Agency as a Writer's Tool

[lovecraft68]

Or take Firefly. The series has a bunch of "strong female characters" who are good at fighting/fixing engines/sex/killing people with their minds. But the storylines tend to be driven by decisions made by Mal, and sometimes Jayne and Simon, and their antagonists; the female characters (along with Wash and Book) are more often reacting to those decisions than calling the shots themselves.

Joss Whedon was behind Firefly which explains why it was fake feminism with a man really calling the shots. The biggest fake feminist who was in reality a predator out there.

To quote Stan Lee 'nuf said.

 

[Lifestyle66]

The people with the problem were men who have issues with women who feel empowered by flaunting their bodies and sexuality.
There are also some women who have issues with sex positive women

SOME women?

In my experience, MOST women are far more judgmental of other women.

My sister-in-law used to work in a sewing factory where they were all women working on piece work for their wages. The women would compete to earn the most by working faster than the others! They would never agree to work together to earn higher wages together!

Another woman I dated was an unwed mother (from before I met her). All other women in her neighborhood and social circles ostracized her as a slut!

In many cases, it's not men who define the women, but the women trying to fit in with their own female peers which causes the conflicts.

Some authors even identified such female peer conflicts in movies like "Mean Girls" or in "Legally Blonde" and many others. They're caricatures of reality.

If a teenage girl in high school becomes known as "easy" for having sex with her dates, which others cause her the most angst? The boys who want to go out with her? Or her female peers calling her a slut and ostracizing her?

 

[TheRedChamber]

Consider Batman and Robin (Dick Grayson).

Both these guys have motivation. In fact, they have almost identical motivation: "crime killed my parents and I must fight it." But Batman is the one in the driving seat, literally and metaphorically. Batman without Robin is pretty much the same person; Robin without Batman is something quite different, so much so that he ends up taking on a new name and costume while somebody else becomes a new Robin.

In storytelling terms, Batman has much more agency than Robin. (Though depending on the story, one could argue that the lead villains have more agency than Batman, since he's so often reacting to the consequences of their decisions.)

Well, Bruce Wayne probably has the most agency of any character in fiction - no authority over him, unlimited resources and no responsibilities (except to Robin). But does having freedom to act make characters stronger. What you are describing I guess is a command structure (in this case with a paeudo-parental role). Is Batman more interesting as a character than Robin (yes?). Are the Star Trek captains the most interesting crew members on their ships (also maybe yes?).

Or take Firefly.

Sorry, haven't seen enough of Firefly to be able to comment on this. Always meant to get round to it, though as Lovecraft notes it's cultural moment may now be past.

It's not exact, but asking "who feels like the protagonist and who feels like the sidekick/love interest?" might be a useful tool in thinking about motivation.

But, and I'm starting to sound like a broken record I know, that seems like a different test than agency.

 

[Parhelical]

My submission for 2022 Pink Orchid challenge described an MFC who had her own fantasy goal/"bucket list", and she chose to have her husband facilitate her achieving her Bucket List fantasy on her terms. But the story had its nay-saying detractors because the MFC's fantasy was to someday be a stripper! She took the stage and took control of the men in the club to act out her fantasy.

Jan is out to win, and she allows others to make their own choices to win with her. In the shower scene, she makes no secret of what she wants, and her husband is allowed to be jealous ... or not. It's his choice, and they've been together long enough that he knows how to win with her. He won much more from her later by making the right choice. She fulfilled her fantasy (and his) on her terms, and she doesn't accept embarrassment from her son's rebuke.

Don't bring sushi to the church bake sale.

You just wrote a generic male fantasy with a shallow female character while expositionally explaining how 'empowered' and 'free' she is.

You aren't attempting to get into her head any further than 'I feel sexy and validated by male attention'. As an actual story it's boring and one dimensional.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I feel like it's worth pointing out that this event sprung from the vast array of stories where agency has never occurred the author, and the concept is entirely foreign. Agency is, much like the Bechdel test, an impossibly low bar under which theoretically no solid story* should fail, and yet many do.

You don't need to go out of your way to do anything overtly girl boss feminist. The event is asking for bare minimum stuff. Reasonable motivations. The room to make decisions, even bad ones, if they make sense.

If you haven't seen, Omenainen introduced a neat little chunk of analytical advice in an otherwise unrelated thread called "But why would she?" If you can ask this question of an action the character takes and don't have an easy answer, then something has gone off the rails. A simple example might be a story where a girl flashes her sister's boyfriend. For a male POV main character, this idea is hot on the face of it, but why would she? If the answer is "she does it just because" on the way to telling a story about banging your girlfriend's little sister, that's not a great answer. If the answer is "she does it because she has a whole long, complicated thing where she covets the things her sister has" that's great story fodder. Lots of juicy history to explore in a story. Plenty of interesting ramifications.

*The Bechdel Test does not apply to short fiction. It's a film critique, and trying to apply it to too many other kinds of media is disingenuous.

 

[Lifestyle66]

Don't bring sushi to the church bake sale.

You just wrote a generic male fantasy with a shallow female character while expositionally explaining how 'empowered' and 'free' she is.

You aren't attempting to get into her head any further than 'I feel sexy and validated by male attention'. As an actual story it's boring and one dimensional.

YOU are the " MOST women are far more judgmental of other women."

As I said, these were my WIFE's goals and fantasies, you sanctimonious P.O.S, which is why I won't contribute to the next year's Pink Orchid challenge!

I was leary of posting to this thread. But YOU are the judgmental types I am describing as the subhuman, cancel-culture forms which disparaged your female peers!

And I would guess YOU are one the lurkers on the authors forum who is 1-bombing the stories of those YOU choose to hate in your single-sided biases!

 

[alohadave]

Are the Star Trek captains the most interesting crew members on their ships (also maybe yes?).

When talking about being captains of ships, sure. But look at Data from TNG. He fought to maintain agency over his life against Starfleet personnel who tried, repeatedly, to strip him of his rights because he was seen as less than them.

 

[Parhelical]

YOU are the " MOST women are far more judgmental of other women."

As I said, these were my WIFE's goals and fantasies, you sanctimonious P.O.S, which is why I won't contribute to the next year's Pink Orchid challenge!

I was leary of posting to this thread. But YOU are the judgmental types I am describing as the subhuman, cancel-culture forms which disparaged your female peers!

And I would guess YOU are one the lurkers on the authors forum who is 1-bombing the stories of those YOU choose to hate in your single-sided biases!

I've never given a story less than 5. I'm not trying to upset or troll, but you brought it into the thread.

Fundamentally you can write whatever characters you want and still potentially have a great story. What feels off-kilter is that Jan is written as a narcissist with near-zero empathy for her husband and son and an all-consuming need to be validated through the sex acts with strangers.

The narrative though doesn't realize this and then you, the author, break the forth wall to tell us the 'lesson' which is apparently that familial relationships - marriage - sex, are all battlegrounds - wars that 'strong people' 'win'.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Joss Whedon was behind Firefly which explains why it was fake feminism with a man really calling the shots. The biggest fake feminist who was in reality a predator out there.

Yeah, I wasn't planning to get into a tangent about Whedon, but I suspect that has a lot to do with why his work provides such good examples of how "Strong Female Character" doesn't equal "woman with agency".

If we were writing them up as characters in a roleplaying game, River would be some kind of level twenty mindmage/ninja, maybe more powerful than the rest of the cast combined. But when we look at her role in the story, she's an NPC.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Well, Bruce Wayne probably has the most agency of any character in fiction - no authority over him, unlimited resources and no responsibilities (except to Robin).

What you're describing there is power. Very often power and agency go together but they're not the same thing. In the Simpsons, Montgomery Burns has power but Homer Simpson has much more agency. Even when Burns is up-ending Homer's life, the focus of the show is on the choices Homer makes, and to a lesser extent those of his family.

But does having freedom to act make characters stronger. What you are describing I guess is a command structure (in this case with a paeudo-parental role). Is Batman more interesting as a character than Robin (yes?). Are the Star Trek captains the most interesting crew members on their ships (also maybe yes?).

A command structure is a form of power, but again not synonymous with agency.

Lord of the Rings: the most powerful member of the Fellowship by far is Gandalf, followed perhaps by Aragorn, with the hobbits at the bottom. But they make important choices and those choices matter just as much as anybody's. Indeed, the story stresses that Bilbo's decision to spare Gollum's life has world-changing consequences.

 

[Rob_Royale]

I'm 3/4 through a story that would be perfect for the Pink Orchid Competition or whatever that is. I'm relatively new here, so could someone provide a link?
NM found it.

 

[Omenainen]

So are y’all saying that the word to drop from next year’s event announcement is “agency”?

 

[SimonDoom]

I would echo what Bramblethorn said, that power and agency are not the same thing, and that LOTR is an excellent example of this. The 4 hobbits are the least powerful members of the fellowship, but the story of LOTR is principally THEIR story. It's about their internal struggles and the choices they make. In fact, in the second half of the trilogy the main POV character is the least powerful of all of them -- Sam. He's the real hero of the story. In the final book the POV shifts almost entirely from Frodo to Sam. There's even a chapter in The Two Towers called "The Choices of Master Samwise," which is about his internal struggles and the choices he makes when he believes that his master, Frodo, is dead. Sam gets the final words in the trilogy. I call that "agency."

 

[Lifestyle66]

... What feels off-kilter is that Jan is written as a narcissist with near-zero empathy for her husband and son and an all-consuming need to be validated through the sex acts with strangers.

The narrative though doesn't realize this and then you, the author, break the forth wall to tell us the 'lesson' which is apparently that familial relationships - marriage - sex, are all battlegrounds - wars that 'strong people' 'win'.

If you listen to more, and more real people throughout your life, you'll eventually come to realize that marriage and sex ARE quite often battlegrounds.

There are many who marry for the wrong reasons and later regret their decision. There are wives who manipulate their husbands with sex. There are husbands who grow angry, withdrawn, or even violent over sex. There are "battles" for control in marriages which don't even deal with sex, such as battles over money, how to raise kids, who sets the family schedule, etc.

Jan as a narcissist with near zero empathy ... I would agree with the narcissist, but the empathy comes from her knowing her own husband and his desires. It's explicitly spelled out early in the story they are swingers, and they enjoy watching each other having sex with others!

As for her near zero empathy for her son, I disagree. She wouldn't agree to go on-stage in deference to her son being there. And later, when she found out she performed for one of his friends, she used that as a parental teaching moment telling her son: "Don't be so naïve. And don't fall for other women taking advantage of YOU that way either!"

I found with writing that strip club story, there's no pleasing everyone, and readers always carry their biases regardless of what I try to explain. So, with merely eleven-thousand words, I can't describe Jan's motivations, choices, and emotions enough to appease the scenario haters. The very fact Jan wants to get on-stage makes every man in the audience a misogynistic exploiter and she's a sexist manipulator, rather than just two people mutually enjoying the moment for their own fun.

 

[stickygirl]

So are y’all saying that the word to drop from next year’s event announcement is “agency”?

At this rate it might be "women"

I would echo what Bramblethorn said, that power and agency are not the same thing, and that LOTR is an excellent example of this. The 4 hobbits are the least powerful members of the fellowship, but the story of LOTR is principally THEIR story. It's about their internal struggles and the choices they make. In fact, in the second half of the trilogy the main POV character is the least powerful of all of them -- Sam. He's the real hero of the story. In the final book the POV shifts almost entirely from Frodo to Sam. There's even a chapter in The Two Towers called "The Choices of Master Samwise," which is about his internal struggles and the choices he makes when he believes that his master, Frodo, is dead. Sam gets the final words in the trilogy. I call that "agency."

I liked the illustration too. Sauron created the rings of power to deprive owners of agency, with differing degrees of success. When he lost the One Ring he didn't lose agency but the power he'd poured into it. Any wearer then fell under its influence.
So agency can be stolen and taken back. Surely enough food for a decent set of plot twists there?

 

[SimonDoom]

At this rate it might be "women"

I liked the illustration too. Sauron created the rings of power to deprive owners of agency, with differing degrees of success. When he lost the One Ring he didn't lose agency but the power he'd poured into it. Any wearer then fell under its influence.
So agency can be stolen and taken back. Surely enough food for a decent set of plot twists there?

An interesting "wrinkle" is that the hobbits' super power in LOTR, if you will, is that they are less susceptible to the One Ring's power than other seemingly stronger inhabitants of Middle-earth. Frodo falls under its spell at the very end, but is saved by Gollum, in a sense. Sam is never corrupted, and willingly gives it back to Frodo. Bilbo is able, with reluctance, to turn it over to Frodo, through Gandalf. All of them show the ability to make important choices under conditions of extreme duress, including the ring's power to corrupt.

 

[firmbutgentle]

Or take Firefly. The series has a bunch of "strong female characters" who are good at fighting/fixing engines/sex/killing people with their minds. But the storylines tend to be driven by decisions made by Mal, and sometimes Jayne and Simon, and their antagonists; the female characters (along with Wash and Book) are more often reacting to those decisions than calling the shots themselves.

Fireflly is a good example; maybe the changing perspective on Joss Wheedon as a whole is instructive as well. Buffy was a symbol of empowerment on the one hand, but on the other, between Angel and Spike and the watchers etc etc, not to speak of the entire premise of the series, she was rarely choosing her own path.

 

[yowser]

So are y’all saying that the word to drop from next year’s event announcement is “agency”?

Not sure you need to do this. Maybe re-title the whole thing? The Pink Orchid Agency?

About a special gender-centric business, stories could be those either applying to join it or otherwise utilising its services.

 

[SimonDoom]

So are y’all saying that the word to drop from next year’s event announcement is “agency”?

I would definitely NOT do this. The existence of this thread, and the many opposing views that it has prompted, is proof that it's an interesting subject and worthy to explore in stories. If nobody can agree, that's a good thing, not a bad thing. My view on story event and contest descriptions is that they should be seen as springboards, not fences. If people take the basic idea in wildly different directions, so much the better.

 

[Omenainen]

I would definitely NOT do this. The existence of this thread, and the many opposing views that it has prompted, is proof that it's an interesting subject and worthy to explore in stories. If nobody can agree, that's a good thing, not a bad thing. My view on story event and contest descriptions is that they should be seen as springboards, not fences. If people take the basic idea in wildly different directions, so much the better.

My prompt is basically “write me some women who are something more than sexy cock accessories”, but when I try to phrase it using fancy words, some people tend to get stuck on them. I’ll get there one of these years.

 

[MajorRewrite]

I just want to read more about Emily, her love life, and her experience as a female Robin Hood.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I want to ask a naive question... In the stories I read and in the ones I write I don't think I have ever seen a woman that doesn't have a decent amount of agency on her. The way it is implied in this thread, one would think that it is such a common thing for women to be written as 'mindless fuckdolls' as someone coined it. The fact that a competition with this theme exists is also one more thing that points in that direction... So, is that really the case? I mean, I don't really read LW, EC or Incest categories, so I assume most of these women can be found there?

 

[AwkwardMD]

I want to ask a naive question... In the stories I read and in the ones I write I don't think I have ever seen a woman that doesn't have a decent amount of agency on her. The way it is implied in this thread, one would think that it is such a common thing for women to be written as 'mindless fuckdolls' as someone coined it. The fact that a competition with this theme exists is also one more thing that points in that direction... So, is that really the case? I mean, I don't really read LW, EC or Incest categories, so I assume most of these women can be found there?

Consider: Elayne, Aviendha, and Min are strong female characters who are powerful and respected characters in their own right and within their different areas of expertise, except when it comes to Rand. At the end of the day, they form a reluctant polycule because that's what Mr. Rigney wanted, and the in world justification that gets them there is "it's fate and you can't change it, so buckle up." Since the story is told more from Rand's perspective, where he is understood to be the central hero, this is framed as an acceptable thing that they should get used to for everyone's sake.

I only had to look at your avatar to find a sneaky example of bad characterization masquerading as "agency". There's plenty more.

 

[stickygirl]

My view on story event and contest descriptions is that they should be seen as springboards, not fences.

I have to live with my brain - you just get a peek at the shit it throws up every minute

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Consider: Elayne, Aviendha, and Min are strong female characters who are powerful and respected characters in their own right and within their different areas of expertise, except when it comes to Rand. At the end of the day, they form a reluctant polycule because that's what Mr. Rigney wanted, and the in world justification that gets them there is "it's fate and you can't change it, so buckle up." Since the story is told more from Rand's perspective, where he is understood to be the central hero, this is framed as an acceptable thing that they should get used to for everyone's sake.

I only had to look at your avatar to find a sneaky example of bad characterization masquerading as "agency". There's plenty more.

I can't say that I completely agree with what you said there. While it is true that Rand is the one pulling others in a certain direction, that doesn't really happen until later in the series. Also, one could argue that almost every male character gets pulled in the same way by Rand, so there isn't really any gender bias, except when it comes to Rand himself. There are many male characters who are Warders and they get pulled in certain direction by their Aes Sedai. There are also many other female characters who are pulling the threads, even Rand's throughout the series. Moirraine at start, later it's Wise Women and Cadsuane etc. So I don't really see what you intended with that example. I mean, I agree that Jordan didn't really impress with his characterization of women, yet it wasn't because he didn't give them agency in my opinion. Also, I don't need to be explained the forms of agency, I am just saying I haven't really seen many women without decent agency in the types of stories that I read or write, thus the question I asked...