Writing Women Characters
Dec. 14th, 2009 07:42 pmOkay, so a recent interview with Sigourney Weaver has her saying that writers should just imagine that they are writing a man if they want realistic female characters. She appears to be one a series of actresses asked about "women in film". On the one hand it must be irritating for actresses like Sigourney to be asked this sort of question over and over again. (Mark Kermode mocks himself in his recent podcast for being "the umpteen shlub who's come in and said: 'So Sigourney, please tell me about the feminist undercurrent of the alien movies and the entire cycle as a metaphor for birth'" *with interview quote in squeaky voice*.) On the other hand, I guess it means she's had plenty of time to consider her answer. (Perhaps unlike Eliza Dushku who says that exploiting sexuality is beautiful and Joss agrees on this. Somehow I found that a little creepy.) So here's Sigourney's own words on the subject:
A few pointers before I give my view on Sigourney's comments:
( Read more... )
Back To Sigourney
I've long viewed that there's no real difference between men and women in the same way that there's no difference between people who like or dislike bananas. Sure social pressures mean there are differences (and I similarly don't think that class distinctions are set in stone) and, as with any group, physical differences will make a difference to you (though amongst men and women this is still the case, so the fact that women are often weaker than men seems pretty unimportant). However, it doesn't seem to me that gender makes people essentially different.
As such, I think I rather agree with Sigourney on this. Writing a man and then putting a woman in the role doesn't sound like an awful idea at all. In the end the important thing is that they are a convincing person. That doesn't mean that female experience as understood from female writers isn't important. After all, to produce convincing characters, you can't just ignore social pressures any more than you can ignore class distinctions or racial prejudices. These things are part of life and good writing will encompass the various aspects of life in all their grittiness. Still, I think the idea that male and female characters are inter-changeable is a lot more healthy than insisting on characters who are hold to some ideal of essential femaleness. There isn't an essential man or an essential woman. There are people and there are cliches, so let's try to aim for the former and avoid the latter, ok?
A few pointers before I give my view on Sigourney's comments:
( Read more... )
Back To Sigourney
I've long viewed that there's no real difference between men and women in the same way that there's no difference between people who like or dislike bananas. Sure social pressures mean there are differences (and I similarly don't think that class distinctions are set in stone) and, as with any group, physical differences will make a difference to you (though amongst men and women this is still the case, so the fact that women are often weaker than men seems pretty unimportant). However, it doesn't seem to me that gender makes people essentially different.
As such, I think I rather agree with Sigourney on this. Writing a man and then putting a woman in the role doesn't sound like an awful idea at all. In the end the important thing is that they are a convincing person. That doesn't mean that female experience as understood from female writers isn't important. After all, to produce convincing characters, you can't just ignore social pressures any more than you can ignore class distinctions or racial prejudices. These things are part of life and good writing will encompass the various aspects of life in all their grittiness. Still, I think the idea that male and female characters are inter-changeable is a lot more healthy than insisting on characters who are hold to some ideal of essential femaleness. There isn't an essential man or an essential woman. There are people and there are cliches, so let's try to aim for the former and avoid the latter, ok?