« The Two Towers | Main Index | the malaise of plotting »
12/20/2002: the dark underbelly of fictional preferences
An entry and discussion in Betty Plotnick's LJ on destined/chosen heroes also linked to an article by David Brin about the underlying anti-modernist ideology, something that seems to be a recurring theme in his articles (at least in those I've checked out after reading the one about the LOTR). The conflict he sees between literature and entertainment in the tradition of the Enlightenment (in particular SF) vs. those in the tradition of a specific anti-democratic Romanticism is also central to his article "Star Wars" despots vs. "Star Trek" populists, for example.
And while I thought Betty's interpretation to see the "chosen hero" motif as metaphor, in which the "world" they're destined to save and to rule is really a stand-in for the reader's life and the importance and consequences of personal, individual choices of the hero, choices the readers are sort of automatically "destined" to make in their own lives, is interesting, for me whether the hero is preordained or accidental is not at the core of my unease with the setup. The problem is that in universes with "chosen" heroes, there is a natural order to the universe, which also imposes their quest. I suspect for me the construct of a "feudal" universe has emotional appeal because it is anti-modernist, there is no uncertainty about the goals, only about the methods, and this set-up removes the abstract, political responsibility for the shape of the world and society as whole from everybody in favor of a natural order, that is fixed and only to be defended against threats to that order. A hero in such a universe can never set out to change the "natural order," that remains the realm of the villains. Those universes are structurally conservative. Whereas I don't believe in a natural order of the universe, certainly not when humans are concerned. But emotionally somehow that concept isn't so attractive as that fantasy one, in which there are certainties about the world.
But this discussion and Brin's political criticism of a certain kind of romanticism in fiction reminded me of a list post I'd made a while back (actually last September) to FCA-L, about my unease with some of my fictional preferences, and how the reassurance "it's only fiction" fails to dispel my nagging doubts about my own psyche. And I back then I wanted to cross-post it in the blog, but I just checked the archives and obviously I forgot. Anyway, now I'll use this opportunity to inflict my rambling once again on the public (cut-away for the cross-posted part...)
What do our reading and writing preferences really say about us? My preferences about me?
I'm still confused about this, because I'm not entirely comfortable with my fiction preferences. And yeah, I know some people think "hey it's fiction, it's fantasy, why get an ulcer about liking things," but for me it is not quite that easy to dismiss. Obviously I don't believe that there is a simple connection, as in "I like in RL what I like in fiction," obviously I like for example rape as a fantasy, but not as a RL occurrence. I certainly don't want to be raped, nor do I want to rape someone. Nor do I think that it makes me a cruel person that I like torture fiction.
But -- I don't think it is insignificant either. And it's not just about "sexual fantasy stuff", in fact the sexual fantasy part might even be easier for me to shrug off. But I enjoy a whole range of concepts in fiction which I'd judge from extremely problematic to non-acceptable in RL. And I don't only enjoy those concepts when they are covered critically, or from a non-supportive distancing perspective. Among other things I'm thinking about ritualized and glorified concepts of violence/war/warriors in fiction often in combination with not even remotely democratic power structures which are drawn in a positive light (for example stuff like the Jedi order in SW, huge parts of Tolkien's universe, the Anla'shok in Babylon 5-Legend of the Ranger etc.) and though it's obvious that those in themselves have no close resemblance to any realistic depiction of war, those kinds of glorification of war still have always been part of militaristic and patriarchal ideology.
Consciously I want no part of that ideology. But trying not to like this fiction doesn't work for me either. I tried that. Tried hard, as I first recognized this, as a teenager. I tried a "program" of reading to "recondition" my tastes. (It sounds sort of silly, I know, but I had this moment where I recognized the pattern, recognized that there was a reason that I made up stories only with male heroes in my head, and many other things and I decided to change that. I figured, hey, I'm a teenager still, I caught this shit relatively early, I noticed it, I will do something against it.) It didn't really work out that way, obviously 14/15 is far too late.
So despite my very best efforts I'm still attracted emotionally to concepts I despise politically. What does that say about me? That I like this stuff despite being opposed to the things this kind of ideology stands for? And more importantly, what significance has that outside of my fiction preferences? Obviously militaristic and patriarchal conditioning is there, so does it influence me in other ways I'm not aware of? Maybe this emotional attraction to such concepts is only one thing? It is simple to say that liking things in fiction doesn't equal approving of them in RL, and that to indulge in fantasy versions is harmless as long as you're aware that they are fantasy versions, but that somehow doesn't mollify the nagging inner voice telling me that my tastes in fiction must have some significance to me as a person.
If I truly want to change those ideologies in RL, is that even possible when I sort of support them in fiction? Isn't my enjoyment of that kind of fiction part of what supports those ideologies in RL and makes them so stable? Is it really possible to say "here are my fiction preferences, in their neat little box, and they don't have any impact on what I want in RL"?
I wish I wouldn't like these things in fiction. And this is not about fiction being sanitized, or "PC", it is just my vague suspicion that persistent ideologies are supported through more than just conscious decisions, and that I might unwittingly sabotage my own political agenda. And I can't even get out of this dilemma. I like fiction with Jedis, I like the Anla'shok, I enjoy Tolkien... my ingrained fiction preferences of good entertainment, of drama, of heroes, ... are the product of a culture supported by an underlying ideology I despise.
So what do I do with that?
