issue for me. I don't really understand why you feel this way - I use I a lot in my head, too, and it's never bothered me - but it's interesting to at least learn why people don't like first-person.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#73
Apocryphal Wrote:
Half Wrote: This is getting pretty far off topic, but I have never understood how a 3rd-person style would logically have access to the thoughts of the characters. I think of 3rd-person as a camera (like film), so the internal thoughts of the characters should be off limits. When I see a 3rd-person that dives into the thoughts of the characters I see that as cheating and/or poor writing.

3rd person isn’t a camera view, though. It’s akin to omniscience. You can peek into the minds of a character because from your viewpoint you’re basically a god outside of that world that can see everything.


If you take that approach then it should be impossible to be surprised by a characters actions. I mean if the reader is supposed to be able to know everything, and then a characters actions are a surprise, that means the author is purposely not playing fair and messing with the readers "godhood". I see that akin to a mystery story that doesn't provide all the clues to the audience, and then pulls out some random nonsensical solution at the end to get a cheap "gotcha".

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#74

Half Wrote:
Apocryphal Wrote:
Half Wrote: This is getting pretty far off topic, but I have never understood how a 3rd-person style would logically have access to the thoughts of the characters. I think of 3rd-person as a camera (like film), so the internal thoughts of the characters should be off limits. When I see a 3rd-person that dives into the thoughts of the characters I see that as cheating and/or poor writing.

3rd person isn’t a camera view, though. It’s akin to omniscience. You can peek into the minds of a character because from your viewpoint you’re basically a god outside of that world that can see everything.


If you take that approach then it should be impossible to be surprised by a characters actions. I mean if the reader is supposed to be able to know everything, and then a characters actions are a surprise, that means the author is purposely not playing fair and messing with the readers "godhood". I see that akin to a mystery story that doesn't provide all the clues to the audience, and then pulls out some random nonsensical solution at the end to get a cheap "gotcha".

I think you’re looking at this with an extremist viewpoint.


Just because 3rd person means you CAN know everything if the writer wants you to, doesn’t mean that you WILL. You could be told the thoughts of one character while never being told the thoughts of another, and when a plot twist comes, there’s no indication where you shouldn’t be surprised by it. It revolves around delivery, not capacity.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#75

Commander Wrote: Heck, man. Why is it that no one can give a decent female lead nowadays?



I actually don't agree with this sentiment at all. I think female lead characters are more diverse--in the sense of character arcs and personality--than ever before in popular media. Looking purely at blockbuster movies, it's easy to cherry pick examples that people hate, but this is generally because the movie itself sucks (or the Nerd-o-sphere hates it at least).

Just in popular film from the past five or six years, we have smash hits like Knives Out or Lady Bird or Alita Battle Angel which all deliver extremely unique, extremely memorable female protagonists. Nobody is complaining about "forced diversity" in Bumblebee because that movie is really damn good. Everyone is complaining about it with Ghostbusters but the root of the issue is that that movie just isn't very good. 

There are exceptions, of course (Star Wars is impossible to have a reasonable discussion about online so I won't even go there), but generally when people complain about "forced diversity" in popular media it's because the media itself is the problem. The "diverse" characters are poorly written stereotypes or else the entire thing just isn't good. I haven't seen the new Men in Black but it's not like having a female main character was the issue, I'm sure--Tessa Thompson is a great actress after all. The issue was bad writing and bad direction, almost certainly. 

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#76
You know what good female/lgbtq+/whatever protagonists have in common? They are primarily written to be great characters, not symbols of x empowerment. They become symbols through being greatly written characters.

You know what bad female/lgbtq+/whatever protagonists have in common? They are written to be symbols of x empowerment and not to be great characters. They are nothing more than pure political propaganda and people are right to despise them.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#77

Thedude3445 Wrote:
Commander Wrote: Heck, man. Why is it that no one can give a decent female lead nowadays?



I actually don't agree with this sentiment at all. I think female lead characters are more diverse--in the sense of character arcs and personality--than ever before in popular media. Looking purely at blockbuster movies, it's easy to cherry pick examples that people hate, but this is generally because the movie itself sucks (or the Nerd-o-sphere hates it at least).

You might be right. Most of the movies I've seen recently come from the big-wig studios (Disney, Marvel, and the like) so I'm not quite certain what other studios have to provide.



Quote:Just in popular film from the past five or six years, we have smash hits like Knives Out or Lady Bird or Alita Battle Angel which all deliver extremely unique, extremely memorable female protagonists. Nobody is complaining about "forced diversity" in Bumblebee because that movie is really damn good. Everyone is complaining about it with Ghostbusters but the root of the issue is that that movie just isn't very good. 

I've not seen any of the good movies you listed but rarely have I heard of any complaints about diversity in Ghostbusters seeing as they just flipped the genders.



Quote:There are exceptions, of course (Star Wars is impossible to have a reasonable discussion about online so I won't even go there), but generally when people complain about "forced diversity" in popular media it's because the media itself is the problem. The "diverse" characters are poorly written stereotypes or else the entire thing just isn't good. I haven't seen the new Men in Black but it's not like having a female main character was the issue, I'm sure--Tessa Thompson is a great actress after all. The issue was bad writing and bad direction, almost certainly. 

I think Star Wars is easy to have a discussion about if you don't bring meaningless points into it (the majority of people, I think, weren't upset with the movies because Rey was a woman, but because she was a Mary Sue who didn't really work for any of the powers she was given). And yeah, Thompson was pretty awesome in the Thor movies. Afaik, the comedy really flopped because she and Henderson brought in different writers to work for them and, well, a lot of other things just didn't work out.

Re: Representation isn't as important as people think

#80

Apocryphal Wrote:
Half Wrote:
Apocryphal Wrote:
Half Wrote: This is getting pretty far off topic, but I have never understood how a 3rd-person style would logically have access to the thoughts of the characters. I think of 3rd-person as a camera (like film), so the internal thoughts of the characters should be off limits. When I see a 3rd-person that dives into the thoughts of the characters I see that as cheating and/or poor writing.

3rd person isn’t a camera view, though. It’s akin to omniscience. You can peek into the minds of a character because from your viewpoint you’re basically a god outside of that world that can see everything.


If you take that approach then it should be impossible to be surprised by a characters actions. I mean if the reader is supposed to be able to know everything, and then a characters actions are a surprise, that means the author is purposely not playing fair and messing with the readers "godhood". I see that akin to a mystery story that doesn't provide all the clues to the audience, and then pulls out some random nonsensical solution at the end to get a cheap "gotcha".

I think you’re looking at this with an extremist viewpoint.


Just because 3rd person means you CAN know everything if the writer wants you to, doesn’t mean that you WILL. You could be told the thoughts of one character while never being told the thoughts of another, and when a plot twist comes, there’s no indication where you shouldn’t be surprised by it. It revolves around delivery, not capacity.

Huh, funny. The use of first person typically makes me feel like someone else is narrating a story for me, like I'm sitting in a pub and the MC tells me what happened to them earlier that day. It's not as easy to get into the shoes of the MC that way because it feels like someone else talking. Third person, but limited to the MC's perspective, is my personal preference. 


In the end, though, just a preference. I'm fairly indifferent to whatever person a story uses, what's important to hook me is that the viewpoint is consistent. Writing "I did" or "he/she did" is just a grammar choice if a viewpoint is solid.