ONTD

Most fantasy works are poorly researched and seldom know anything about the eras they research. If you're going to sideline women then you're going to have to display that the history you are employing reflects that and chances are the history one is using is really just pretty decor. Even then, it's testy.

The only person I can think of who researched correctly is Tolkien, that's not to say his work isn't problematic, and it shows. LotR is just one big historical tribute act to early medieval North-Western Europe post-schism.

Madam Efunroye Tinubu was among the most prominent and powerful Yoruba women in pre-colonial Nigeria (early to mid 19th century). Other renowned Yoruba women from that period were Iyalode Efunsetan Aniwura and Madam Omosa, both of whom deserve posts of their own.


more here

Edited at 2012-12-05 11:17 pm (UTC)

Let's face it, it has left to do with history than nostalgia for what they think it was like back there. Yes, women didn't always have equality, but we have this myth that women were helpless until the 20s and that's bullshit. Poor women have always had to work (as WOC), royal women had to always be involved in politics in some way. Being a Princess didn't mean diddling around all day or singing to birds.

I'd rather read something creative than the same backwards re-telling of the middle ages.

elizabeth & cleopatra

and whenever they DO make films about strong queens, they always ramp up the romance as the most important part.

Btw, all those talk about fierce historical ladies reminded me how badly I want a movie about Catherine the Great.

YES CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THIS, she was so badass.

I think this same argument can be applied to race in fantasy settings too.

I am the biggest LotR fangirl and I remember when they were filming the original trilogy and were asking for extras to come out, they were specifically looking for white extras. I was so hugely bummed about this. And the only available roles for non-whites were basically the easterners or orcs.

I don't see why the elves especially couldn't have been represented by various people of color since they are a total invention of fantasy anyway.

And Game of Thrones has really problematic issues with race too.

Edited at 2012-12-05 11:18 pm (UTC)

not to mention, it's tolkien...he was a strict catholic so had even more extreme views for his time.

But I'm talking about the films, not the books. Peter Jackson already took a ton of liberties when adapting the books for film and there really was no need for him to be so exclusively white in his casting. I mean yeah, a lot of the characters were described as being white in the books, but someone like Elrond could easily have been cast as an Asian actor (even through I love Hugo Weaving) and still fit the description of Elrond in the books. the hobbits were basically representations of the pre-industrial British, but elves are elves. They're fantastical, other worldly creatures, so I think there was an opening there to possibly cast people of color. But I doubt that was ever considered as an option even.

Don’t get me wrong: I think Game of Thrones is quite successful when it comes to portraying interesting, complicated female characters, and a good many of them, especially in its second season.

Except season 2 was an almost complete fail when it came to the female characters. They turned Dany into a whiny brat, they gave Cat's best lines/ideas to Robb, the useless torture porn re: Sansa and Joff's storyline, motherfucking Ros and her cumshot diaries, etc, etc.
At this point, Arya is the only female character who remains as awesome as she is in the books.

Ygritte, Osha and Yara were done well enough, but that's mostly because they fit the tomboy archetype. It's like the GOT writers can only conceive strong women if they fit either the tomboy or the seductress archetype (such as Melisandre). They don't know what to do with women who are more complex than that.
Case in point: Brienne and Margaery.

Book Brienne is more than a tomboy, she's also a naive, hopelessly romantic girl who is afraid of killing. She's affected by Jaime and Renly in a very feminine way (blushes, awkwardness, googly eyes). Yet in the show they took away all the 'girly' elements and made her a stone-cold killer and ice-queen.

Margery was turned into a seductress, when she's anything but in the books. She uses her beauty to her advantage, but not her sexuality, not in the overt way that was portrayed in the show. She's very subtle in the way she manipulates people and how she uses the misogynistic social mores to her advantage. The idea that she would come up to Renly and straight out tell him to take her doggy style while Loras watches is ridiculous.

I'm not sure I explained myself vey well. Sorry for the novel in any case.

I like sims medieval and it has potential to be better but EA and others don't care about it.

IA with everything

Earthsea was great, then the TV series came along and whitewashed Ged

i honestly think many authors are simply more interested in writing about white men. there are plenty of amazing women/poc/queer people to be found through history, and just because their stories are rarely taught doesn't mean they never happened.

I have to say that, whilst it is certainly problematic, Disney movies from Pocahontas onwards (not really sure whether to include Rapunzel tho...) provide better female representation than, well, most media I come across for all age groups.

It'll sound so wrong but I liked that Pocahontas presented the Natives as racist and as ignorant as the white people.

I liked that too. I thought it made their portrayal human.

I like Pocahontas too.

That had to be accurate in a way

Arawelo: motherfucking Somali queen who castrated men who did not play by her rules. All about switching up gender roles. Shame that there is not much written about her

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arawelo

Even if they do use historical accuracy to defend their fuckery, history is still largely about war and conflict which is generally a male thing in the Western world. I wish women's history was valued just as much. Yes, there was gender inequality, but women's role as wife, mother, caretaker, nun, etc. is continually ignored. Taking care of a home was hard as hell. Women had to make sure the house ran smoothly and had enough supplies. People's lives depended on them doing their job properly. Besides, not all societies were patriarchal. Sigh.

Also, I need to see something on Queen Kandace.

That legend always makes me smile and tear up simultaneously.

The idea that Alex the Great decided to invade this East African empire and upon arriving found Kandace with her army on elephants and went "Guys, I'd rather not invade this place than try and lose to a woman."

It's beautiful.

There are very few printed historical works about her. It's infuriating.

Also, dagnab the influence of Ancient Roman and Greek philosophers.

Totally put women on a second step in the Western world.

Historical accuracy doesn't matter in a fantasy setting. Duh. But with something like AC III, I believe the developers that it would've made the storytelling a lot more complicated because they're already walking a tightrope concerning the feeling of only slightly altered historical authenticity - it would've been easier having a woman protagonist in the Renaissance setting. But I feel like we've gotten a lot of hints that the next main character will be female.