i think with dark, complicated female characters who don't emote there's this tendency to want to "fix" them-- to make them get in touch with the feeeeeeelings and get psycholanalyzed and therapy through their shit until they're OKAY (whatever the hell that means.) and frankly, it bothers me. i've also seen it manifest itself as a temptation to break down the character emotionally until they put themselves back together in a way that's more socially acceptable (read 'normal with normal emotions') and that's equally problematic.

I went round and round all day about jumping in here or just having longer rambly think-y thoughts on my journal (answer: both), but this is touching on some things I'm really struggling with in some of the stories I'm writing (which I will grant you are closer to Disney than Cronenburg, but aren't entirely either) - where is the line between "fixing" and a character "healing" as a part of their growth and development? Because I'm a whole-hearted believer in characters coming to places and situations that help to heal them (Tony becoming and embracing Iron Man, for instance) as well as the situations that crop up that can break parts of a character down (Clint being possessed by Loki falls into this category, I'd imagine.)

And I'd think that the position that Natasha ends up in with SHIELD and her partnership with Clint, and eventually with the rest of the Avengers, that has to be a stronger place, a stronger foundation than what she had with the Red Room and would be a situation from which healing arises, which would change her. But I'm not sure I see what the differences are? I don't want to give her flat, pat answers or solutions, but I also want her to have a chance to grow and develop, if that makes any sense?

Or, you know, I could just be having one of those attacks of "oh god, what the hell am I actually doing" sorts of doubt-y moments that sneak up on you when you're not expecting them.

Well, first off, i think emotional growrth is going to be a component of every story. You have to have conflict, overcome it, learn something at the end of the day--that's pretty much the blueprint for every story ever told. So it's not really about whether you have an emotional journey or not, it's simply how it's handled.

What gets me uneasy is when very spefically drawn characters (read: dark, complex women) are given conflict to help achieve a more normative response-- and the two best and most egregious examples i can think of are forced sexual trauma (rape, triggers, "oh, my awful past!", etc.) or "oops i got pregnant!" in order to force this woman to deal with her demons and normalize and confront emotions and get in touch with her inner earth goddess nurturer or whatever so by the end of the story OMG! Look at how fully actualized she is! All it took was some normative shit to be able to confront her inner womanness! Look how much better behaved she is now! Look how well she plays with others! She can give hugs! She can kiss her man with confidence! She can hold that baby with pride!


Okay, now i've gone off on a snarky tangent, allow me to stop being a jackass for a minute and actually unpack this. None of this-- NONE OF IT--is bad in and of itself. Not at all. A story can take me any place it damn well pleases---if it's told well. And for me, well = with nuance and subtlety. I need the conflict to feel organic and not contrived and the same thing goes with the emotional response of the protagonist. I want it to feel earned. What i dont' want is fixing for the sake of fixing or worse... some kind of normative fixing that doesn't feel appropriate to this character we're talking about.

For natasha, she no doubt has issues. She no doubt has demons she needs to fight. No doubt at all. So it's not a matter of if they come up but how they are handled. I guess what i'm trying to say is that she needs to be able to heal herself on her terms. It may not look normal or even healthy but it really doesn't matter if it works for her. And it doesn't mean that she has to be less complex or even less dark.

Okay now i'm just a rambling jackass. Is any of this making sense?


---also, this who exchange was me just shooting off my mouth in the most general way possible. It certainly wasn't meant to cause doubt for anyone, least of all you my dear. :)

(now i just need that "let me love you" gif...)

Edited 2012-08-09 12:08 am (UTC)

Okay, now i've gone off on a snarky tangent, allow me to stop being a jackass for a minute and actually unpack this. None of this-- NONE OF IT--is bad in and of itself. Not at all. A story can take me any place it damn well pleases---if it's told well. And for me, well = with nuance and subtlety. I need the conflict to feel organic and not contrived and the same thing goes with the emotional response of the protagonist. I want it to feel earned. What i dont' want is fixing for the sake of fixing or worse... some kind of normative fixing that doesn't feel appropriate to this character we're talking about.

For natasha, she no doubt has issues. She no doubt has demons she needs to fight. No doubt at all. So it's not a matter of if they come up but how they are handled. I guess what i'm trying to say is that she needs to be able to heal herself on her terms. It may not look normal or even healthy but it really doesn't matter if it works for her. And it doesn't mean that she has to be less complex or even less dark.

Okay now i'm just a rambling jackass. Is any of this making sense?


You're not a jackass, hon. :) And I see (or at least I'm pretty sure I see) where you're going with that. For me, whether or not a story is in character (or at the very least, whether or not the OOCness has a believable path to get there - show me *why* they're different now!) is of paramount importance.

In a way, it's some of the same kind of thing that happened with Kara Thrace - the baby thing in particular, because I'll admit right now to being a complete sucker for well done (read: in character) babyfic in numerous fandoms... but it's that "in character" part and dealing with how they are or are not dealing with it, in a manner that's true for them, and that's what appeals to me about it (which may or may not make any kind of sense, idek.) It was figuring out how she would react to this - and it often did the opposite of fixing her, god knows... I'm not sure where I was going with that. But yeah. And I might have a seriously angsty C/N fic almost done that deals with pregnancy but most certainly *doesn't* involve "fixing"... quite possibly the opposite, yikes


---also, this who exchange was me just shooting off my mouth in the most general way possible. It certainly wasn't meant to cause doubt for anyone, least of all you my dear. :)

I think most of my concern (which I was already having because I've gotten to "that point" in things where you look at what you've written so far and just go "what is this even?") is wanting to do her justice, and not make things pat or easy for her, and she's so hard to pin down sometimes (in part because I'm playing pretty close to movie canon and there's just not so much of it.) So I was at the point of going to the flist and being all "please tell me this isn't crap!" in any case. This just brought up a particular point I needed some clarity on. :D

(now i just need that "let me love you" gif...)

Ask and ye shall receive. :D

late response is late...

I think at the end of the day, you just have to write the characters in a way that feels authentic to you. And what that looks like and sounds like is going to be different from everyone, which is why there never is (nor should there be) one definite fanon take on how to write anything. And likewise, readers will tend to gravitate to portrayals that ring true to them. We all bring something different to the table, and we're all looking for different things, the things that resonate the most to us as readers and as writers.

A very good friend of mine in k/l fandom (who is also my bestest and most trusted beta in the world) and I always said that we were satisfied with a story when we got to the point where we could justify every decision we made. We knew it was done (and good) if we could defend every single word and its reason for being there. Now, we take our words pretty seriously (b/c we are ridiculous that way, and we're also both argumentative as hell--it's part of our charm), but I feel like that's the general idea. As long as you know why you did it and how you got there, I think that's all you need.

Edited 2012-08-14 03:21 pm (UTC)

Yes. This. All of this. <3 <3 <3