Covenant raping Lena

[iQuestor]

Insomniac, I get what you were going for.

What I mean by actions is something you physically do in real life.

If I commited rape in a lucid dream that I beleived was RL, would I go check myself into a prison the next morning? nope. Because that was not me in the dream, but part of my psyche. I do not agree with dreams being the 'real you' as was said before, just like I don't beleive you always say exactly how you feel when you are drunk or high (Ask Mel Gibson) Sometimes you may, but its not reliably an indicator of the kind of person you are in RL.

SO raping someone in RL is not the moral equivalent of actually raping someone in a dream, because it isn't really the real world you doing it. It may say something about how you are on the inside, but it doesn't mean you are a rapist.

last point: is someone who intends harm innocent if it was thwarted? yes, that is a different thing altogether.

[jwaneeta]

I don't want to say anything disruptive here, and I really don't want to go outside of the text. So please bear in mind that I'm female and speaking from a female perspective entirely. And I will mention meta: that is, other works by the author, comments by the author, and comments by people who have read the author.

It's just that I've seen a lot of rape-as-drama-device, in stories where other types of threat would be more logical in terms of plot. It probably isn't there to titilate so much as to shock the reader, but when everybody's doing it the shock loses impact, and the cumulative effect feels, well, exploitative.

The thing is, rape is (and rightly so), often viewed by decent, upstanding author-men as the ultimate horror and used as such as in a story, as a kind of shorthand for the Ultimate Evil. It motivates the hero, gets him angry, and involves his honor -- to repent or to avenge. These decent author-men, who would never rape, can't imagine that this very trope is felt as demeaning and repulsive to a female reader.

Why? oh, I'll tell you, what the hell. Rape is wriiten as (and rightly so) by decent author-guys as The Ultimate Evil. It's well-meant. But it's *never* written from a female victim's POV. And the destruction of honor/ loss of innocence / repercussions only affect the male rapist, or the close Male Kin of the victim, at least in the stories I'm referencing. (I'm talking about USA pop culture here, mind, not literature.) The Man's honor is touched, the Man's story is motivated, the Man is made better or worse. This self involvement, innocent in itself, is a big turn off to women who live every day, and make all their plans, with the sensible caution that takes the vauge possibilty of sexual assault into account.

Women who don't use their heads in terms of where they park and where they walk, and what time they chose to go home may get raped. Sometimes they get raped anyway -- and they're often raped by people they know. It's not just a matter of unwanted sex: it's accompanied by fist blows, vaginal tearing, and death theats, if they're lucky. Unless you live as a woman and know what it is to live with the perpetual habit of caution that comes from the threat of assault, it's really not cool, in my opinion, to use it as a means of adding drama to a story.

I love TCTC, but I admit that the rape was a big obstacle to me. I got past it and loved the character development, vivid imagery and genuine heart in the rest of the Chronicles. But I'll tell you a secret: I picked up The Mirror of her Dreams and there was the rape threat again, used as (and only as) a way of making a Bad Guy Bad. It gave me the skeeves and I quit.

If I could say anything to a well-meaning Decent Author Guy (and I know many) it would be this: if we female co-creators tell you that this Rape Trope is something we're uncomfortable with, please listen. We're not trying to censor you. We love you and love your talent, but this is something that, so far, you are using as a plot ploy, and it's not cool. It's not OMGwhoa instant drama. It's a reality for every woman who runs out of gas. It's a reality for every woman who leaves a theater alone. Until you live as a woman or take the time to see it from a female POV just be polite and take our word that your take is incomplete and not cool.

ETA: Oh God, I should really edit this. But I'm weary. Suffice it to say I'm not trying to start a fight: it's the real world and I love peace. But I also think this is a safe enough place to speak my mind.

SON OF ETA: Well, I was trying to correct a typo and lost a sentence and had to reconstruct a sentence, and I'm scragged-out-tired. Sorry if there's some incoherence in the middle.

ETA III: Davey Jones' ETA: I really don't want to go outside of the text. Way to contradict oneself in the opening paragraph. I suck.

[wayfriend]

I cannot tell you how important your perspective is to me. There's not enough female perspective in many discussions around here. I hope you find things safe enough ... then again, don't let a little disagreement make you feel unsafe.

I agree with your assessment of Decent Author Guy and The Ultimate Evil. (Sounds like the title of a paper if not a book!) I would only add that, as an author trying to connect to readers, then connecting with the perception of something is often a clearer road then trying to connect with the reality of something. Because readers recognize the former rather easily, the latter less so. Unless you're writing a book that explores the reality of rape, would you go there?

Which begs the question, are authors writing fantasy for males, or are they writing for everyone but oblivious to their bias? An interesting discussion right there. And why do female authors go in the same direction, more so if anything?

Jwaneeta, you've indicated clearly that the rape threat in MN is gratuitous drama. I think the author would disagree... you should check out the GI response to the sexuality found in MN, maybe it'll move your opinion a bit. (You can find it in the GI thread here, as well.)

How about the rape in LFB? Gratuitous drama, or essential to the story?

EDIT: ah heck, I won't make anyone work for it.

Kevin:Mr. Donaldson,

I cannot help but notice that the Mordant's Need series is a bit more "spicey" than your other works that I have read. Poor Terisa seems to have frequent trouble with torn or missing clothing, her breasts are mentioned in almost every chapter, etc.

Not that I didn't find it enjoyable! But this inquiring mind wants to know: what were the details behind this choice?

• "Mordant's Need" is more explicitly *about* gender roles and stereotypes than my other stories. Terisa Morgan begins the story with such a frail sense of her own identity that she makes Linden Avery at the beginning of "The Wounded Land" look fully self-actualized. And Mordant itself is gripped by rigid gender stereotypes: the kind of male-dominated quasi-medieval society that we so often find in mediocre fantasy novel. Well, the subsequent story describes how Terisa discovers her own reality as both a person and a woman *while* the culture of Mordant undergoes a profound redefinition of gender roles, predominently as that pertains to the permissable/available roles for women. King Joyse (get it?) sets in motion events which eventually enable his daughters, his wife, and Terisa herself to assume unexpected roles which transform their society.
  
  In other words, "Mordant's Need" is about sex. Specifically it's about how the treatment of women as mere sexual objects breaks down in a society which is in danger of breaking down itself under pressures both external and internal; and about how the breaking down of the treatment of women as mere sexual objects actually enables their society to be both transformed and saved. So naturally the evidence that women are being treated as mere sexual objects is fairly overt.
  
  In addition, these issues also touch on the "rape" theme which is so prevalent in my writing. But "Mordant's Need" is--as I intended it to be--a *gentler* story than my usual work; and so "the evidence that women are being treated as mere sexual objects," while overt, is seldom violent. Hence your observation that the story is more "spicey" than others I've written
  
  (10/10/2004)

BTW, I still don't "get it".

[Buckarama]

Agreed a female perspective is exactly what's needed. Being male I don't think we can truly empathize with physical rape. I also agree that it is used as the "Ultimate evil" but surely there is another way to represent that to the reader.

[iQuestor]

I dont think SRD or any male writer could completely put theirself in that position of a female as jwaneeta so eloquently expalined, unless said male had experienced some sort of rape himself by another man, as in prison, and even then I am not sure it would be the same. I also beleive rape is one of the worst imaginable crimes one human could commit against another. I know women who have said they's rather be murdered than raped.

But, IMHO that does not invalidate SRD using it. I think he didnt write those lines lightly. I think he stands by it, and I seriously dont think TCoTC would be the same without it. SRD wanted to cause the readers to be uncomfortable; personally, I don't like the scene myself, but I do think it is a part of the story that defines Covenant as he was then and contrasts him against those much nobler and respect-worthy than himself.

What if SRD had chosen another crime, like say, Murder? It doesnt have the same connotations as rape. Would no thave had the same effect. What other symbolism could be used in place of the rape? I cannot think of one.

[jwaneeta]

Oh, wow, I completely messed up the quote thing, there. Yuck.


Iquestor said:

SRD wanted to cause the readers to be uncomfortable; personally, I don't like the scene myself, but I do think it is a part of the story that defines Covenant as he was then and contrasts him against those much nobler and respect-worthy than himself.

And he absolutely succeeded in that. But what I'm trying to say is that the inclusion of rape in a story is almost exclusively used as a chisel to throw Male Issues into relief, and after a while it can't but come off as a failure of imagination at best, and at worst, a stunt.

Don't get me wrong. Women -- most women -- don't spend their lives cowering in a basement because sexual assault is a possibility. It's not the defining reality of life; we're not all like that paranoid nut Stephen King portrayed with such scorn in The Stand.

But for a woman it's part of the landscape, like a ditch. You grow up with it. You don't wallow in the ditch, you don't center your life around the fact that oh WOE there's a ditch over there, but you don't forget it's, you know, an undeniable ditch and as a reasonable person you need to watch your step. To see it reduced to an issue that solely motivates male characters is just a little weird.

Here's a question: what if Esmer had threatened to rape Covenant in TOT? Different culture, Bad Guy, overwheening dominance issues -- why not? Could've happened... yet it didn't . In SRD's work (and other pop culture efforts with which I'm familiar) the use of rape as drama, as threat, seems to be exclusively a male/female construct. For this female reader it gets a little old. If the male author is simply trying to explore issues of evil and violation, why is it never m/m? Where's the line, and who drew it?

[danlo]

I'm not trying to defend SRD here but simply pointing out the time LFB was written--at least it helped to bring to issue out in the open. Granted 'rape' was a four letter word then as it is now--however it was still a pretty verbotten subject, even newscasts quailed at mentioning it. And that a rapist would even conciously consider he'd done something wrong-that was a totally new concept. I think I have more of a problem with The Real Story than I do with LFB (pardon the usage) the ground had already been broken...

[jwaneeta]

I cannot tell you how important your perspective is to me. There's not enough female perspective in many discussions around here. I hope you find things safe enough ... then again, don't let a little disagreement make you feel unsafe.

Thanks. And since I'm being completely frank here, I'll confess that there's another reason I was a little chary of hopping into this discussion heretofore -- talking about rape is sometimes uncomfortable for women for reasons that have little to do with men, and a lot to do with female pride. An egalitarian-type woman may feel that she's casting light on a female disadvantage that all the pluck in the world can't erase. One doesn't want to be percieved as bleating, whining, or weak, after all the labor to be seen as equal. It's a sticky subject.

But you know, I'm getting older and I'm coming to the conclusion that plain honesty is better than saving face. Things are what they are.

And why do female authors go in the same direction, more so if anything?

I've thought about this. I can't really get my head around it, to be honest. I can only assume that some people will do anything to get into show business.

EDIT: ah heck, I won't make anyone work for it.

The GI quote is very illuminating, thanks for posting that. But again, I can't help but ask: why is female sexuality, female powerlessness, and female jeopardy the default choice? I'm not just talking about SRD here -- this is something I see a lot of. It almost starts starts to feel like an abstraction after a while.

And I'm just trying to say that it's really, truly, frankly not an abstraction for the female reader.

This is an interesting discussion. Thanks for the reply.

[Insomniac By Choice]

Rape is a reality on the male mind, too, but it's mainly related to sex.

Anyway, let me put it like this to answer your former question about male/male rape: would you consider it a trivial or unnecessary plot point for a man in prison to be threatened with rape? This is probably where you most often see it, in fact, because if a man is going to raped, it's most likely going to happen there and it is very much a reality.

The truth is, given the opportunity, a man will generally have sex with a (good looking) woman. For a man without morals, willingness is not part of the equation when it comes to opportunity.

Rape isn't to be used for titilation or cheap drama, but it's the ultimate expression of dominance from one person over another, and so you can see how it would come up.

[Seareach]

I really want to add to this thread but don't really have the time to have an indepth discussion (takes me far too long to write anything--which sounds like a cop-out, but it's not).

But, briefly: I'm a woman but the rape of Lena doesn't evoke in me the passionate response that it does in other people (eg: I have never once thought as I read that passage "oh my God, that's vile, SRD ought to be ashamed of himself"). Don't get me wrong--the act is vile--but it's an important aspect of the first Chronicles. Without that one act, you wouldn't have the books you have (these books are about the consequence of that one act of violence, and although you only see those consequences from Covenant's POV, you see the effect of that violence throughout the story by the actions of other characters, as witnessed by Covenant--characters such as Triock, Atirian, Trell, even Elena come to mind).

I think along the lines that iquestor does: someone suggest to me an equivelant act that would result in the story that you have. Metaphorically speaking, the rape of Lena results in the "rape" of more people than just Lena. The act is shocking, but its effect on not only Lena but a multitude of other characters are, in my mind, just as shocking.

Like Danlo, if I'm going to have a "problem" with anything SRD has written it would be The Real Story. But I *don't* have a problem with it (but that's a completely different topic).

[I do think that there's something important to remember here: the rape of Lena is actually seen from Lena's POV, not Covenant's.]

Not the most eloquent thing I've ever written...but hopefully you can "hear" my POV (even if you don't agree with it).

[A Gunslinger]

I really want to add to this thread but don't really have the time to have an indepth discussion (takes me far too long to write anything--which sounds like a cop-out, but it's not).

But, briefly: I'm a woman but the rape of Lena doesn't evoke in me the passionate response that it does in other people (eg: I have never once thought as I read that passage "oh my God, that's vile, SRD ought to be ashamed of himself"). Don't get me wrong--the act is vile--but it's an important aspect of the first Chronicles. Without that one act, you wouldn't have the books you have (these books are about the consequence of that one act of violence, and although you only see those consequences from Covenant's POV, you see the effect of that violence throughout the story by the actions of other characters, as witnessed by Covenant--characters such as Triock, Atirian, Trell, even Elena come to mind).

I think along the lines that iquestor does: someone suggest to me an equivelant act that would result in the story that you have. Metaphorically speaking, the rape of Lena results in the "rape" of more people than just Lena. The act is shocking, but its effect on not only Lena but a multitude of other characters are, in my mind, just as shocking.

Like Danlo, if I'm going to have a "problem" with anything SRD has written it would be The Real Story. But I *don't* have a problem with it (but that's a completely different topic).

[I do think that there's something important to remember here: the rape of Lena is actually seen from Lena's POV, not Covenant's.]

Not the most eloquent thing I've ever written...but hopefully you can "hear" my POV (even if you don't agree with it).

Covenant's rape of Lena was terrible, indeed. It was however, not a standard rape...that is, not a rape designed to demostrate power or rage over another. No, in this case, Covenant raped Lena as a demonstration of frustrated self-loathing. in so doing, he rapes himself and the entire Land as well. he spends a fair amount of time attempting to mend that wrong not only for her, but for himslef and the land as well.

This why, intuitively, we can see beyond the rape. Yes we revile it, but it can be understood in the poetic sense.

It was icky though. the firt time I tried to read TC, I put it down because of the rape, only to come back some months later.

[Fist and Faith]

jwaneeta, your posts are fantastic. If I was an author, I'd definitely think very carefully before I wrote a rape scene.

I was going to ask how many female authors have rapes in their works, but I guess you and Wayfriend are saying it happens often. That does seem very strange.

As Buckarama says, it's not something men can understand the same way you can. If your suggestion was used, and Esmer raped Covenant, the reaction from the male readers would be something along the lines of, "Oh, Covenant's gonna f---ing kick your ass for this! I can't wait to see it happen!!" And I don't think the different reaction is only because most men have never felt threatened in this way, much less actually been raped. I remember watching Sally, or Montel, or something, and there was a teenage boy who had been raped by a group of boys at school. (Using a broom.) The boy was asked how it had happened, and he talked about it, and even got on the floor in the position he had been held by the gang. A viewer called and, a bit upset, said she could not believe a rape victim was asked to demonstrate such a thing. Would a female victim ever do such a thing? I can't imagine it. I think it demonstrates that men and women are very different in some ways. A male author, even one whose wife had been raped, can't write it from the victim's pov. It wouldn't likely ring true to the female reader. Maybe a female writer could help out on those parts?

[duchess of malfi]

Spoilers for Stehen Erikson (first paragraph) and Diana Gabaldan (second paragraph and Robin McKinley (third paragraph)):

Spoiler

To change the subject a bit; in Memories of Ice, Steven Erikson has women rape men (and not with brooms, either, if you get my drift). And it is just as disturbing and gross as the other way around. And in House of Chains there is a horrible rape scene...

And in Diana Gabaldan's Outlander, there is anal rape by one man to another. And it is every bit as disturbing and gross as a man raping a woman, or Erikson's women raping the men. And is has a profound and lasting effect on the victim.

And in Robin McKinley's Deerskin a father brutally rapes his young daughter. That might have been the worst all...and yes - it has a profound and lasting effect on the victim...

I guess that my point is that Donaldson is not the only fantasy writer who uses rape in his books. As long as the author takes it seriously as the horrible crime that it is, it can add a lot to a story, in how the survivor deals with what happened to him or her; and how the survivor's loved ones react to the crime...

[matrixman]

jwaneeta, your posts are fantastic. If I was an author, I'd definitely think very carefully before I wrote a rape scene.

Ditto.

I was going to ask how many female authors have rapes in their works, but I guess you and Wayfriend are saying it happens often. That does seem very strange.

I got turned off early in my reading of Sheri Tepper's book Plague of Angels, in which it's mentioned that one of her characters was a victim of rape. What turned me off was that Tepper seemed to make light of the issue because she mentioned it in what I felt was a very casual, almost flippant way. I lost a lot of enthusiasm for the book after that, and returned it to my female friend who had loaned it to me. This is the same friend who I mentioned elsewhere had read LFB but was bothered by the rape scene. (To her credit, she at least finished LFB, whereas I didn't finish Tepper's.) So it would seem, on the surface at least, that my friend has no trouble with Tepper's glib mentioning of rape, yet has a problem with Donaldson's earnest tackling of the issue. I found it awkward to face my friend and defend the Covenant books without coming off sounding vaguely chauvinistic, just because I'm a guy talking about it. There's nothing I can do about that (except go for a sex change, but that's for another discussion). What do I draw from all this? That human beings - women and men, authors and readers - are complicated and self-contradictory creatures. It's hard to understand people, even at the best of times. (Unless you're Dr. Phil, right?)

Anyway, jwaneeta, it's worth repeating what others have said: your perspective on this issue is very much appreciated! You've helped me to understand much better how female readers may see the issue of rape - when handled by male authors at any rate. Right from the start, SRD struck me as a writer who treated his female characters sensitively, and his words from the GI confirm my impression. He was and is very conscious of how women are portrayed in traditional fantasy stories. I see SRD as an agent for positive change for female roles in fantasy, even if, as you say, he and other male authors are guilty of using exactly the kind of "demeaning and repulsive" trope that perpetuates the female-as-victim role. It's undeniable that the consequences of Lena's rape are seen from Covenant's point of view, but I keep Seareach's salient point in mind:

[I do think that there's something important to remember here: the rape of Lena is actually seen from Lena's POV, not Covenant's.]

Obviously, that doesn't really address your larger point, that the rape scenario is used too much by authors - correct? It's certainly your right, especially as a woman, to question the appropriateness of using rape as a dramatic device. The dilemma you raise has no satisfactory solution. Without the rape, the Chronicles would need to be completely re-imagined.

Which begs the question, are authors writing fantasy for males, or are they writing for everyone but oblivious to their bias?

Maybe. I just hope SRD won't be remembered only as that weird fantasy author who wrote about a rapist anti-hero.

[A Gunslinger]

I just hope SRD won't be remembered only as that weird fantasy author who wrote about a rapist anti-hero.

I doubt that. The act is a defining moment in the CTC, but I think the work has a lot more to offer that will define the lgacy of the author.

[jwaneeta]

I just hope SRD won't be remembered only as that weird fantasy author who wrote about a rapist anti-hero.

Well, I happened to mention the books to a friend the other day, and her response was, "Oh, the leper books?" not "Oh, the rape books."

As I said upthread, the LFB rape was difficult to read through, not impossible, and I did go on to be a big fan. What I find harder is the ubiquity of rape as a device, here, there, everywhere. And yes, some female authors seem to have got on the bandwagon in the last few years (whether from a desire to break into the genre, to appear edgy, or because they can't be bothered to introduce drama in some other way) and of them I have no opinion whatsoever.

[matrixman]

I'm probably being unfair to Sheri Tepper, as she's considered to be one of the bright lights of the fantasy genre by those in the know. I shouldn't haven given up on her book just because of one little passage, just as people new to TCTC shouldn't throw LFB away just because of the one rape scene. (Actually, I think Tepper's style of writing just didn't click with me, in addition to the glibness mentioned.) Whatever. I'm not losing sleep over it.

Back to Donaldson...the Real Story of the Gap series is definitely more intense in its depiction of rape. I can imagine people new to Donaldson reading that book and thinking he might be some kind of sex pervert. Wayfriend noted elsewhere that the second book, Forbidden Knowledge, pushes the envelope even more. (I haven't read it yet.)

There's no way around this. It's Donaldson's prerogative to do what he wishes as a writer, but I can understand how female readers would be less than impressed by his seeming obssession with rape.

[mhoram]

i dont think SRD should have put that in there - it annoys me

[Avatar]

But it's crucial to the story.

Some really excellent posts folks, Jwaneeta especially. (And you should know us well enough by now not to have to worry about either disruption or disagreement. The first may be impossible, or nearly so, and the second inevitable. )

As I mentioned with post that started this recent spate in this thread, (and I'm only sorry I didn't manage to get back here sooner), it was based upon my girlfriends comments on learning that it apparently put people off the series.

And that's what I'm looking for here really...why. Gunslinger? You said it made you put the book down for a long time. Why? The fact that the main character was a rapist? The simple inclusion of it? Rape, as terrible as it is, does happen. It is a reality, as Jwaneeta pointed out so well.

Now from Jwaneeta, we have an excellent explanation of why women may be put off by the rape, in the sense that it is its effect on men that the use of it as a device usually focuses on.

Now from SeaReach, we have a different (and equally interesting) perspective, which I sorta think my GF shares, at least insofar as her reaction was not one of revulsion or disgust or offense or anything like that.

She certainly didn't find it difficult to read, or distasteful, and her problems with the series have nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Perhaps something that both she and I have in common is an inability to suspend disbelief. Another of her comments when I mentioned the varied reactions was "It's a story."

I'm even worse than she is. Although I've been moved by writing, including some of Donaldson's, I've never, for example, been scared by a horror movie. I can't forget that it's a movie. I can't erase the screen and the surroundings from my perception. I'm always aware that it's a story.

(Obviously, the rape didn't bother me at all, (and nor for that matter did The Real Story or Forbidden Knowledge, the only two Gap books I've read so far.)

Maybe it's just a lack of empathy. Intellectually, I'm well aware of the horror it must involve. Emotionally, well, as has been said, you need to be a victim to actually know.

Excellent posts folks. And some definite food for thought.

--A

[A Gunslinger]

Clearly Donaldson MUST have known that to use rape so prominantly in the GAP series after using it as a device in the TC series would be provacitive, and that it would have consequences. He's a reasonably smart guy, it seems.

I just don't think that he can so easily be summed up as the rape guy. It is a necessary device in both series to justifythe series of choices made the victims of the crimes. Crimes which were very different...whereas Morn's was classic in the power & rage sense, Lena's was quite different...TC was really raping himself.