Charas-Project
Game Creation => Requests => Tutorials => Topic started by: Zerlina on June 28, 2008, 01:28:27 AM
-
I’m aware that the majority of you have no trouble understand the male mind (which –according to our threads here- seem to be strangely obsessed with tacos, porn, and musical theatre. (see thread: Your Weakness)).
Let’s look at the female mind which -by large- is far less fascinated with food, sex, and tap dancing.
There are two classical archetypes for female heroines. That is- extroverted (or strong) and introverted (or soft). Most commonly, the first of these stock characters is independent, feisty, and headstrong. The second is sweet, innocent and kind.
If we were so simple, it’d probably be easier for men to approach us.
Heroine Type 1
Helen in The Iliad
Isolde
Buttercup in The Princess Bride
Aeris in Final Fantasy VII
Johanna in Sweeny Todd
Heroine Type 2
Atalanta
Hermia in A Midsummer Night’s Dream (arguably)
Elizabeth Swann in Pirates of the Caribbean
Garnet in Final Fantasy IX
Laurie in Oklahoma
Cathy in Wuthering Heights
Now that we’ve seen examples of these characters, let’s start by looking at where they came from.
Classical Mythology (Emergence of the “soft” heroine) 1
During its time, Classical Mythology was more than something to be studied in textbooks. Along with entertainment and explaining the universe, classical myths served as a way of teaching what is “right” “virtuous” or “good.” Most of the focus in these myths was on men, their deeds, and their glory. The female characters usually were an ends to a mean, or were simply a reward for the men who bravely adventured. (There were villainous females as well, but we’ll go into that later). In order to serve as a reward for the virtuous heroes, the women had to be worth it. And by worth it- they had to fit the classical ideal of perfection. They had to be beautiful, and faithful. Aside from characters like Atalanta and Artemis, women were helpless, providing the opportunity for the hero to save them.
Examples of this ideal woman are Penelopea from the Iliad (who was faithful to her husband even after she believed he was dead), and Andromache who –helpless to protect her son- represents the wives of those left behind by their honourable and brave husbands.
These women never fought, but were still considered two of the “strongest” females in Classical Greece.
Women who were not like this were usually vain, jealous, foolish (Niobe, Chang’E for example).
Classical Comparison Case 1
Let’s look at two women in Hellenistic Mythology. The first is Penelopea, the second is Clytemnestra.
Penelopea’s husband, Odysseus, was lost at sea after the Trojan war when he failed to make a sacrifice to Poseidon. On his way home, he slept with two other women, Circe and Calypso (the latter of which he had a long affair with). When he came home, he killed all the men in his house, who had been trying to woo his supposed widow. While this is definitely a great display of classical manliness, it leaves Penelopea with an unfaithful husband (at least by our standards) and a bloody mess of a living room to clean up. She gladly accepts both of these, however, and is revered.
Now comes the villainous Clytemnestra, who is often depicted as headstrong and possessing masculine qualities. After her husband graciously sacrifices their daughter to an unhappy goddess, he sets sail to burn and plunder Troy. While he’s there, he sleeps with prostitutes, and even picks up a few concubines. Because she’s such a terrible person, Clytemnestra has taken a lover who kills. Clytemnestra later gets her k’mupins when Agaememmnon is avenged. Serves her right for not staying faithful to the man who slaughtered her child, cheated on her, and burned a city.
We might have modern ideas of which woman was more clever, but in the Classical World, Penelopea was the one you’d want to bet on.
The Enlightenment-The Post-Modern Era
While it is impossible to discount the women thinkers who came before the enlightenment (Hypatia, for example), it is around the eighteenth century that the wheels really started to spin (albeit slowly).
There was far too much going on to mention, but most notably was the emergence of the salon. Many salons were hosted by women who would otherwise not have been exposed to so much philosophy, art, and political thinking. While female freedom was far from where it is today, there was more room than ever before for women to explore their intellects.
As time went on, a new heroine began to emerge from the writings of women who –dissatisfied with the classical archetype, and constrained by their own adherence to men- were more than happy to offer an alternative. They made a headstrong, independent girl who could maneuver the world in ways they could not. Examples of these characters are Jane Eyre, Anne of Green Gables, and Marguerite Saint-Just (arguably).
While she is cliché now, this type of heroine was revolutionary in her time. She stood for independence, and the desires of the authoresses who were otherwise bound to the oppressive reality they lived in.
As time went on, and political correctness became king, men began to adopt these characters into classical fantasy as well. Along with pleasing female audiences, it provided them with a way to avoid the dreaded cliché of a princess locked in a tower. Of course, after a while, Miss Rebellious became fairly cliché as well.
Unfortunately, when inventing original characters, it is often difficult for gamemakers to think of more than these two female archetypes which –by now- have become common. This is the main reason why many games with developed characters have only two females in the main party (three if there is a child). You can see examples of this in Final Fantasy VII, and Final Fantasy IX. “But wait!” You say- “FFVIII had three female characters.” Well, remember, I did say DEVELOPED characters.
(ba doom tsch)
So now you want to avoid these two types of characters like a Barry Manilow concert. But wait! These two archetypes –while common, cliché etc- do not necessarily have to be overlooked. What is important about using them is developing them. Think of them –not in relation to your hero- but as heroes themselves. (Really, you should be doing this with all your characters, but I notice a tendency to use especially female characters’ purposes as their personalities- ie: “she’s what he’s fighting for…that’s all I have to write, right?”) Examples of well-developed characters who fit into these archetypes are Beatrix and Garnet from Final Fantasy IX.
This concludes our history. Next we’re going to look at applying our knowledge and imaginations to create original female characters.
That’s all for now.
Next article: Developing these archetypes, and thinking outside of them
-
Good read, but I find it very hard (lol) to believe that anyone could ever be at any level of disinterest with sex, food, and anything that is musical and/or theatrical. Who's your fact checker? You should fire them right now.
-
It's very good but i think you forgot that women can change their type back and fourth(Like Elizabeth Swann for
example).Other than that good work!
-
Love. Just.... love. You're my second favorite femlae now. I'm still first, mind you.
Thanks for noting that the rebel female has become cliche. I'm soooo bloody sick of fantasies by women where the female is all RAH I HAVE A SWORD AND AM A STRONG HEROINE WHO DEFIES SOCIETY AND OH BY THE WAY I DON'T WEAR DRESSES OR USE COMMAS APPARENTLY! Archetypes are good beginnings, but you have to tweak them into full characters.