The Chosen Ones

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

The night before last, as I tried to write the next installment in the serialized novels, I ran aground on lack of words.

For background, we were on a trip for a week, came back late on Wednesday, had to figure out medical appointments for tomorrow and have (I HOPE) resolved the insurance fight. (I hate it when the insurance tries to provide medical care instead of my doctor, you know? And it’s now the third or fourth time. Being treated by actuaries is particularly bad for Odds because, as Kate Paulk put it, we have bodies as strange as our minds, more likely than not.)

Anyway, in the midst of this stuff, the story is in my head, but words won’t come. Add a dash of ADD and stir well, and what you get is my falling into the first video or article someone sends me, and ending up rabbit holing.

Well, the video someone sent me was Razor Fist. It’s linked in the last post. And then the side bar suggested the Critical Drinker on various Disney flops and Hollywood characters in general, and then —

I have very little control over the rabbit hole, once it starts, particularly past the time at which the ADD med has any effect. So, all I could do was background think.

I’ve been getting very upset at the invasion of “Witch” stuff into cozy mysteries. Not because I have anything about paranormal mysteries, but because these aren’t mysteries in any sense of the word.

And before someone gets very upset, no I don’t want people to stop writing them — I worry about their effect on people’s minds, yes, but I don’t want people to stop writing what OBVIOUSLY has a market — I just want Amazon search to achieve the functionality of Alta Vista search in the mid nineties, and let me have exclusion words. If I can search the cozy mystery subcategory with -witch it will take care of the problem. Instead, they insist on filling my search with pages and pages of books I’m neither going to buy nor borrow. So my grrrr in the search is at Amazon. (No, it doesn’t do to remove “supernatural” — I’ve loved some ghost cozies, which have a LONG tradition.)

Anyway, my husband reads them, because… well, Dan reads everything, and at the rate he reads he runs out of “favorite” stuff and branches out. And Dan reads me passages and tells me plots as a matter of course. (It’s better than telling me movies.) Also, I’ve read a few when in dire need of words in front of eyes.

I’m a little disturbed by most of them, for the same reason I’ve been more than a little disturbed by my son’s generation preferring fantasy over science fiction.

Oh, it’s not the magic, though that’s part of it. Go too far down the reading about magic path, and you start believing you can change the world with a thought or a word. I mean, you can, sort of, but only your internal world, which causes you to see the world in a different light. You can’t actually turn frogs into princes with thought or word, though, and thinking you can is the path to madness.

What really has disturbed me was an early manifestation of what the Critical Drinker described as “The chosen one” syndrome.

And it’s part of the issue I had too with the Snow White actress’s comments that Snow White would be dreaming of being the leader she knew she could be.

We all have dreams. I dreamed I would be a bestselling writer back when I was 8 in Portugal. And in the half-formed, inchoate dreams of a little girl in a small place, who had no clue what anyone did, or how things were made and sold, it was very much “And then I’ll make them amazed with my talent, and voila!”

This syndrome wasn’t helped by my parents religious-like belief in “Talent” which yes, should be written as a capital T. I have no idea where they got half their ideas and stories, but they were — for instance — convinced that Mozart could play the piano flawlessly the first time he saw one. They thought that writers would send in their first novel, and if they were any good, it would be immediately accepted. Etc. etc. etc. It was in a way a cult of the “genius” the person who could flawlessly do things.

I can’t begin to tell you how many times they held their breath as I tried something out for the first time — from archery to music — then informed me I’d never be any good, because I couldn’t do it flawlessly first time out.

I do wonder if it’s a Portuguese thing, and if these stories are in the culture. It would explain much about the country and the culture, if they believe people are either born to do something without learning, or they’ll never do it.

Anyway, I’m very lucky I was married when I started seriously trying to write and publish, and away from the culture. I can imagine what my parents would have done at my writing book after book and story after story for 13 years before breaking in. I suspect they’d have browbeaten me into giving up.

And this is why the “Witch Mysteries” (Most of them. There are, undoubtedly exceptions) and most of the Hollywood stories of “strong women” scare the heck out of me for their influence in the culture.

So, my problem is that most Witch Mysteries are fantasy but not mysteries, not in any classical sense. You don’t give the reader clues and play fair. Not a bit of it. Instead, you set up a mystery, and then the main protagonist — almost always a woman — uses her magic to solve it.

The good ones are amusing and set up “the price of magic” type of problems, but they’re not mysteries, except insofar as there is a murder. This is sort of like calling Heinlein books a romance, because there is pair-bonding. It doesn’t hit the right mark. It doesn’t play the right music. It’s not a mystery.

Anyway, so, after Dan had read me a bunch of bits of them and I’d read a few, I pegged them as “Grown up, female Harry Potter.” Which makes a certain sense, since I suspect most of the writers are generation Harry Potter.

And Harry Potter is of course the least developed of the group of protagonists of the eponymous novel. This is not a criticism. He is the “chosen one” a perfectly acceptable role in fantasy. And he does have struggles, though maybe not enough for the role.

But here’s the thing: you cross that with the “females already have power within themselves, and just need to accept their awesomeness” ethos of our culture, and you get very bad art. Which in turn poisons the culture further.

But of course, this bad art is very popular. And the reason it’s popular is that we’ve already poisoned the culture.

First, let me point out that my last 20 years or so in traditional publishing I was protected. As much as I don’t wish to go back into the fold, Baen is still the sanest house in the field, and I can’t imagine “She’s jut perfect and flawless and things fall into her lap” would be acceptable as a main character, ever. Much less suggested and enforced.

However I hear stories and for at least 15 years it’s been verboten to create flawed female characters (or other minority or “left protected class”.) If you do, you’ll be called misogynistic and cancelled.

At the same time — I KNOW. I had kids in the school system — the schools are terrified of being the “science teacher” all female boomers complain about, who apparently told each and every one of them girls couldn’t do science. (Which amazes me, because in a much more patriarchal and misogynistic culture — a true one — I was never told that by a teacher. Not a single one. And most science teachers were male. Oh, I was told that by peers, friends, family but NEVER BY A TEACHER. Probably because I could actually do the work. Never mind.) So, girls are given all the prizes and the “Lady’s A” and positioned for accolades (positioning for success doesn’t work) and treated as if they’re already perfect and don’t need to learn. (Until they crash as young adults, because they’ve been smothered by the tyranny of low expectations. Which actually does make them incapable.)

At the same time, a girl who argues with a boy is treated as a victim, as though females were predestined to be hurt by boys their own age. Seriously, they’ll put them in counseling, and try to arrest the boy for “sexual harassment” starting at age three.

The result of this is a generation of women on psych drugs, and running from themselves.

Part of me empathizes with them. Who knows? I might have been quite good at sports, if I’d been allowed to try and fail and try again, instead of being told if I failed the first time out, I “didn’t have it” in me.

In the same way even if they’re given the grades or whatever, these girls are failing where it matters: At understanding that skills are something you build. They keep looking inside themselves and finding young, unformed people who can’t do much of anything. And then imagining that boys somehow have it easier. And of course, little boys already have Svengali like powers to hurt them irreparably by calling them poopy-faces or telling them they’re bossy. Because casual playground insults are super serious and determine your course of life.

So, of course, they like reading these non mysteries, where women with amazing powers can do anything by waving a wand. It’s a way to self-soothe their sense of failure.

But at the same time builds on it.

And before you tell me that Heinlein too had chosen ones — waggles hand — kind of, but not really. His characters go through black moments and breaking points, and never get good at some things. A lot of them are bad at math, for instance. And others have friends who are better at what they most wish to do.

But more importantly, struggling and learning is portrayed, however abbreviated for narrative reasons.

The inability to create realistically flawed characters who have to work for what they want does nothing but inject into the culture the poison of the cult of the flawless genius. Which none of us is, being human.

And no, not blaming the Witch Mysteries for that — that’s just a symptom (and some of them are good, again) — but yes, blaming the horrible movies of the last couple of decades.

Perhaps it’s a good sign they tend to tank. Perhaps instinctively they strike us as wrong.

We need more stories of people who struggle, even if they have a knack or an ability. More stories of people who fail, early and often on the way to future success.

And fewer stories where “easy wins” are a sign of being chosen.

That’s not how the world works. The win that’s too easy is often hollow and can’t be sustained.

Of course you can’t make struggles as realistic as in real life. Stories are abbreviated and more dramatic than reality.

However no one, no sex, no race, no orientation, no culture should be exempted and have all their members portrayed as flawless and perfect.

Humans aren’t perfect. I doubt aliens if they exist will be perfect either.

Man (and yes, woman too, for those lacking in ability to read by inference) was born to strive.

Everything else is a lie and a road to nowhere.

150 thoughts on “The Chosen Ones”

  1. Not enough coffee, but one thought is about what the main character in “Fiddler on the Roof” said (roughly) “Lord, I know that we’re your Chosen People but do you have to chose us for some much?”

    IE: G*d choses to load plenty of trouble on His Chosen People.

    IMO True “Chosen Ones” get chosen for difficult tasks.

    Need more coffee. :wink:

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I remember “I know we are your chosen people, but could you maybe choose somebody else for a while?”

      Who would have expected a movie about ethnic and religious oppression to be funny and uplifting?

      Liked by 3 people

    2. I think that Rowling got one thing right in her Chosen One: In the end, Harry wasn’t really Chosen because of some prophecy, but because of what HE chose to do and how he chose to act. (And of course, the case is strong that Neville Longbottom not only was a “possible” other Chosen One, but he actually WAS one as well–the one Voldy didn’t see coming–again, because of what he chose to do and become.)

      Liked by 1 person

      1. As I remember it, Neville Longbottom actually fulfilled the preconditions of the prophecy the same as Harry Potter. Harry became the chosen one in the end because Voldemort decided that the prophecy pointed to Harry — in effect, choosing the chosen one himself.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. He did, but without Neville killing Nagini, the final Horcrux, the conditions would not have been set up for Voldemort to off himself when he tried that last time to kill Harry (in the Great Hall). And Neville wouldn’t have survived long enough to do that if Harry hadn’t allowed Voldemort to kill him in the forest, and so put protection on everyone else involved in the Battle of Hogwarts. And, of course, Harry wouldn’t have survived the Forest if Voldemort hadn’t so thoroughly pissed off Narcissa Malfoy by threatening her son’s life (directly and indirectly) that she could lie to his face and he didn’t notice. And, of course, that isn’t even touching on Snape, or all the others among Harry’s friends and family who made the choices that got them all through to that last moment.

          I’ve long felt that, although HP has the outward trappings of the usual Chosen One story, it also has a LOT of other stuff with other characters’ arcs that were necessary for the defeat of the big bad :D

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Aha, right. You could say there were effectively two chosen ones; the one the evil villain chose as his nemesis and the one he never thought of, who turned into a nemesis in the end. I found the conclusion, with its interlocking acts of kindness, bravery, and love (some of them from people who it seemed didn’t have much to give) incredibly uplifting. Much more than a “chosen one, so he wins” kind of thing.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Exactly! And the sad thing is, it seems like of lot of these folks who never read any other book series (apparently) and are joining the blue haired shrieking harpy mob and pushing Chosen Sue crap…entirely missed that part. And would throw a fit if it was pointed out to them.

              This is often the same bunch who decided, later on, that Snape was a creepy, irredeemable stalker (because Marxism and its spawn don’t believe in forgiveness and redemption) Look, the guy was a Grade A a**hole, but the point of his character was that even someone who is really horrible in most areas of their life are STILL capable of incredible acts of self-sacrifice, bravery, and love. It might not be for all the right reasons, but it doesn’t negate the act. Or, as Sir PTerry & Gaiman put it in Good Omens, humans are capable of evil demons never dreamed of and acts of goodness that make angels weep…and are often found in the same person.)

              Liked by 2 people

      2. Harry Potter wasn’t really the Chosen One because if he was, who was the Choosing One?

        You can downplay the Chooser IF you downplay the Chosen One aspect.

        If it occurs to you that playing them both up might raise questions about the Chooser’s motives and reasonings, you are wise.

        Like

        1. John Ringo had problems with the Chosen One for that reason. IE Who is the Chooser?

          It’s very clear who Choose his character, Barbara Everette, in his Special Circumstances series (two books, Princess of Wands and Queen Of Wands).

          Barbara is a Conservative Christian who “just happens” to have the skills needed for the job and “just happens” to be the proper place to take down a nasty evil “god”.

          Of course, she’s scared for good reasons and realizes that she has a Choice in the matter.

          She trusts in God and He delivers the “extra power” she needs to do the job.

          And it isn’t easy even with that help and she is almost killed in the aftermath.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Who was the Chooser? Presumably there were two.

          1.) Whatever causes prophecy to happen in the Potter-verse. The list of conditions required for the Chosen One is laid out in the prophecy made by Trelawney (one of exactly two prophecies she’s made over her life, we’re told earlier on).
          2.) Voldemort himself, as Dumbledore observes, since there were two people who met the conditions of the prophecy, and Voldemort decided which one to target.

          The latter, of course, is a classic case of self-appointed nemesis.

          But that does still leave the question – what causes prophecy to (very rarely) happen in the Potter-verse?

          Like

    3. Storytellers these days have forgotten an important lesson from the likes of Frodo, Luke Skywalker as well as Anakin.

      Namely, being the Chosen One…kinda sucks.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Almost forgot Rand al Thor.

          Yeah, not a fan of the later books, and rereading the first of them I notice more of the flaws, but him being the Chosen One wasn’t all sunshine and roses, and half the problems the good guys got themselves into came as a result of misinterpreting the Prophecies of the Dragon.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Chuckle Chuckle

          In Tad Williams’ Memory, Sorrow and Thorn series, the heroes were using a prophecy as their guide.

          Unfortunately, the prophecy was for the Big Bad and by following it, they almost freed the Big Bad.

          Fortunately, they realized it and managed to foil the Big Bad’s plans. :lol:

          Liked by 1 person

                1. Hey Now!

                  I didn’t tell you Character A was the BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ and married Character B who was BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

                  And I especially didn’t tell you Character C who was BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ turns out not to be BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

                  [Very Very Big Crazy Grin]

                  Liked by 1 person

      2. Mike Pondsmith made this point when writing suggestions for GMs in the Mekton rulebook (a TTRPG based around anime mecha, written long before his much better known Cyberpunk RPG). He was specifically basing it around Japanese fiction, where the idea is (at least according to him) that a hero must have opposition that actually challenges the hero, and that being a powerful hero is essentially asking the universe to do its absolute best to run you through the wringer.

        Like

  2. It occurs to me that the Struggle To Succeed is key to all good stories…with the possible exception of mysteries (which present evidence to the reader so he can solve it).

    Romances invariably involve the couple struggling to avoid throttling each other long enough to fall in love…or struggling to maintain hope long enough to meet the right person. Dramas demand that the hero strive, fail, develop, and strive again. Even if you’re the Gray Lensman, the product of a massive breeding program and trained to a razor’s edge, you get shot up, chopped up, and generally beat to a pulp on your path to victory.

    The Miss Perfect Heroine genre lacks this…and because of it, the stories are no good.

    Liked by 1 person

    2. I don’t know about that, watching the detective struggle to succeed while you’re trying to puzzle out things yourself can really enhance a good mystery. Some can get away without it, but it can make a good thing better.

      Liked by 1 person

    3. I don’t know about that, watching the detective struggle to succeed while you’re trying to puzzle out things yourself can really enhance a good mystery. Some can get away without it, but it can make a good thing better.

      Like

  3. I’ll add something about character-building: Good characters are often flawed. Not in a catastrophic way…it may not impact the work the character does. But flawed. It’s the arch-hero who can’t cook…or perhaps one who uses his superlative hand-to-hand fighting skills because he’s a lousy shot (or vice-versa). And maybe his handwriting is a barely legible scrawl.

    Liked by 2 people

    3. Realistic enough Characters are flawed. They have to be realistic enough that you would believe them. But you’ll forgive a little handwavium if the rest of the story is good.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. The Men In Black movie where the girl joins. And she’s perfect and already knows how to do everything better than the pros, and even when she “fails,” it magically, pseudo-comically turns out to have been really the best success ever and makes everyone realize that she’s awesome, and no one seems to mind the fact that she did something that was completely unnecessary, stupidly dangerous, AND almost killed a dozen other agents.

    Perfect Girl Is Perfect. So…fecking…boring.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Why didn’t they keep the woman who worked at the morgue? She would’ve been a great fish out of water like Will Smith’s character was.

      Liked by 1 person

      2. That was the biggest thing I disliked about the second movie, Laurel was one of my favorite characters in the first and I’d have loved to see her adventures learning from a more experienced Agent J rather than retiring back to the normal world offscreen.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Number two son spent several years without competition for his place on his Uni Rugby club, then he moved up to Men’s club where the intensity is an order of magnitude higher and there are people competing for places. The change in him has been remarkable. He’s bigger, faster, stronger, and more skillful. All hard work on his part.

    That’s the problem with all this affirmative action, those in the protected classes don’t need to strive and those who are not malignant narcissists, cough Obama cough, know they got where they are without earning it. even Obama slipped from time to time. He’s not a stupid man and that’s why, partly, he holds everyone in contempt.

    Further, as you say, all the happy girl boss pixie ninja BS sets up completely unreasonable expectations, everyone has told you how easy it is, but it’s not. Thus, you’re a failure before you start.

    Off topic, Payrolls came out today, which means little, but the second revision to June did too, which does. Things are deteriorating quickly. Jobs slipping tends to be the last step before the crisis stage, all set up for October, which is the traditional month for these things.

    Buckle up.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Was just thinking about the Ashoka debacle.

      She had a lot of the basic underpinnings of the magic happy pixy girl boss ninja, but in the Clone Wars, they evaded that because she did struggle, and got overconfident and screwed things up and had to fix them.

      And the arc ended with her clonetrooper army being turned on her, and for everything she was capable of, even knowing what was happening to them, they were her people and she could not save them. All she could do was survive.

      And it works on an emotional level because she really has no path to what she would call victory, only a selection of bad endings, and the need to decide right now which is the least horrible path she will accept.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. And when they reintroduced her in Rebels, they only kept her around for a bit. The team had to grow without her.

        Like

  6. I’ve been reading popular juvenile (age-wise) books, old and new. There’s a difference between, say, Meg Murry in “A Wrinkle in Time” and more recent oddball protagonists. Sure, she recognizes what she has within her – but that’s her love for her brother. Her peers and the nasty post mistress don’t fall over themselves to recognize her as cool or get their comeuppance.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’ve been listening to the audiobooks of the sequels to Wrinkle in Time (I didn’t know there were sequels!) and I was impressed by how Meg’s assumptions about people she doesn’t like, such as Mr. Jenkins and Calvin’s mom, become a lot more nuanced, and how she and Charles Wallace are taught that, yes, they need to make more of an effort to fit in. Surprisingly mature stuff you don’t see these days.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Hum. The chosen ones sent me off into a rabbit hole, things always change but this accelerated rate of change…

    For most of humanity’s history shank’s mare was the way to go. Then came the horse extending our range and speeding things up, but slowly, over generations and generations and generations, speeding things up.

    Rather suddenly my granddad; his span of years went from horse and buggy (I still have a carbide carriage lamp from a trap he owned on my shelf.) to man on the moon. Me, my life span from telephone party lines, radio, prop driven planes, to…

    Times they are a changing, faster and faster.

    For ages shaman’s tales, fairy tales, epic odes were cautionary tales, Billy goats gruff taught generations from Scandinavia, throughout Europe and beyond to look before you leap, watch your step, you never know what might be under the bridge.

    It’s not surprising the new cautionary tales (In my opinion all fictions probably contains a caution.) are all over the map. The if you do this or that you will succeed or fail is fluid as not only do the goal posts keep moving, the field keeps changing dimensions, tilting and turning as well.

    Which is perhaps why witch cozies, inner strength rosies and Karen’s got her eye on you nosies abound and wander all around.

    Me, I’ll stick to the old standbys like Whow Snite and the Deven Swarfs (Still readable on line at; https://www.fanfiction.net/s/7559379/1/Whow-Snite).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Rather suddenly my granddad; his span of years went from horse and buggy (I still have a carbide carriage lamp from a trap he owned on my shelf.) to man on the moon. Me, my life span from telephone party lines, radio, prop driven planes, to…
      ……………..

      My grandmothers and one surviving grandfather too went from horse and buggy to seeing a man walk on the moon. Went from seeing a horse as a household requirement, if you lived on a farm or ranch, to a luxury extravagance.

      I’ve seen party lines, but we didn’t have one here in Eugene. Grandparents and other relatives had party lines in rural Oregon until late ’70s. I know of places that didn’t have any phone lines until mid-’70s. Party line to Cell Phones, and now satellite phones. As satellis and the phones and plans that use them become more common, and less expensive, we are going to see cell phones go poof.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. old standbys like Whow Snite and the Deven Swarfs
      I once read the tale of InderCella, whose last line ran:
      “And so, gadies and lentlemen, the storal of the mory is that if you want to marry the Prandsome Hince, don’t forget to slop your dripper!”

      Spiel chick is very upset with this comment.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I was just thinking, in the movie Rocky, he loses the match in the first movie. Can you imagine how cloyingly awful a girl boss reboot of Rocky would be??

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I was just thinking, in the movie Rocky, he loses the match in the first movie. Can you imagine how cloyingly awful a girl boss reboot of Rocky would be??

    Liked by 1 person

  11. When I am tired and/or stressed I watch reaction videos on YouTube. (I discovered them during the lockdown lunacy.) Some are better than others, and I know many don’t quite understand WHY people watch these (for me: watching someone have the joy of discovering a new thing–like the LOTR movies which, since I read LOTR first when I was 8 I don’t really HAVE that, or not a clear memory of it).

    Anyway–there’s a particular group I like of three burly dudes watching all kinds of things they’d never seen (or that 2 of the 3 had never seen, while 3 keeps his mouth shut). Yesterday they dropped one of Legally Blonde, and I realized, watching their commentary and reading some of the other comments, that it is probably one of the few “female power” films to come out in the last 20-30 years that is neither stuffed to the gills with misandry, nor does it have a perfect protagonist. I’ve always loved it for its comedy and overall warm and kindly outlook.

    But I also realized, listening to the comments the reactors made, that the film is also a gentle send-up of typical angry-feminist and Mary Sue/Chosen One tropes. I don’t know if it was entirely intentional, or if it was just good writing that happened to hit those right in the teeth, but…the protagonist seems, in the opening scenes, to be a classic Mary Sue: she’s gorgeous, everyone worships and adores her, she’s from a wealthy family, she has a handsome, wealthy boyfriend, and seemingly it is all just “because.” But then…the first indication that she is in fact NOT a Mary Sue is a scene where she calls out a store clerk who, assuming that she is a dumb blonde just spending daddy’s money, tries to scam her. And she does so calmly and politely, but very pointedly, and once she makes her point, she lets it go (rather than getting the clerk fired or throwing a fit)

    Throughout the film, it hits plot points that continue to demonstrate that she works hard for her academic and professional achievements and that the reason everyone loves her is because she is genuinely kind to everyone, even people who are unkind to her (though she isn’t spineless either–good is not always nice.), and she is kind without any expectations that they owe her the same. People trust her because she is honest AND honorable, and will not sell her integrity (or her person) for any price or social win, even if it costs her what she most desires. At every turn in the film, the writers made it very clear that the protagonist is what she is and where she is because she earned it, and that she is a genuinely good person because she does and thinks good things, not because the writers said so. Even better, men are not portrayed as dumb nasty brutes or evil oppressors–they just are what they are. Some are amazing people, some are jerks. It’s one of the few “feminist” films–the only one I can really think of, that I’ve seen, anyway–where it is actually shooting for men and women being on equal terms and working together and supporting each other.

    I think that’s why the movie was a hit when it came out in 2001 (or 02?), and why it’s still beloved now–because it WAS a standout Odd in the girl power genre, and because both men and women appreciated the refreshing change. No hate, no beating over the head with THE MESSAGE(tm) (and yes, that should be read in the Critical Drinker’s voice). It put fun and good storytelling first, and worked in the message in an appealing way–and it wasn’t the endless “Men bad, women good” but “Work hard, be kind, and be true to yourself no matter what, because it is always worth it.”

    Liked by 1 person

    1. When I rewatched Legally Blonde a few years ago, I saw the opening scene with the clerk and it was so clear.. she was not stupid. She had an in-depth knowledge of make up and fashion and textiles (at least) and a shallow knowledge of other areas because she had never been interested to learn/never had a reason to learn those things. She wasn’t stupid nor was her knowledge in born, as was shown when she enters a new area, law school and has to work to acquire all the new knowledge. She didn’t just wake up as a clever lawyer the first day she showed up at class. She’s sitting there studying nights to learn it all. And even her ex- boyfriend’s girlfriend winds up her friend because she is that genuinely nice to everyone.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. I have to comment on science teachers because while most of my teachers were forgettable some weren’t. And (although my Latin teacher was boss) the three BEST teachers at my high school were MISS Kay – algebra, MISS Burke – biology, and Mr. Froehner – chemistry. A substantial plurality of the girls in high school had crushes on him because he was just a great person as well as a great teacher. And I’m as old as our hostess so we lived through the dark and patriarchal years. It’s a wonder we survived, am I right? :)

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Mr. Froehner was blonde. (grin) He was also cute in a geek way, skinny, smart, had glasses and a killer sense of humor.

        Like

    2. Little older than you and Sarah. Most my STEM classes were male teachers. Don’t remember a single one singling out the girls and saying “girls can’t”. Not one.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I think that was vecause they where real science teachers … they would have logically realized that there was no “science” that showed girls can’t do science … there are some statistics that show the girls “don’t ” do science as much as boys (statistics isn’t science btw) … but they would have no reason too believe girls can’t do science… the example of Madam Curie is too glaring to ignore …

        Like

          1. There’s no reason to stop a woman from majoring in physics even if you don’t think she’s obsessed enough to be a scientist. You might urge her to take some communications courses and be open to the possibility of being a science writer, but if does well enough in the physics courses, that physics degree will open doors just because it says “smart.” There’s no meaningful limit to the number of physics degrees we can award. Even if worst comes to worst she hurts no one but herself by choosing the “wrong” major. Ditto most other degrees.

            The exception is doctors: we can graduate as many M.D.s as we like, but there are only so many residencies to go around. While we can and should add more teaching hospitals and more residencies, that’s a slow process being stalled by entrenched interests, and so for all practical purposes the supply of doctors is limited. It DOES hurt society to award a residency to someone who will never practice medicine, or even to someone who won’t work overtime after her residency.

            Like

            1. Er…. who the hell is stopping a woman from majoring in physics?
              The problem I have is that they’re pushing girls into physics who aren’t weird enough not to play games. (And all of stem.)
              Tbf most men aren’t suited to physics or stem, either. It’s just no one is PUSHING them and telling them they HAVE to do it or they’re gender traitors.

              Like

      2. SIL was born around 1962 and got the “girls don’t (not “can’t”) do STEM from her HS advisor. She attributed this to him being LDS in a largely rural county. OTOH, SIL became an EE. She got some grief from an instructor at college, who tried the same crap. Said instructor met her later at a social function and couldn’t understand why she never took any of his course sections. #SMH.

        On the gripping hand, $NIECE became an ME without reported pushback, barring the gripes from fellow students who didn’t understand why she was so well prepared. (BIL is also an engineer. Go figure.)

        Like

          1. And the Reader notes that they are no happier than the boys who were pushed into engineering when he was in college. The Reader saw plenty of both in his career. Based on observation over a 40+ year career, the set of ‘odd’ characteristics that make up good engineers who like their work exist in only a small fraction of the population, and that small fraction is about 80% male. Good engineers welcome good engineers regardless of shape, color or sex parts.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Somewhat noteworthy, both SIL and $NIECE are former engineers. SIL and BIL worked for a smallish electronics company in Not-California, and she was more-or-less happy (though they did a rotation scheme and she got stuck with a couple of jerks/fuckoffs that made that project rather un-fun) until $HUGE_CONGOMERATE bought the company, proceeded to jerk everybody around, and both SIL and BIL left. BIL kept at a startup a couple of years before retiring early.

              $NIECE got her masters and was working for a building materials supply company, and was considered a rising star. OTOH, that meant she got a) on-call duty 24-7 until she raised hell, and b) had to travel to various plants in Europe, where a small female was considered “fair game”. She found a more challenging/rewarding job: motherhood. They moved to the Midwest for reasons*, and reports are that all are doing well.

              (*) Hubby was getting screwed by the management at his previous plant (“You worked 19 hours yesterday? You still need to show up at the normal time, serf!**”) but found a better situation at the same company’s Flatlandia plant.

              (**) Supposedly legal for exempt employees where he was working. Waggles hand. Not my circus.

              Like

  13. It’s hard to know which points to address here.

    I remember in 2nd grade having a teacher hand out a math assignment. She came to my desk last, put the paper down, and said “I know you can’t do it, but do your best.”

    It had nothing to do with gender, and I didn’t think it had anything to do with gender at the time.

    If I was a rabid feminazi I’d probably assert it as gender. In that case I would also have willfully forgotten when she did the same thing to a boy (also over math–I think she was projecting).

    On the other hand, I remember my father teaching my brother about something science related, and when I asked a question he told me to go away because science isn’t for girls. He did the same thing for sports, for karate, for math, for a lot of things.

    As an adult I know and recognize the problem. He was born in the early 40’s, and he was raised by his grandparents. Mom as well, raised, not by her grandparents, but by people of that generation. Mom was a feminist, but she was a 1920’s feminist, not a 1960’s feminist. And Dad was a third generation Italian, raised by HIS grandparents. Which essentially means I was raised in a 1940’s household. I “came of age” as a 1960’s child in the 90’s.

    You’ve talked before about people’s attitudes and understanding of the world being locked in to their childhood. I think it goes beyond that, with people being locked into the stories they were told as children.

    The boomers were the last generation raised primarily by their parents, rather than the public school system and daycare. From there on, a large percentage have been raised by teachers and peers in the free-for-all of the public school system, essentially without adult role models. They weren’t told the stories of their parents and grandparents.

    They grew up without generational stories, without grounding, so it makes sense that they make up their own stories. Without history, they make up their own history, their own math, and some try to tear down those things because it’s not part of the story they’re telling themselves.

    In this vacuum, the only stories they have access to (other than those they tell themselves) are those they’re fed by the media, and the media tells boys they’re pitiable and incompetent abusers and girls that they’re pitiable and incompetent victims. It also tells them that they can’t change it, it’s built in. Is it any wonder that they live out these roles?

    At the same time, is it any wonder that they make up stories where they’re powerful, competent, and honored?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I still haven’t grown up, I am a fourteen year old in this old guy’s body. Still waiting for some one to tell me how this happened. snark

      Like

        1. I shall join you in this.
          My son — in his thirties — and I have long realized if he and I spend any time together we BOTH become thirteen year old boys. My poor husband played the adult to our juvenile dialogue for a week. That man is a saint.

          Liked by 1 person

      1. Yet I have a problem with the concept that those born in ’30s or ’40s raising girls saying “girls can’t”. Because, while I heard the concept, dad’s comeback was “No One Tells My Daughters What They Can’t Do.” Even his youngest brother. Who learned from big brother because “No One Tells His Daughters What They Can’t Do.”. Not one of us has a traditional college degree. Only one of us had a traditional career field (teaching) and that was not in a subject that at least my sisters and I (cousins are both our oldest children ages. Uncle is barely older than I am.) had any male teachers in from middle school through high school.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. And yet, that was exactly what my parents did. Dad more obviously, but to Mom it was about sewing, doing dishes, laundry, etc. The girls were expected to “get it” but she’d help the boys and often ended up taking those tasks from them because they “do it wrong.”

          It’s an interesting contrast. Probably by the 40’s most of that was gone or not being spoken, but again my parents were both raised essentially in the 1920’s. NOT literally, but because of who raised them and how they were raised. My siblings have chosen not to pass that stuff on to their own children, just as I suspect those raised in the 40’s and beyond made that same choice for themselves.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I get it. My point was to note that it doesn’t happen that way all the time. The way to bet? Probably. OTOH I have no brothers. Just us 3 girls. We not only learned to sew, knit, garden (which based on my current black thumb, didn’t take), and clean house, we also learned to handle guns, hunt, and fish. Some would say “you didn’t have any brothers”, true. But then mom’s side nieces and nephews, all taught the same (two girls and one boy for her sister, three boys for her brother). Dad’s nieces and nephews, not so much the guns, hunting, and fishing, for a lot of reasons, but they all were helping in the appropriate family businesses (construction or farming) as soon as they were big enough to fetch and carry, or handle the equipment. (Female cousin didn’t start driving the combine until she was 14, while her 2 years younger brother started at age 10. Fully grown shes 5’2″, he was taller than that at age 10, just not coordinated before then. She couldn’t reach the go petal until she was 14.)

            Like

  14. The problem is not “chosen one” stories. Such stories, when done even halfway well, make it clear that being a Chosen One sucks. (Yes, even Harry Potter. He’s special, but half the people he knows hate him, people make all kinds of assumptions about him that are never true, and most of the adults he knows, including the ones he trusts, lie to him because of who he is. And he still has to work at things, apart from Quidditch.) (Also, Rowling makes clear late in the series that Harry is not necessarily the chosen one. Neville Longbottom could just as easily be The One.)

    Or take Vin in Brandon Sanderson’s Mistborn series. She’s a chosen one, after a sort, but it causes her no end of grief because she knows literally nothing at the opening so, despite her power, everybody around her knows a lot more about her powers than she does. And she got her powers (you find out in the third book) in a way no one would ever choose, and which has made her a pawn of sorts for the entire series without ever knowing it.

    The problem is more Mary Sue-ism, where the author-insert never has to work at anything, and is always right all of the time.

    Take Captain Marvel, whose only problem, ever, is that people don’t understand just how amazing she is. That’s it. That’s the only conflict in the film. She’s amazing, and she’s just waiting for the rest of the universe to catch up.

    Or Scarlet Witch in WandaVision. (Which started out strong, but clearly did not have a plan and got bogged down in endless “scrapbooking” elements that never tied together into anything coherent.) At the end of the series (SPOILERS) it turns out that she has trapped a town of two thousand some people, robbed them of their agency, and essentially tortured them for weeks on end. And is she the villain? OF COURSE NOT! She’s told by another character (Monica Rambeau, who was Captain Marvel in the 1980s comics, and was a much more interesting character there) that “They’ll never know what you sacrificed for them!” She didn’t sacrifice anything, of course, but heck, it sounded like a line for the end of an epic series, so they put it in.

    In fact, I won’t even say the problem is Mary Sue-ism, I’ll go further: writers and producers in Hollywood no longer know what a hero is. (And in comic books, too.)

    They think “a hero” is “insert myself into the story, then bend everything in it to the way I want things.” Yes, they are the moral equivalents of Norman Boutin, and do not understand why nobody likes what they do. It’s just proof of how oppressed they are, in their minds.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. WandaVision, even with the tangled mess of the plot, would have been SO much better if they’d gone down the “Yep, she’s the actual villain here. Sure, she’s sad and sympathetic, but that don’t excuse it.”

      The whole “What you sacrificed for them!” utterly killed it for me. Sorry, b*tch but no–letting the thousands of people you trapped and tortured and treated as your personal puppets and letting your imaginary spouse and equally imaginary children fade away is NOT a sacrifice, it’s undoing something you never should have damn well done in the first place!!

      Agatha was the freaking GOOD GUY, trying to take her down.

      Liked by 2 people

          1. No, the vintage TV stuff was what held together the best. It was after the “reveal” that things got all scrap-booky. And there was a good idea there, they just couldn’t commit to it.

            Like

      2. It is based on at least three cruddy comic book arcs, one of which had Wanda go insane. (Long story, and you will want to hand me logs I can split while I tell it – no, better yet, read this for a semi-recap of those arcs: https://open.substack.com/pub/carolinesnewsletter/p/mad-about-madness?r=q3lc4&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web) I NEVER WANTED THAT ONSCREEN!!!! But it made waves (and money) in the comics, so they slapped it together in the TV show and ARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!

        WandaVision was a disaster waiting to happen. I’m glad I didn’t watch it. I don’t WANT to watch it, ever. If you can’t hand me logs to split, hand me DVD cases of it. That will work. :goes off grumbling:

        Like

    2. Amusingly, I literally just finished watching a video explaining why John Walker is – accidentally, of course – a strawman that’s so badly bungled by the writers that he’s the most sympathetic character of the entire series (Falcon and the Winter Soldier). The writers appear to have intended for him to be an unsympathetic strawman jerk. But – at least according to the guy making the video, since I haven’t seen the series myself – he’s instead by far the most understandable and approachable guy in the series, who’s also clearly in the right almost the entire time (and when he’s not, it’s a clear “heat of the moment” thing that would trip up a lot of people).

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’ve only watched the series once, but I’m a huge fan of the comic series arc that introduced John Walker (and broke him).

        The entire point of the character in the comics was that Steve Rogers was Cap because of his character, whereas Walker was a well-intentioned super-patriot without Steve’s moral center. (Walker first appears, in fact, as a fake super hero named Super-Patriot. Yeah, subtle, but the series was still good.) The scene that breaks him (as Captain America), he’s in a deadly situation and his parents are hostages. He does his best but… they die. And he goes to their corpses and talks to them like he succeeded and saved their lives. Really, really well done for Code-approved comics in the late 1980s.

        Going into F&WS, Walker was the thing I was worried most about. The actor does a great job, and the writers didn’t fuck up the character as badly as I feared, but he still comes off as a smear job on strong handsome men who want to do good, which is not a crazy reading of the original character, but not a great one either.

        Then again, F&WS had massive identity issues, wanting to make the villains the good guys, wanting to make the good guys all villains, and turning Falcon into a lame scold. “We were going for moral complexity!” No, you just couldn’t make up your minds what you wanted to do. Except turn Falcon-Cap into a hectoring scold.

        Like

        1. I read the issue that introduced Super-Patriot (and the BUCKIES). Though as I recall, even then he was openly gunning for Cap’s job. It didn’t help his characterization that he was basically created to be “someone who we can have be Captain America for a bit, but that no one will mind when Steve Rogers eventually takes the job back”. I don’t think I read any of the subsequent issues of that plot arc that included him.

          Someone in the comments of the video noted that when Walker is well-written in the comics, he’s a lot like Guy Gardner -abrasive, but still a reliable good guy. And token straw conservative, of course. Because conservatives are jerks.

          Unfortunately, Marvel can’t do well-written these days.

          I haven’t seen F&WS myself. But it seems that there are basically two opinions of the show for those who have seen it. Either a viewer hates Walker because he’s not Steve Rogers, or a viewer appreciates that Walker is probably the best character in the series – both for character depth, and because he’s the one acting most like a good guy.

          Liked by 1 person

  15. You keep reminding me of things I wrote! https://carolinefurlong.wordpress.com/2023/08/14/writerly-sound-bites-number-15-threading-the-eye-of-the-needle-with-great-power/

    On the broader point, I agree – if there is no struggle, there is no skill. If you simply “have the power” that can cause problems, too; having it all means you need to learn how to apply it WITHOUT BREAKING THINGS. So if a “chosen one” character magically has the power, as Luke Skywalker and his father both did, they need lessons on how to Not Throw It Around And Wreck Things. Those lessons didn’t stick for Anakin, but Timothy Zahn made darn sure they did for Luke in his Star Wars books.

    If a writer cannot or does not want to show his heroine leveling up to great power, that’s fine. How about showing her leveling it down to the point she can make a glass sing across the room without touching it, when by rights she could just blow the whole room up, herself not included? THAT would be more interesting than “she’s simply Perfect as she is,” but they don’t even bother to do that anymore.

    Sometimes, I wonder if it is a mere obsession with power. But your point that they have been told they have great power and only need to look within to find it, and are still doing it when that power doesn’t manifest, makes more sense. :sighs: Sick culture needs healers, and more medicine, and there just is not enough of either to go around….

    Like

    1. The other thing is that Norton and Mayhar were basically doing a sort of hero’s journey of internal spiritual change, with intuition or magic items instead of a mentor to guide them along. And they were good enough writers to make riding a plot railroad something fun.

      So there were generally some kind of trials of courage and tests of virtue, or development of virtue, even if the plot was rather dreamlike and conveniently difficult to mess up.

      Liked by 2 people

  18. In fact, the cultural rot is deeper than that. Nobody knows what words mean, at least in the younger generations:

    Dworman: “What’s been debunked?”

    Bump: “These, these claims. I’ve written about this, this argument about his dad calling him. I’ve written about this. Did you read what I wrote?”

    Dworman: “It’s not debunked. Neither of us were there.”

    Bump: “Well, I debunked it in the standpoint that I’ve already addressed this and presented the counterarguments to it.”

    If Bump knew what “debunked” meant, and understood how facts and evidence work, he wouldn’t be so hysterical at being questioned and asked to back up his “debunking”. In his view, “debunked” means he argued against Bad Thing, now nobody gets to believe Bad Thing, and he can’t even say “because reasons”. He wrote an article, so you shut up.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Another example, the Hunter Biden laptop, according to All The Best Sources, had “all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.”

      And not one reporter, not one, ever asked any of these sods to name three such hallmarks, so everyone could see them for themselves. Nope, just “all the hallmarks” and you shut up and don’t think for yourself. Didn’t you hear them? ALL the hallmarks! (Like what?) ALL of them!!!!!!

      Liked by 2 people

        1. But even if you wanted to believe it, wouldn’t you, you know, want to have something specific to point to? A single fact? “THIS is why we know it is disinformation!”

          Instead, it was appeals to authority all the way down.

          Liked by 2 people

            1. Being a journalist, doesn’t mean investigating, a Journalist just keeps a journal of happenings. In this case most knew it was a lie from the beginning. They just believed it was more important to beat Orangeman, than it was to tell the truth to the American people. Which is why if it comes to Civil War you should shoot the modern media, first, last, and often. I still would love to give all the sites that lied the NCAA death penalty, no broadcasting news for two years. Local stations can do local news, but no national news. And yes I would throw Faux News in with that bunch as well, The only person I would hang at Faux News is Paul Ryan and I would leave his carcass hanging in a cage from Rockefeller Center until there was nothing left.

              Like

      2. Frankly, I’m at the point where I don’t believe it’s ignorance, or not knowing what the words mean anymore. I think the vast majority of those slimeballs know EXACTLY what they are about, and just don’t care. Them getting power is the all important goal.

        Liked by 2 people

  19. I have a lot of mystery stories wrapped up in my life. I don’t need any more witches (x-in-laws were quite enough), fail (“mistakes were made” in Dale Gribble voice), or challenges (cancer 2x, 40+ months of unemployment between real jobs after age 50).

    Got space opera? Gimmedat. I really enjoyed both Heinleins book Rocketship Galileo and the much tamer movie version, Destination Moon. That’s why the Darkship and Dusty Rhodes stories are perfection for me.

    And while I loved Bob’s Saucer Repair for the light-heartedness, robots, and so on, I felt betrayed when the story continued past volume 10 (and it now sits at 37!). Jerry Boyd is a very good author; but he and I have split company over that. YMMV.

    God bless you all this weekend.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Now that I think about it, this may be one of the reasons I find the April series so addictive. She isn’t “chosen”. There is a non-trivial amount of authorial right place/right time, but she and her co-protagonists work for what they want.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Oh, one more thing. While Critical Drinker is very good on analysis (being a novelist himself), I find Literature Devil’s infrequent, but intensely in-depth analyses to be more rewarding.

    For instance:

    and:

    Liked by 2 people

  22. I’ve never enjoyed “chosen one” stories, aside from Harry Potter. I suspect it comes from growing up on Greek mythology and King Arthur, where being selected out by the gods means your life is going to be horrible.

    I think what I loved about the opening of Norton’s Witchworld was the idea of something that would take you to where you were meant to be, a place where you could fit in and be something if you worked hard enough. Not without pain, not without risks and having to learn a lot, but somewhere that you might “be all you can be” to quote the old recruiting slogan.

    The perfect-from-the-start character sets my teeth on edge. I see too many of the results at Day Job, and I have it easy compared to grade-school and middle-school teachers.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. I’ve tried very hard to repeatedly express to my kids that what makes you good at something is practice and repetition, not some magical Talent From the Sky. (Mind you, I’m not really sure what drove my eldest to challenge his way into calculus this year, his high school sophomore year, but it was his decision and he is good at math.)

    I find it especially important to do that with things I’m good at. “You’re so much better than I am.” “Well, I have literally decades more of practice, so…”

    I am also of the opinion that you can get good at anything with sufficient practice. Mind you, for certain things, that amount of practice is going to be greater than your lifespan. It’s important to know that no, you’re not going to be a stellar basketball player if the needed practice time would stretch past your period of youthful health and flexibility…

    Liked by 2 people

    1. My grandson mostly refuses to try things, since he cannot be perfect immediately.

      Bright 10-year-old, low tolerance for frustration.

      Like

  24. Public service announcement, totally O/T, but since we didn’t have a promo post this week – just got a notice in my inbox that Edward Thomas (our own Phoenix) has released his book. Look for “The Crossroads and the Oni” on Amazon.

    That is all. Continue with your evening.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I sent it to you for the Book Promo post. I can re-send if need be.

        I released another one today, too. Used that cover you didn’t like, but I changed it around to look less like a service manual. ~:D

        Like

          1. I eagerly anticipate the next promo. ~:D

            It is a testament to your fan base that one promo from According to Hoyt makes a bigger sale boost than all the paid promotion of Amazon.

            I tried the paid-promotion thing with my first book, $200 spent and zero sales. One promo on ATH, a hundred sales. If you fold -all- the royalties into paid-promotion, it amounts to nothing.

            I was also told this by a very successful Amazon author, so it isn’t just me. The books have stopped moving the way they did in 2020/21. This author had one of the most-downloaded free books on Amazon in 2020, Ritu Sethi “His Hand In the Storm.” 6800+ reviews.

            The two follow-on books in the series, which are better by any measure, the second has 91 reviews and the third ~1300. Something changed. Otherwise those two would be up there in the 6000 review range.

            Current theory is that if an author continually pays into the paid promotion, the algo will push it up the rankings and it will get mentioned more frequently. If they stop paying, it will fall. Obviously even a popular book by a skilled author is getting shoved down into the rankings basement by the algo. Previously top-100 book is ~#174,000, how does that happen? Shenanigans.

            Therefore, I do believe that your advice to release a couple or three short stories in the series to kick the algo is sound. We shall see how the numbers turn out, but right now I’ve got a couple sales where I had nothing. My First novel is 100% dead in the water, the second isn’t ready yet, but a couple of stories I ripped out in a week or so are getting a tiny bit of traction.

            This is better than me paying them money for exposure. -They- are supposed to be paying -me- for content.

            Like

              1. Hard to say on the paid-promo thing. For you, with a large base already installed on Amazon as it were, some promo money might get you a pop. Or not, hard to say. A bigger pop than what you spent? That’s the important question. (It does smack of those publishers who do you the honor of publishing your book for a small fee, on very reasonable terms.) Might be worth pending a hundred bucks just to find out.

                For me, working alllll the way down here in the basement drain at #207,000, it is pointless.

                I did bite the bullet and put all my books on my blog. I’ve been shy of doing that , but I’m old and not going to live forever. No time like the present, as they say.

                Liked by 1 person

        1. No worries. I’m on a roll here, publishing stuff all over the place. I’ll just re-send and include the newest one as well.

          This is a long haul marathon, not a sprint race. ~:D I’m not so old I can’t wait.

          Like

  25. You don’t want to be the “Chosen One” in any of my writing. The term “Do not fold, spindle or mutilate”, doesn’t apply to the protagonist, and the struggle is the story. Any “gifts” come with greater consequences and misunderstandings.

    But I was going to make a south of the border tale about the “Chosen Juan”.

    Like

      1. That would be a fantastic Raconteur Press anthology! “Tales of the Chosen Juan” Ooooh Lawdog …

        Grins evil kitty grin, rubs paws with glee

        Liked by 1 person

          2. Concerning “Tales of the Chosen Juan”, it might be interesting to have stories with “lines” similar to the one below.

            “Why Chose Me?”

            “Well, you were about the one hundred & first on our list.”

            “What happened to the ones higher on the list?”

            “Some said No Way and the others died attempting the job”.

            :twisted:

            Like

        2. If he was from Frozen Chosin, as my Da who fought there called it, you could join up with Culture Club In The Church the Frozen Mind.

          Sorry, I spent the day with my lefty sister and the anti-logic just got to me,

          Liked by 1 person

  26. I agree with most of this, especially the Mary Sue/Marty Stu thing(1) . The one thing I will add is that it isn’t enough to give your characters struggles – you have to make them interesting. I cordially dislike most of the Dagobah scenes in Empire Strikes Back, for instance, and that Harry Potter novel where Harry keeps stressing out in ALL CAPS. And one of the main problems with Mansfield Park for most people (besides Jane rubbing future generations’ noses in the fact that her values aren’t their values) is that the heroine’s struggles just aren’t that interesting to read about. And let’s not talk about the boring, badly scored scene in Ahsoka which spins “With the blastshield down I can’t even see, how am I supposed to fight?” out to four or five times its original length.

    (1)yes, even now, in a world of grrlbosses, you occasionally find the male protagonist who has everything handed to him on a silver platter, usually indie-published.

    Like

    1. “Mary Sue” is an accusation gets tossed around a lot. People forget that what made Mary Sue irritating was her perfection. She was always in the right place at the right time to Save The Ship with her awesome awesomeness. After the first five times, its boring. After 25 times, you’re rooting for the Klingons. “Bring me the head of Mary Sue!!!”

      The protagonist gets handed the keys to the kingdom all the time in anime. Its an isekai staple. OP protagonist, chosen of The Gods, goes forth and kicks ass. We don’t care that he’s been given all this for free. We care what he’s going to do with it. Is he going to rise to the occasion, or wuss out? Is he going to be smart, or will he wade in and get stomped?

      I like those over powered characters. It shows strong moral backbone when you go do your Chosen One job fighting the Demon Lord instead of staying home and becoming Evil King with your ridiculous un-earned power.

      Liked by 1 person

  28. “And it’s part of the issue I had too with the Snow White actress’s comments that Snow White would be dreaming of being the leader she knew she could be.”

    Live-Action Snow White is nothing more or less than the destruction of Western culture by Leftists. That’s all it is. The same as the Barbie movie. BNest treated the same way as horse apples in the street. Ignored and eventually washed away into the gutter.

    As for the Chosen One bullroar, it doesn’t even make for a good story. Accidental Hero is a far better concept. Random Dude chosen by Random Chance to Save The Kingdom, or the Princess, or what have you. Why does he do it? Because he’s got the normal decency you find in normal people, that’s why.

    I just released today a short story called Alice Haddison’s Busy Day. Her day is busy because she’s like the Reverse Chosen One. Anything evil or messed up in 100 miles will come to her. She gets by on preparation, paranoia and redundancy.

    One of the biggest problems with The Chosen One as pushed by Hollywood is that They Stand Alone! They triumph due to Sheer Awesomeness and whatever magic they get that the rest of us don’t.

    Alice seems like a lone wolf, and acts like one, but we discover that she is in fact supported by a large number of people. I don’t see much of that from Hollywood lately. Nobody stands alone, not really. If nothing else, somebody has to make all those guns.

    Like

      1. Many thanks. Be sure to Tell Us How You Really Feel in the comments. ~:D

        Alice is a main character in Angels Inc, forthcoming pretty soon because my captive artist made me the most amazing cover. Seriously, it is nice.

        Like

    3. Live Action Snow White wants to be the Evil Queen when she grows up.

      If I had more time and energy (and fewer other projects) I might do a send-up on that.

      “Mirror Mirror on the wall: Who’s the wickedest of them all?”
      “A wicked witchy queen thou art. But Snow White’s far wickeder in her heart. She’s a commie.”

      Liked by 3 people

  29. In Hollywood they call the character the magical “insert one of a long list of protected classes of people” (Indians, African Americans, noble savages, women etc. Etc.) …
    It works in movies because they don’t have the screen time to show you how they acquired their “special” abilities … but in a book there is no excuse to ignore the back story … and if there is no backstory then it’s just magic BS …

    Like

  30. When you read the book of Judges in the Bible, you see that God specializes in flawed Chosen. I give you Samson. Strength and stupidity. He is not the only flawed “Judge”.

    The most interesting part of the flawed Chosen is when their strength is their weakness. To get to the end of the journey, you must be stubborn, yet stubbornness is your great weakness. Certainty as both strength and weakness. That is what makes Trump so interesting, his strength is his weakness.

    Like

  31. Lloyd Alexander, in his Chronicles of Prydain, and Lois McMaster Bujold, in her Chalion books, both gave good examples of heroes. Taran, in Alexander’s books, didn’t start out as anything special, and had to struggle. He made a lot of mistakes, but learned from them, and eventually earned his happy ending. And Cazaril is said, in The Curse of Chalion to have been one of many who could have done what he ended up doing, but he was the one who didn’t get sidetracked and did it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Excellent examples.

      I was shocked as an adult when I realized that Taran is almost completely without description other than rough age. Every other character has quick descriptions of hair style / eye colors, general size, etc. Which makes him a great reader stand in character. I then realized that I always viewed Taran as looking like me when I read it as a child.

      Like

      1. I do that–the only description of any character is that necessary for the story. My writers group hated it. But my writers group were the kind that would stick in a two page description just of clothes. I hated that…

        Liked by 1 person

  32. I don’t believe that characters have to have flaws. They just have to be limited, which is not quite the same thing.

    Back in the day, I got a bellyful of “Characters MUST have flaaaws! Or else they will be total Mary Sues who completely ruin the story!” writing advice.

    And then there was Peter Jackson’s LOTR movie where the movie versions of the characters were deliberately made flawed and extra-flawed because “People these days don’t like stories with ‘perfect’ characters” – ignoring the fact that the LOTR book’s popularity was in large part because it had those ‘perfect’ characters who lacked the modern pile-of-flaws design.

    What triggers my “Mary Sue! Bad!” reflex aren’t characters who can do many things well, and/or can do certain things better than anyone else. What I find grating are characters who are better than each of the experts in their areas of expertise: Stronger than the Strong Guy, smarter than the Smart Guy, a better pilot than the Pilot Guy, a better shot than the Marksman Guy, etc. etc. ad nausium.

    The character who, through pure Grrl Power, can do everything perfectly is a subset.

    Like

  33. “And fewer stories where “easy wins” are a sign of being chosen.”

    I wonder how many heads would explode if you informed them “Congrats, you just re-discovered Calvin’s Elect. / Predestination”

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.