Post by kajainthesky on Aug 17, 2012 13:59:11 GMT -5
(Because the horsepersons appeared!)
So! I guess, a while ago while discussing good omens with a friend, I started talking about how War is a Femme Fatale, and how I wished she'd gotten more development in a more... personal way? Somehow it feels like both Famine and Pollution gets more of a character while she's just... more of a stereotype.
My friend didn't agree with me, but I'm wondering what you guys think, about War in general but also the characterizations of all the Horsepeople.
I really liked all the horsepeople. Personally I felt they all had their share of perosnal points. Though, I think the resason why it seems she's more of a sterotype is because not many of us experience actual war. Like with pollution and famine you see it all around you.
You see people trying to diet, you see people trying to loss weight with these healthy foods.
Then pollution all you have to do is look around at the sky. So you have a more personal connection with all the others.
War I would say is a bit harder to connect too because not many of us live in areas were people are breaking out fighting. Now someone in the middle east or in Africa might be able to relate to war a lot more then the rest of us are able to considering they probably have seen the gun shots, see the rebels start up, and so on and so forth were people in more developed areas just don't.
So even if War really does have personal way with other people she won't with us who don't have to worry about war in our own town.
Post by kajainthesky on Aug 17, 2012 16:27:53 GMT -5
idjagdina I wrote a really long response and then my browser crashed, so you get a summed up version
I see your point, and I deem it valid. I, however did not find most of her scenes or situations hard to relate to. You know, the people around her. I just found HER unrelateable, and even if she IS war, the war is more relatable than she is, at least to me. Just as I have not starved myself, I've been friends with people who have starved themselves. I have not been in a country affected by war but I have known people affected by it, just the same.
I just get this really uncomfortable feeling that she's just another femme fatale trope, and I don't want that from Terrman.
She might be that trope after all! I just shot out that idea because thinking about it, while I know people who have been effected by war I can't personally relate to how it feels. (Though then again I haven't tried to starve anyone either.) For me I guess it was a they are closer to home then...you know war itself is.
I myself have a hard time telling if certain characters are tropes, and she really didn't have much screen (or well book) time so I guess it's hard for me to judge. I did noticed that they focuses a lot less on her though. (Like with Famine and Pollution it was more about them where with war it was more..starting the wars and what happened in the town.) So maybe she really is.
Though that raises the question of, if we could redo the points where War was shown and used, what would we write instead to bing more of that perosnal stuff out?
Post by manderspuppy on Aug 17, 2012 16:41:40 GMT -5
I think it might be that her personality IS that of a femme fatale... or at least that's how she plays it around humans... Kind of like how Famine is playing the sleek business man? I mean the two of them are both trying to put a pretty face on something ugly? Ugh I'm not sure how to express it. Some people really DO have that femme fatale personality so I guess it never really bothered me. I think I'm trying to say that there is a lot more to War than she shows on the outside. I think that's actually hinted at in some of her later appearances. Maybe?
Post by kajainthesky on Aug 17, 2012 16:56:03 GMT -5
I've always had a bunch of headcanons around it all. But I don't know, I mean, I still LIKE HER. I just wish she'd gotten a bit more focus, like Iacrypte said. It is fair to say that some people just are Femme fatales, but most people who are are... more than that at the same time? That's why I'm comparing a trope and a character, because... from what I get to know about HER, it's mostly trope and not so much character.
I do like that, the entire Trying to "put a pretty face on something ugly." Well said. Applause!
I don't know, I cannot write for shite but if I could mix around with her points, I'd mention more... her point of view. They mention how everyone freezes or whatevs, while she uncrosses her legs. Her beauty, her terror. You get it. I'd like to have had it more like, let's say Famines chapters where it's a bit more from his perspective on the entire thing.
Post by aliceapproved on Aug 17, 2012 17:26:45 GMT -5
For me, War really came off as a stereotypical femme fatale. I've seen this type of character multiple times, so while she's not the most exciting character to me, she is handled a little bit better than some of the other femme fatale characters I've seen.
However, while I don't hate or dislike her, the other characters are handled better and are more interesting in my opinion. (Though, I agree, some more chapters of the other horsepeople would be cool) She has "perfect" eyebrows, she's beautiful, she's sexualized, she's deadly, she's kind of boring to me as a character because everything presented about her is superficial. She starts wars. Wars are bad. Yup, got it. She's a badass. Yup, got it. Tell me where you got those shoes, gurl. Nope, don't have that store here.
There isn't really much to her personality. If there was more "book" time for her that delved deeper into her character, I bet she would be a bit a lot more interesting.
I like to think that she probably lived in an abusive family that was always fighting around her, because that's what being around her does, people start fighting. So, even families are fighting within each other and not just two different towns.
Post by aliceapproved on Aug 17, 2012 17:41:37 GMT -5
It's all right, but I don't think you need to feel bad about War being pretty much a trope.
Nobody's perfect. Actors and characters aren't perfect (despite us claiming perfection multiple times over a certain angel and demon XD), books aren't perfect, shows and movies aren't perfect, writers aren't perfect, too, so Pratchett and Gaiman are no exception.
That doesn't mean you have to stop respecting them just because they ended up writing a trope. It just proves that they're human, too, and not godly creatures that somehow have secret powers over us.
So, I think you can still respect them despite War not being a fully fleshed out character. I still love the book despite its flaws. c: What's important is that it entertains us which is the purpose of most books.
Post by kajainthesky on Aug 17, 2012 17:47:35 GMT -5
Doesn't change the fact that I don't want the stereotypes and everything. It's a nice thing to be able to say about your favorite author, yaknow. But then again, the book is sort of... old. In author-lifetime relativity.
I mean, I'm well aware with the whole like something but discuss it's faults. I'm a fan of both BBC sherlock and Supernatural, after all. Hard to ignore flaws.
---but I will always claim perfection from Crowley
Post by manderspuppy on Aug 17, 2012 18:44:19 GMT -5
Also you could look at the fact that GO is TECHNICALLY a work of humor/parody, even though I think it comes off a lot deeper in the end, and that type of work sometimes has stereotype characters deliberately. They're often used for the role the character plays in the story instead of the... worth of the character as a character. Now I don't LIKE this technique... actually it really pisses me off most of the time BUT that doesn't make it a FLAW just something we personally don't like. I'll admit that other than Adam and Them, the only characters I REALLY pay attention to in GO are C and A. I've never NOTICED something lacking in War till you brought it up... I also have I friend who occasionally RPs War with me in RL so I might be guilty of putting her personality onto War without meaning to. Hmmm... things to think about...
Post by kajainthesky on Aug 17, 2012 19:06:30 GMT -5
That's one of the things my friend said, that it's all a parody and so on - But that doesn't change the fact that unlike Famine and Pollution, her part his a lot more focused on repeating how lethal and gorgeous she is, and her appearance. It's not even for the sake of humor, it just... is. And while I don't dislike her, not at all, I just think it's a shame she fell under a trope like that.
I get more of a personal grasp of madame Tracy than I do with War :/
Post by screechthemighty on Aug 20, 2012 18:45:20 GMT -5
RE: War being a stereotypical Femme Fatale:
It could be that, because she's meant to be a personification of something (namely, war), she isn't really meant to be that "deep" of a character. She is what her name implies, and there's not much else to it. All things considered, I wasn't terribly bothered by her.
Subject change time:
Famine. I don't like him that much. Not because I find him to be a terrible character or anything, because he's well-written and all. It's just the way he spends his free time gives me a bad taste in my mouth. What I'm wondering is if Famine would have been as unlikable as I found him when the book first came out, or if my negative reaction to him is influenced by the fact that eating disorders, body image problems, and deathly thin models are so in-the-spotlight.
Post by aliceapproved on Aug 20, 2012 19:11:27 GMT -5
I think that makes sense about War. She is what she is and there's really not that much to it. Doesn't mean I can't find her uninteresting, but she doesn't really need that much depth.
As for Famine, he's doing his job and it's especially disgusting considering today's socially accepted standards of what "beauty" is and that people feel the need to starve themselves to be a twig in order to be accepted. It really is discomforting.