The Time Has Come

Discussion

Feb 21

In all honesty, I contemplated not writing this post. On one hand, I acknowledge, over the course of this blog’s five-year history, I have written approximately eight posts referencing the treatment of characters in the content we consume. Why would it be necessary to add another and who would care?

On the other hand, I understand the human mind, when not properly honed to a fine edge through self-reflection, will blindly follow insane rantings without blinking an eye but question sanity at every turn. Changing perspectives takes time and I would be remiss in my own work as a content creator if I gave up attempting to challenge people to see certain practices or issues in a different way.

For those who may have just come upon this blog and started on my latest entry, I have provided a list at the end of this post, detailing those prior writings. They merely provide necessary context, which serves to fuel the passion I have for this subject matter. It is not necessary to read them before continuing with this one; however, should you choose to do so, read at your leisure.

As we continue focusing on the critical storytelling element of how to properly develop and treat characters, the crux of this post will be on the role an author plays in remaining true to their vision, while understanding the messages they send to content consumers when making decisions related to the fate of their characters. A wise person once told me, Never write your characters in to a corner. Let me take the sentiment a step further by telling authors not to write themselves in to a corner.

The impetus for this writing stems from the second show in the Game of Thrones franchise titled, House of the Dragon, which is a prequel to the aforementioned Game of Thrones (2011-2019), created by George R. R. Martin and Ryan Condal for HBO. Both of the series are based on the A Song of Ice and Fire novels by Martin, which this writer has not read. Based on the research I conducted for this post, I probably never will.

If you have read any of my prior posts, especially the one titled, Expectations: Pragmatic vs. Idealistic (2017), the rusty vaults should open just enough to recall the struggles I had in reconciling my own perspectives related to an event in the Game of Thrones series referred to as The Red Wedding. I will not repeat the exact details from my prior post but once I took a step back to view the progression of the story with my content creator hat in place, I could clearly see why the event in question was necessary for story progression. In other words, I was being intellectually honest and not allowing my enthusiast hat to color my judgment.

The only color I am seeing now with House of the Dragon is red. Initially, my husband and I were exceptionally pleased with how the story was developing. The story’s setting is one of our favorites and, although I disagreed with how they handled Daenerys Targaryen’s character arc at the end of Games of Thrones, it felt good to be back. It was fleeting, however, because just as we invested enough enjoyment in the series, it fell victim to entertainment storytelling and predictable tropes.

In episode five, We Light the Way, we are introduced to Ser Laenor Velaryon who will be betrothed to Rhaenyra Targaryen; however, Laenor has a lover in the form of Ser Joffrey Lonmouth. Understanding Laenor’s feelings for Joffrey, Rhaenyra proposes fulfilling their duty to produce heirs, then take lovers. You can see where this going, right?

Prior to the wedding of the two in this episode, Ser Criston Cole, a common-born knight who becomes one of the Kingsguard knights, is seduced by Rhaenyra. In an effort to restore his honor, Ser Criston suggests he and Rhaenyra elope and marry under new identities, which is immediately rebuked by the Princess.

During the farce wedding of Laenor and Rhaenyra, Joffrey surmises Criston is Rhaenyra’s paramour and confronts Criston, suggesting guarding the wedding couple’s secrets. This results in Criston, who views Joffrey’s suggestion as blackmail, brutally killing Joffery in front of horrified guests. Later, when Criston is about to commit suicide, he is conveniently saved by the Queen, Alicent.

This ends the episode and my commitment to watch anything further from a franchise continuing to glorify the brutal death of yet, another gay man at the hands of his heterosexual murderer who opportunely gets away with it when a person of power intervenes of their behalf. As I have mentioned in my prior posts, the history of treating characters, especially those not heterosexual, is replete with anti-gay tropes typically focusing on how expendable and easy it is to throw them out with the trash.

The cycle usually starts with a number of media outlets highlighting the emergence of a LGBTQ2S+ character and showering content creators with praise for their forward thinking. When the character is finally revealed, they are often stereotyped and rarely seen, which makes them forgettable. If they are killed off, which typically happens when they are gay male characters, the content creators and/or network will toss enraged fans a complementary scrap towards the aforementioned killed character’s lover in the form of a new love interest. This act of appeasement is mainly designed to distract from the fact they did not have any serious intent on making the character integral to the story in the first place. It further absolves them from serious scrutiny because they have now put a check mark in their diversity, equity and inclusion box.

Even more baffling and frustrating is I have noticed this typified approach practiced by both heterosexual and gay content creators alike. When you consider how gay characters have been treated in series’ such as The Vampire Diaries and The Originals along with the practice of queerbaiting, it is no wonder why many of us in the queer community who want equitable representation of LGTBQ2S+ characters in mainstream content, have settled for less.

Let’s circle back to the main crux of this post by focusing on the words from George R.R. Martin himself from the 2014, Pink News article by Nick Duffy, which is listed in the references section of this post. I will summarize Martin’s statement as follows:

Frankly, it is the way I prefer to write fiction because that is the way all of us experience life. You’re seeing me from your viewpoint, you’re not seeing what someone over here is seeing. Will that change? It might. I’ve had letters from fans who want me to present particularly an explicit male sex scene – most of the letters come from women. I’m not going to do it just for the sake of doing it. If the plot lends itself to that, if one of my viewpoint characters is in a situation, then I’m not going to shy away from it, but you can’t just insert things because everyone wants to see them. It is not a democracy. If it was a democracy, then Joffrey would have died much earlier than he did.

Let me point out one thing, which some of you may think I have completely lost my marbles by contradicting myself, when I say, I agree with Martin’s perspective. As a writer, albeit not at the same level as Martin, I fully understand the concept of writing content from the perspective of your cast of characters. I consider it a duh statement actually, but it is only one of many perspectives. Nonetheless, I felt it necessary to point it out and I am, first and foremost, a writer who does everything he can to keep emotion out of the equation and give credit where it is due.

In spite of what I just said, I also file Martin’s explanation under the category of plausible deniability, which falls under the main category of bullshit. I have written plenty of times, often in a humorous tone, how characters can open up their mouths and thwart your well-laid plans.

As a writer, I view my role as a navigator; applying appropriate, gentle nudges to ensure storylines are progressing in the proper direction. By no means am I under the impression I have full say on how my story evolves. The very nature of character interactions, dialogue, and proper utilization of cause and effect, implore me to be malleable in my approach to successfully deliver the promise of fully fleshed out content, consumers can walk away from feeling satisfied. This is why if you have more than three storylines, you may want to perform a course correction to avoid convolution.

Applying my laissez-faire approach does provide, in my opinion, the opportunity for a story to evolve organically with proper application of those gentle nudges I mentioned previously. This does not absolve me from implementing story elements designed to not only challenge characters but myself as well, especially as it relates to integrating real life social issues in other worldly, fictional settings.

As the author, if you are only allowing your viewpoint characters as Martin refers to them, to tell the story as they see it, you are presenting a myopic view of your world by projecting your own personal bias through the eyes of your characters. This makes them rather one-dimensional and begs the question; why have supporting characters at all if they are nothing more than fluff pieces for your main characters? I would have much greater respect for Martin, HBO, and Condal if they would just come out and say they do not like the LGBTQ2S+ community because we are expendable and not worthy in 2022 to be a prominent lead in any mainstream content creation.

My final point is the responsibility of content creators as it relates to representation. When someone like me brings up these rather valid perspectives, a common counter argument is; Well, this is just a fictional story. People should be getting more upset about real life issues such as gay people being thrown off buildings in the Middle East.

The above comment demonstrates a few, glaringly obvious misconceptions. First, it is usually iterated by people outside of the LGTBQ2S+ community who have no idea what it means to live life in our shoes. Just because you know a family member, friend, or co-worker who is part of our community and one you may sympathize with, does not mean you understand our struggles or viewpoints.

Second, what we are talking about here is representation, i.e., how we are seen by those who are in positions of power to control the narrative of these stories. I was born in 1967 and all I ever wanted to see growing up was a gay character who was not suicidal, a drug addict, sex addict, alcoholic, or stuffed into the stereotype of being overly flamboyant. I wanted a representation of how I saw myself; a boy who did not fit into the box society saw fit to put him in.

Lastly, I do not know of anyone in my community who says, Let’s stop being mad about our fellow gay people being thrown off buildings in the Middle East and be more outraged about the treatment of fictional characters in a story! This is not a thing and if you think it is a gotcha when talking about this issue, you are missing the point entirely.

As an author it is my responsibility to check my bias at the door and provide accurate representation of all perspectives by co-mingling reality with fiction. This ensures a richness of the world I created is presented in an equitable way with the hope, it can touch at least one-person who is struggling to find where they fit in our often cruel but wonderful world.

We say consumers vote and speak with their wallets. This is a case where I have to put my own, personal enjoyment aside to practice what I preach and write. I truly enjoyed where the House of the Dragon was going in its storyline, but I can no longer abide by the Entertainment Industry’s loathsome disregard of gay characters in mainstream programming.

The time has come for me to put my own foot down and demand more from my fellow content creators.

Feel free to post your questions or comments. I will respond when I am able. Be safe, be well, and allow compassion to manifest while we continue to navigate a crazy but beautiful world.

Thank you for reading.

Prior Blog Posts Referencing the Treatment of Characters

Characters: They are no expendable (2017)

Expectations: Pragmatic vs. Idealistic (2017)

Creative Liberties (2017)

Keep It Simple (2017)

Bait and Ditch: The Gay Character Paradox (2018)

Order 66 (2019)

The Stereotype (2021)

Oh, do grow up 007 (2022)

References

House of Dragon Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_the_Dragon