extrajoker ([info]extrajoker) wrote,
@ 2007-04-24 17:24:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: *roar*
Entry tags:books

Butcher's a Hack!
After watching a couple of "Dresden Files" episodes and hearing people at ConBust talk about Jim Butcher's book series, I decided to pick up a copy of Storm Front, the first Harry Dresden book.

I was expecting to like it. I was really hoping to like it.

Instead --



I thought it sucked ass. It has a few good moments, a few nice turns of phrase, a few interesting concepts. But overall: ass suckage.

Harry Dresden, the narrator/protagonist, calls himself "old-fashioned" while acknowledging (more than once) that others would call him "chauvinistic." Sadly, these self-assessments do nothing to diminish the offensiveness of his narrative voice. It seems that Butcher is trying to deflect criticism from Harry by showing him to be not a mere tool, but rather a self-aware tool.

If such was the author's intent, it didn't work with me. Instead, I'm remembering an Oscar Wilde quote: "There is luxury in self-reproach. When we blame ourselves, we feel no one else has a right to blame us." Unfortunately, our feeling that way doesn't make it true.

Suffice it to say, I really couldn't stomach Harry.

As for the author himself...well...I could be wrong...but the sexism inherent in the wizard's character seems to stem from a corresponding prejudice in the author --

But before I babble about this, I'll say that, when my annoyance with the writing grew from mild to moderate, I started surfing the Web for like-minded readers. Sometimes, I need the affirmation of knowing that it's not just me.

Well, I found blogger Ragnell, who writes (April 6, 2007):

    The first few books make it difficult to distinguish between Harry's innate chauvinism and the attitude of the book. But as I kept reading, I realized that Harry's chauvinism, his continuous desire to Save Women From Themselves, was in fact a *huge* character flaw, and therefore Quite The Interesting Character Flaw Indeed! I've met other readers who had similar reactions, both male and female alike....

And then:

    Anyway, in the Dresden Files, Harry's chauvinism is characterization and doesn't hold true to the plot. I can understand why a lot of people would like to spare themselves the reading anyway, but I actually like to see a stupid character learn his lessons in a story. Its fantasy, after all.

I don't know that I agree with this. I think that readers can trace the sexism right back to Butcher. I have to wonder whether Butcher had any inkling -- and if so, whether he cared -- that women might read his books. Yes, all the female characters are described from the skewed perspective of Harry Dresden, and readers may take the wizard's words with a grain of salt. However, I don't think the narrator's accounts of their behaviors are unreliable, and those behaviors consist mainly of crying and seduction...and sometimes mothering.

(And here's where the spoilers come in.)

The following is a cast of Storm Front's female characters:

  • Monica Sells, housewife, loving mother, and client of wizard-detective Harry Dresden;
  • Karrin Murphy, the homicide detective who consults Harry on double murder case;
  • Jennifer Stanton (prostitute), one of the victims of said double murder;
  • Susan Rodriguez, seductive tabloid reporter;
  • Bianca, vampiress and brothel Madam, employer to the late Jennifer Stanton and the soon to be late
  • Linda Randall, prostitute moonlighting as the chauffeur of
  • Mrs. Beckitt and her husband...grieving yuppie parents of a little girl killed in gangland crossfire.

I think that's everybody.

Jennifer Stanton's only appearance is as an in flagrante delicto corpse, who died while servicing a mob boss's bodyguard. But we shouldn't judge or dismiss her. She was a great girl, really. According to friend and co-worker Linda Randall:

    "....She was sweet. A lot of girls get like-- They get pretty jaded, Mr. Dresden. But it never really touched her. She made people feel better about themselves somehow....I could never do that. All I did was get them off."

Had Jennifer Stanton made a live appearance in Storm Front, she'd probably have been a Crier. (Or a Mother.) Linda Randall, however, falls into the category of Seductress. Take, for example, this exchange:

    "Harry who?" she asked.

    "Dresden. I'm a private investigator."

    She laughed, the sound rich enough to roll around naked in. "Investigating my privates, Mr. Dresden? I like you already."

Or this one:

    "Did you know Tommy Tomm [the dead mob bodyguard]?" I asked.

    "Oh, sure. Fantastic in bed." She lowered her eyes and shifted on the car's seat, lowering one of her hands out of sight, and making me wonder where it had gone. "He was a regular customer. Maybe twice a month Jen and I would go over to his place, have a little party." She leaned toward me. "He could do things to a woman that would turn her into a real animal, Harry Dresden. You know what I mean? Growling and snarling. In heat."

    She was driving me crazy. That voice of hers --

Yeah, I think you get the point.

Harry's other Temptress is reporter Susan Rodriguez, who becomes petulant when her attempt to wheedle information from him fails:

    "Harry Dresden," she said, "you are a thoroughly maddening man." Her eyes narrowed a bit further. "You didn't look down my blouse even once, did you," she accused.

Oh, chuckle chuckle chortle.

Whatever, Butcher.

That covers the Sirens. How about the Snifflers?

The unlikeliest of these is powerful undead Bianca, whose grotesque demonic form Harry magically reveals. And since one of Harry's powers is to see into the soul of anyone who meets his gaze, the narrator can reveal to readers the vampiress's motivations:

    I saw her anger, her rage, and for just a moment I got a peek inside, saw the source of it. She was furious that I'd seen her true form, horrified and embarrassed that I had stripped her disguise away and seen the creature beneath. And she was afraid that I could take away even her mask, forever, with my power.

    More than anything else, Bianca wanted to be beautiful. And tonight, I had destroyed her illusion. I had rattled her gilded little world.

    ....

    She stiffened, then turned her head to one side, and let her fingers go limp. It was a silent, bitter surrender. She didn't move quickly enough for me to miss seeing a tear streak down one cheek.

Again: whatever, Butcher.

Other Criers?

Well, there's Susan again...though at least she's got reason to sob, being terrified by an acid-spewing demon and physically ill from the consumption of magical potions.

But there's also Karrin Murphy -- usually referred to as "Murphy" or "Murph" (to show readers just how hard-nosed she really is). To be fair, Harry doesn't even know for sure whether this friend cries over his refusal to share information with her (in order to protect her, of course):

    I sensed, more than saw, the hardening around her eyes, the little lines of hurt and anger. I'm not sure if a tear fell, or if she really just raised a hand to brush back some of her hair.

Blah.

I imagine Murphy is the character to whom Butcher's female readership is meant to relate. She's an aikido enthusiast, Harry tells us. (We never get to see her fight.) Apparently she's a very capable detective. (Of course, she can contribute nothing but paperwork to this black-magic murder case.) And she's tough --

Which is, of course, why she's the one whose life Harry must save as the book nears its climax.

Murphy's also one of the Mommy figures. When Harry is physically ill, she drives him home, medicates him, tucks him into bed, leaves him a bit of much-needed spending cash....

Mrs. Beckitt is another Mother -- in this case a grieving one. In an effort to avenge the death of their daughter, she and her husband help to power the spells of Victor Sells (the murdering practitioner of black magic) by having ritual sex together. That's about all we learn of the Beckitts.

As for Monica Sells....

Well, she could be categorized as a Crier. But she sheds the righteous tears of a loving Mother, who only wants to save her two children from the monster their father, her husband, Victor Sells, has become. A Mother who doesn't want her children to be abused as she herself was.

Blah, blah, blah.

This is why I don't think the sexism is limited to the character of Harry Dresden. If it were only a matter of the narrator making patronizing comments about Murphy ("one of those liberated, professional women") or others of the "fair sex," then I could lay the chauvinism at the feet of the fictional character. But Butcher's female characters are sexist stereotypes. The weakly weeping woman. The oversexed seductress. The martyrly mother.

I realize that these stereotypes are staples of Butcher's noirish influences. But for crying out loud, this is the 21st century!

From now on, I'll just revisit Witch Hunt's H. Phillip Lovecraft and Hypolyta Kropotkin for all my supernatural super-sleuthing needs.

Okay. Rant over.

I didn't reference the viewpoints of some of the other bloggers I found, but will link to their accounts here, as a record for myself and a resource for anyone else who (unlikely though it may be) is interested.

I Blame the Patriarchy:
(July 9, 2005)
(July 27, 2005)

FicusFan:
(November 5, 2005)

No Arithmetic:
(February 16, 2007)
(February 25, 2007)


(Post a new comment)


[info]jesshartley
2007-04-24 09:40 pm UTC (link)
Wow. I have to admit, I haven't read Butcher's stuff in quite some time, but I totally didn't get that impression from what I've read, when I have read it.

I'll go back and give it a read over with those things in mind, so that I can more adequately discuss the topic with you. :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 01:06 am UTC (link)
I've only read the first book, and some people say that the series improves as it progresses. Ragnell (quoted above) writes that "the Dresden Files...get more interesting, more in depth, and *better written* every book."

On the other hand, No Arithmetic (linked above), who isn't disturbed by the "masculine" tone of Storm Front, gets fed up with Harry by the second book, Fool Moon. And FicusFan (also linked above) writes that in "The last couple of books...Harry has become a smug bully and Butcher's sexism has leaked out."

Given my reaction to the first book, I'm not inclined to read further. If you have, I'd welcome comments on them. Even if you haven't, I'm game for a discussion of Storm Front.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]jesshartley
2007-04-25 01:14 am UTC (link)
I've met Jim, exchanged many conversational emails with him and been in virtual (web) contact with him for years and I have to say that he seemed anything but a sexist to me, so those who sling such loaded terms without ever having had a conversation with the man (or read anything non-fiction that he's written) garner very little respect from me.

Those are hurtful and malevolent terms to use about someone's writing, but to use them about the person without concrete examples of his behavior or words (other than fictional storytelling) is just plain unfair.

I'll re-read starting with Storm Front, when I'm done with my current project, so I'm more familiar with the material, but I strongly dislike the idea of casting moral arrows at a man I have found to be kind, well-spoken and generous of spirit, based on works of fiction he's created.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 02:11 am UTC (link)
Having read your recent journal post about how disheartening that recent criticism of your own work was, I can understand your reaction to the "hurtful and malevolent" comments on his writing. Likewise, I am very sensitive to criticism of my own work, whether it be creative writing, art, or what have you.

On the other hand, Butcher's writing was very offensive to me. I kept reading, waiting for a punchline that never came. It left me disgusted and angry.

You seem irritated, and I'm not sure what specifically did it -- whether it was my post, my reply to your first comment, or the words of the linked bloggers.

What I'll say for myself is that while I can't know whether Jim Butcher is sexist, I do know that I found his novel (and not just its protagonist) sexist.

I don't want to hound you; I'm interested in your opinions (on both the writing and the man). Thanks for your comments....Quite possibly you're the only person to read through this lj dissertation of mine.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]jesshartley
2007-04-25 02:18 am UTC (link)
Oh, please don't take my defense of Jim as a person to mean that I'm angry with you (or anyone, really, although I dislike hearing people label people when they've never met them).

I can't argue with your statement that you felt his novel to be anything in particular. I didn't get that out of it, but we're different people, and that's fine. It makes for more interesting conversation than a bunch of head-nodding about how X is X, regardless of the topic. :)

I did feel defensive of Jim in regards to the person who said something about "Butcher's sexism", but then... I guess that's the price we pay for being published. Some people will make assumptions about the person based on their interpretation of the works, and there's nothing that will change that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 09:27 pm UTC (link)
I guess that's the price we pay for being published.

True. Of course, blogging is a manner of self-publishing...so I myself and those to whom I've linked are all open to the same kinds of assumptions, interpretations, and whatnot as are the writers of fiction (the obvious difference being that most blogs have a much more limited readership than novels).

That's one reason I welcome comments. I'm not one to say, "This is my journal. If you don't like what it says, piss off." I know I'm publishing this stuff.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kjpepper
2007-04-25 02:24 am UTC (link)
I'll just revisit Witch Hunt's H. Phillip Lovecraft and Hypolyta Kropotkin for all my supernatural super-sleuthing needs.

Oooh! not supernatural, but *dangles Miles Vorkosigan's short hyperactiveness in front of you enticingly* eh? eh? *dangle dangle*

The problem with that series is I would not actually recommend reading it in chronological order. Thing is I haven't come up with an alternative order to read them in...

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 09:17 pm UTC (link)
I don't read much actual science fiction, and haven't read anything by Bujold (though Patricia Briggs was praising her fantasy works at ConBust).

What's wrong with reading them in order? Did she write a prequel or two? Or are later books just more engaging than the first?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kjpepper
2007-04-25 09:36 pm UTC (link)
the latter, really. In terms of publication date they're all over the place cause she skipped around. In my opinion the first book (shards of honor) and The Warrior's apprentice (book 3) are the least engaging of the series; the books/ stories get exponentially better after that. Miles as a character gets a lot more interesting as he matures as well. I think what I'd do is tell folk to start with The Vor Game, read a few from there, then double back and read the first two or three (or one, depending on edition) later for backstory and character insight. Or you could go like me and read them in order, but I really wasn't sold on the series until book 4 or 5, just so you know.

Right, babbling ceases now.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sundart
2007-04-25 03:41 am UTC (link)
I never read the first book of the series. But I did read books 2 and 4-6, and I can agree that the books get better written as they go along. Rather than worse, like the Anita Blake novels... which descended into soft-core porn after the fourth or fifth book. But for the Dresden books, improvement serves to lift them up from borderline unreadable to acceptably mediocre, in my opinion. They're fluff reading, pure and simple. Kudos to Butcher for continually improving... and I don't think I'll read the books more than once or at the most, twice.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]verbena76
2007-04-25 12:38 pm UTC (link)
Rather than worse, like the Anita Blake novels... which descended into soft-core porn after the fourth or fifth book.

Thank you, I'm glad I'm not the only person who thought that. I stopped reading the Anita Blake series with the fifth or sixth book.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 09:12 pm UTC (link)
Actually, I've heard that a lot. While I myself haven't read any of that series, I've noticed that many readers qualify their LKH fandom by saying that they like the books that came before the series deteriorated into mere porn. (And the tendency is to use that word -- "porn" -- rather than the euphemistic "erotica.")

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kjpepper
2007-04-25 09:38 pm UTC (link)
no... it's porn, pure and simple. I'm really interested in how they're going to handle that in the comic series. :D

I actually like the Anita blake books, but then again I also read what can only be classified as "lust and thrust" romance novels.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-25 09:09 pm UTC (link)
Given that Storm Front was the first novel not only of the series but also of the author, it's not surprising that the writing improves.

On the other hand, I don't think the chauvinism can be chalked up to inexperience...unless you argue that it's merely a matter of his relying too heavily upon those noirish gumshoe influences.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]morchades
2007-04-28 04:59 am UTC (link)
That's how I figured it. He leaves a lot of that behind.

I have a friend who had the exact same problem with Storm Front as you, only he had started with Proven Guilty and knew that it was considerably better later on.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-30 08:31 pm UTC (link)
Why, hello, Ragnell the Aforementioned! I hope you don't mind my linking to you; I did enjoy reading your blog's take on Dresden. Thanks for stopping by!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]heathersbike
2007-04-30 02:48 pm UTC (link)
Well! I have this waiting for me at the library. So I'll be late in joining the discussion. (:

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-04-30 08:32 pm UTC (link)
Hehe. You're a convert to the urban fantasy genre now? Or are you just filling time before the next Mercy novel? ;)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]heathersbike
2007-05-01 09:42 pm UTC (link)
Well, I'm not sure I would say that yet, as I am currently just a Patricia Biggs fan. I thought I would expand out into the genre, but apparently I have picked the wrong book. I:

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]heathersbike
2007-05-21 10:55 pm UTC (link)
Um... I liked it. Please don't rescind my feminist standing! :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]extrajoker
2007-05-23 09:06 pm UTC (link)
No, I think literary preferences are safeguarded under feminism's right-to-choose policy: marry whomever you wish, control your own reproduction, opt for career and/or family, and read whatever floats your proverbial boat.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…