So, disclaimer up front: I know the author and consider her a friend, so I do have a bias.
I think it was initially written in the 80s and there wasn't as large a social justice scene back then to say "hey, this kind of trope is not ok". The Bazhir are rather two-dimensional in the SOLT quartet and get fleshed out a little bit more in the successive books as Jonathan's kingdom/empire expands. That part always bothered me, but when her book was classified as YA by the publisher it got split into 4 and there was a length limit imposed, so some things got a bit squished in the process. I'm not sure if she would have expanded upon them otherwise, like she starts to some in 3/4, but to a large degree authorial intent doesn't matter nearly as much as the finished product. I don't have any doubt that she intended it that way, but... yeah, I can definitely see that being there nonetheless. (I read it as a kid so that kind of thing wasn't on my radar back then for sure, and that is likely to be the case with many people recommending it as well.)
I don't necessarily see it as a trans narrative, because Alanna isn't a boy, and doesn't want to be a boy, she just wants to be something everyone is insisting only a boy can be. She deals with the uncomfortableness of the breast bindings and hiding her sex from the other pages/squires, but also learns how to be comfortable as a woman from George's mother, from dealing with periods to dresses and such. She's always been a tomboy, doing what she's doing as a knight in training, and actually has a harder time accepting how to be a comfortable in her skin as a beautiful woman than acting like what people expect out of a man. I think that this is also a more prominent theme in books 3 & 4. However, that's my viewpoint and I very well may be wrong. I do believe that it was intended as a narrative about gender equality rather than gender identity, but again, intent isn't always what matters.
Jonathan is an entitled prat; I never really liked him and Alanna. (Though his eventual wife does end up putting him in his place, but I think that's either book 4 or a later quartet.) The way that I read things between him and Alanna is that he was an example of what's not ok in a relationship, and how it's easy to fall for someone that really isn't good for you-- and an example of when to say "no, I will not change who I am to become who you want me to be". I think that might come to surface in book 4, though; I can't remember when she leaves him and goes to George.
All that said, her later books are better in terms of social justice aspects, I believe. Alanna's series is just often pointed out because it was a strong feministic character at a time where there weren't many to be had. There's actually a blogger that is doing a blow by blow review as he reads through them, and Tammy has been wincing at some of the appropriate critiques he's been raising... critiques that she's agreeing with. I do believe that many things would be different if she had a chance to go back and do a rewrite of the series.
I'm trying not to come across as defensive, as it's a series that I love by an author that I love, but you're right that it has issues and it falls under the category of "liking problematic things".
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-21 12:39 am (UTC)I think it was initially written in the 80s and there wasn't as large a social justice scene back then to say "hey, this kind of trope is not ok". The Bazhir are rather two-dimensional in the SOLT quartet and get fleshed out a little bit more in the successive books as Jonathan's kingdom/empire expands. That part always bothered me, but when her book was classified as YA by the publisher it got split into 4 and there was a length limit imposed, so some things got a bit squished in the process. I'm not sure if she would have expanded upon them otherwise, like she starts to some in 3/4, but to a large degree authorial intent doesn't matter nearly as much as the finished product. I don't have any doubt that she intended it that way, but... yeah, I can definitely see that being there nonetheless. (I read it as a kid so that kind of thing wasn't on my radar back then for sure, and that is likely to be the case with many people recommending it as well.)
I don't necessarily see it as a trans narrative, because Alanna isn't a boy, and doesn't want to be a boy, she just wants to be something everyone is insisting only a boy can be. She deals with the uncomfortableness of the breast bindings and hiding her sex from the other pages/squires, but also learns how to be comfortable as a woman from George's mother, from dealing with periods to dresses and such. She's always been a tomboy, doing what she's doing as a knight in training, and actually has a harder time accepting how to be a comfortable in her skin as a beautiful woman than acting like what people expect out of a man. I think that this is also a more prominent theme in books 3 & 4. However, that's my viewpoint and I very well may be wrong. I do believe that it was intended as a narrative about gender equality rather than gender identity, but again, intent isn't always what matters.
Jonathan is an entitled prat; I never really liked him and Alanna. (Though his eventual wife does end up putting him in his place, but I think that's either book 4 or a later quartet.) The way that I read things between him and Alanna is that he was an example of what's not ok in a relationship, and how it's easy to fall for someone that really isn't good for you-- and an example of when to say "no, I will not change who I am to become who you want me to be". I think that might come to surface in book 4, though; I can't remember when she leaves him and goes to George.
All that said, her later books are better in terms of social justice aspects, I believe. Alanna's series is just often pointed out because it was a strong feministic character at a time where there weren't many to be had. There's actually a blogger that is doing a blow by blow review as he reads through them, and Tammy has been wincing at some of the appropriate critiques he's been raising... critiques that she's agreeing with. I do believe that many things would be different if she had a chance to go back and do a rewrite of the series.
I'm trying not to come across as defensive, as it's a series that I love by an author that I love, but you're right that it has issues and it falls under the category of "liking problematic things".