Books, Blogs, Authors and More discussion

I'm just plowing through and am finding Kate a bit annoying and sappy (I think her and Bella may have attended the same school of winge)

Do authors make them whiney to show they're teenagers, or just believe that girls act this way?

Interesting that author is female as well, actually.

Looking at the reviews, it seems that the main character has polarised the people who read it!

Maybe it just shows how hard it is to portray a woman as the lead character.

I've not read The Goddes Test, but I haven't heard great things. I think the sappy female leads so common in YA novels also serves as an instigator of the male's protective nature and highlight it in relief.

Melanie wrote: "I'm just plowing through and am finding Kate a bit annoying and sappy (I think her and Bella may have attended the same school of winge)

Do authors make them whiney ..."

I would think its a little bit of both. When reading any story in general I like characters of both genders to be weak, strong, timid, outgoing etc. Kinda more real to me I guess.

My favorite book fems are Goodkind's Kahlan and Howard's Valeria.

My Favorite movie Fem character would be Jovovich's Joan of Arc in the Messenger.

Sappy females i think yank the chains of some girls and stoke some girlie fantasy for some other. I don't know, some girls like to be man-handled by their guys while others will kick the guy's nice ass before he even think about man-handdling.

it's like different type of guys as the Hero teens rooting for. Some like pretty boys, some like cute boys, some like muscle man, and some don't like the hero at all.

but for me, i'll kick the guy's ass before he even think about going all caveman protective.

Urg. Sappy heroines are the worst part of ya books. Every story has one. I think it's brainwashing rubbish. But I've met people who admire heroines like Bella do I just don't know. It seems like some authors are stuck In the stone ages and all there girls need a guy to take care of them. It annoys me even more when a badass girl becomes dependent on a guy. It portrays us as weak!

I think if the character starts out sappy and then grows into a stronger person that would be a good use of a sappy character but to remain sappy and need a man to save her isn't really with the times.

I think female leads, in conjunction with strong male leads can be extremely polarizing. Myself, I never really found Bella whiney. I mostly found her average, and insecure. Insecure is something I relate well with, so I found myself liking her.

I also think in a vampire vs human situation such as Bella and Edward, showing an internal weakness is another way that the author is able to demonstrate the true difference in their overall strength.

Likewise, I loved how overprotective and vocal about protecting her Edward is. My husband is frustratingly quiet, and while he is protective of me, he keeps it to himself and I rarely see it. Seeing Edwards very definitely view of shes mine, don't touch her was something I liked, although I could see how it also illustrated his flaws when at times he wouldn't allow her to make her own choices.

What I saw as something I enjoyed in the character, I know others felt promoted violence towards women and got very upset about it.

Which, coming back to my original statement, I think shows exactly how different people relate entirely differently to the same character.

Likewise (and possible spoilers here) for the vampire diaries books -

I really hate how Stephen lets Elena walk all over him consistently, predictable and repeatedly. I want to shake him and say dude, you are an ancient friggin vampire. Act like it and scare some sense into her! And I'm not even team Stephan, so don't get me started on my feelings of what she does to Damon.

I know what you mean about Elena. She's a total bunny boiler. I pity Stefan and Damon.

Free writing tip:

Step 1: Write strong female characters by thinking of them as dudes and have them talk about their shoes and hair every few pages.

Step 2: Accept writing award.

Step 3: Yacht parties with J.K. Rowling.

Or, you could just write a strong female character like Frank Portman in Andromeda Klein. Either way.

I don't think you need to have a woman act like a man to be a strong female lead. However, I am against sappy female characters. I think one of the things YA needs to do is show that women can live without men - that they aren't going to fall into this deep paroxysm of self-loathing.

We can become empathetic towards a male character's situation if they're brooding and snarky, but if a female character does it she's a bitch.

Strong female leads can do what men do, but they don't need to behave like a man to do so.

Buck wrote: "Free writing tip:

Step 1: Write strong female characters by thinking of them as dudes and have them talk about their shoes and hair every few pages.

Step 2: Accept writing award.

Step 3:..."

Have them talk about their shoes and hair every few pages - hilarious!

I love female characters who are strong, have a voice and as a reader one can look up to. For an example Eowyn from Lord of the rings, Hermione from Harry Potter amongst others who stand out within fiction. Romance is an element within a storyline that helps make it more readable, realistic and true but those characters who have to 'cling' to the chosen male figure can be a little 'sappy'. Sadly Bella Swan from Twilight is one in particular that spings to mind, which is a shame as the entire concept of Stephanie Myers work is inspired.
Lucinda x

Imagine these two characters:

1. A bad-ass combat mercenary who is emotionally and physically scarred, and is a lone wolf. Competent at every form of killing art, they need no one, and are quite content to live alone and do their job. They have a series of scars along their left cheek that are too prevalent to be considered attractive, and they will punch you if you stare.

2. A physically frail computer hacker who is quite attractive but utterly useless at any combat. They have a cheerful disposition and a positive outlook on life, and despite their physical isolation, are emotionally attuned and empathetic to people. They keep their long hair drawn back in a pony tail, and sometimes need to use a wheelchair.

Number 1 is assigned number 2 as an overwatch, and soon the gruff exterior of 1 is melted by the empathy and cheerfulness of 2. They fall in love, with the penultimate scene of the book 1 going into a complex of enemies guns blazing to rescue 2.

Now, what genders are they?

I'd bet the knee-jerk reaction would be 1 is male and 2 is female. Not out of any sexism, but because the traits aren't expected. Everyone wants a strong female heroine, but a physically scarred or kill-happy one doesn't seem to fit. Men can be emotional, frail, cheerful and even have ponytails, but that doesn't fit either.

This is the problem with "sappy" heroines. The gender associations are tough to break, and it's easier to use the passive-emotional female and the active-distant male archetypes with their specific genders. Mostly because it's hard to make someone like 2 a viable love interest in a woman's eyes. It's also hard to make 1 not be intimidating enough to scare off men.

It's hard to counter those traits in meaningful ways and still keep the desire of many readers to have a kick-ass heroine falling in love with a strong male hero who pursues her. It would be ten times more interesting a book to do so, but given the stampede to publish anything paranormal, it may be too much to ask.

I think they portray them as sappy because people are generally uncomfortable with a female lead character that really kicks butt. I recently had a book review for my book, Blurry, and the reviewer said she found the "actions and intelligence" of the characters to be unrealistic, although I think real life news shows that teen girls are perfectly capable of being strong and intelligent. I think they also play into some stereotypes as well.

Buck wrote: "Or, you could just write a strong female character like Frank Portman in Andromeda Klein. Either way.

"

I like the idea that a strong female is basically a guy who likes hair and fashion... I assume she should also be regularly distracted by other ladies ample chests and spend a certain amount of time laughing about farts :)

I'm also wondering - from Michael's point about the author being a lady - that some female writers do see girls/women that way, perhaps from their own experiences? These characters split opinion and maybe that's because we're a mixture of people reading about women, created by other women.

Personally - I was OK with Bella for some of the time, other bits I would have happily had Edward 'lose control', but perhaps it's me not liking high maintenance women? Kate in The Goddess Test just does very little at all, so I might have to change her 'sappy' title to 'dull' :)

I quite like high matinence if instead of being whiny they actually work for what they want. An example of this is Jo from the weather wardens series, she's totally high matinence and girly but she's also badass.

I like BADASS heroines!

The thing about females in YA fiction nowadays (and I am spotting a trend in this) is that they are either extremely strong headed, to the point of being 'boyish' and having all the stereotypical signs of a strong male lead, or they are very 'girly' representing the other side of the spectrum- flouncy and often portrayed as kind of sappy, as you can see here. This isn't something just seen in girls, either. From the many (MANY) YA fiction books that I read, whether it be contemporary or dystopian or paranormal, there are the same stereotypes. The immensly 'manly' and strong male figure, or the sensitive and more intelligent guy, who is somewhat more feminine and gentle.

The reality is we're usually more in the middle of this spectrum- though we may lean to one side or the other. I'm not sure how this began, though I think it stems to gender stereotypes. However, as time has gone on, people are pressed to make more 'realistic' characters other than the typical 'Ken and Barbie' (that is, manly and girly. If Ken constitutes as manly)so what they end up with is these extremities.

Now, just because somebody is girly doesn't necessarily mean that they can't still be a good character. Take Lizzie from Pride and Prejudice- she's not exactly Katniss, is she? But still- she uses her wit and intelligence and is a well rounded, strong character. Furthermore, I would argue that your character doesn't even need to be likeable for a good book. Try Before I Fall by Lauren Oliver. The girl is downright unbearable, yet the book is still great.

Overall, what I really want to say is that I feel as if the YA writers choose to conform to stereotypes. It doesn't just apply to girly girls- this also applies to supposedly 'tough' girls that only have masculine traits- the author is trying to portray that a girl is only strong because of masculine traits that they have- which is untrue. YA writers need to add dimension to their characters, whether they are likable or not. It doesn't matter. Just make good character!

(also, I used quote '' marks a lot in this almost essay thing, didn't I?)

I am a sappy heroine. I am super sensuously sentimental and my super femininity harnesses the strength of wild horses.

Hmm..I always thought these days authors were making their female characters strong and prominent with backbones and hearts of gold but I guess when it comes to teenage girls in books there's really not much you can do but make them sappy.

Katniss is kick-ass and sensitive; her quarter quell partner is strong and sensitive. Great books without stereotypes!