(no subject)
So, I am doing a periodic reread of The Sharing Knife, by Bujold, and found myself mulling on how Dag has grown on me as a character. I feel as though I like him better every time I read the book. I also like how, despite the imbalance in age and experience, both parties bring something real and vibrant to the match. Fawn isn't just an accessory to Dag, she's really clever, with a mind that can look at the world and ask the right questions to find new answers.
However, much as I think they have some real balance, I am bothered by the narrative as a whole. One of the more problematic aspects is the obvious gender imbalance, and the way that the two characters represent their separate cultures. Dag is the male lead, and the Lakewalker, part of a society that goes off and fights the evil in a constant grueling fight that requires literal sacrifice of life. Fawn is the female lead, and the Farmer, part of the society that grows the grows and tills the land and tends the animals. Dag's people live longer, and at 50ish, he is still healthy and looking forward to many more years. He has the wisdom of Fawn's father and the strength of her brothers. Fawn's people close their eyes to an evil they literally cannot face, and make up childish stories about the boogeymen in the closets, and tell evil stories of the Lakewalkers.
Now, I don't have a real issue with that imbalance in an isolated incident, but I have to wonder: why do the gender roles ALWAYS work this way? Lakewalker women patrol; farmer men are ignorant: why couldn't this story be told that way around? Is it so impossible to create a compelling romance in which the imbalance in position and seeming power is reversed?
I know, this isn't a new insight, but the degree to which it's woven through this series is really upsetting me on a visceral level. It's not that the fictional society is unbalanced towards women, or that this particular story has these particular characters in their designated roles. It's the fact that when building a society with an older, wiser race which has protected and a sheltered, ignorant race that has resented, the images of those have been male and female in almost every narrative. I don't know if it says something bad about writers or about readers, but either way, it is frustrating and really poisoning my reading of this book.
However, much as I think they have some real balance, I am bothered by the narrative as a whole. One of the more problematic aspects is the obvious gender imbalance, and the way that the two characters represent their separate cultures. Dag is the male lead, and the Lakewalker, part of a society that goes off and fights the evil in a constant grueling fight that requires literal sacrifice of life. Fawn is the female lead, and the Farmer, part of the society that grows the grows and tills the land and tends the animals. Dag's people live longer, and at 50ish, he is still healthy and looking forward to many more years. He has the wisdom of Fawn's father and the strength of her brothers. Fawn's people close their eyes to an evil they literally cannot face, and make up childish stories about the boogeymen in the closets, and tell evil stories of the Lakewalkers.
Now, I don't have a real issue with that imbalance in an isolated incident, but I have to wonder: why do the gender roles ALWAYS work this way? Lakewalker women patrol; farmer men are ignorant: why couldn't this story be told that way around? Is it so impossible to create a compelling romance in which the imbalance in position and seeming power is reversed?
I know, this isn't a new insight, but the degree to which it's woven through this series is really upsetting me on a visceral level. It's not that the fictional society is unbalanced towards women, or that this particular story has these particular characters in their designated roles. It's the fact that when building a society with an older, wiser race which has protected and a sheltered, ignorant race that has resented, the images of those have been male and female in almost every narrative. I don't know if it says something bad about writers or about readers, but either way, it is frustrating and really poisoning my reading of this book.