Hiatus

Hey everyone. I have an announcement to make.

Since my Big Life-Changing Exam (tm) is only two weeks away, I have to study hard, leaving no time to update or work on the blog. So, it is with great sadness that I announce this blog's hiatus at least until the exam is done for and I can finally breathe again.

I'll be back in roughly three weeks time, so don't worry about me abandoning this blog forever.

Cheers.

Cherry Bomb: Strong Female Characters vs "Strong" Female Characters" Part I

Like tea, most female characters in fiction comes in two flavors: strong and weak. Since the advent of third-wave feminism, however, there are a surge of "strong" female characters in fiction, whether it's in literature or TV, and they tend to lean towards the hard-hitting kind, with physical prowess, no non-sense attitude, and brash personality.

Basically, they become more 'masculine'.

Now, I'm not saying these ladies aren't strong as a character, or that masculine women are somehow less of a woman. In the hands of a good writer, these characters can come alive into complex people with flaws and a story right before our very eyes.

But there is a trend that I see, a worrying trend I might add, to transform these characters into a one-note character. "Strong" women in TV and books these days are just that; strong. They do not have any other purpose to the story other than to break walls and take names (which is an awesome thing, to be honest) and then get killed five minutes later. They shun emotion and everything girly, ridiculing women who are into fashion and make-up (therefore, those who are more 'feminine' than them), further promoting the notion that us women have to fight against each other. They proudly claim they do not have any female friends, that they love hanging with guys because they don't have as many drama as girls (nevermind the fact that these so-called 'brotherhoods' often have fights over girlfriends and video games the could generate as much, if not more, drama). Women are stupid and emotional, they say, and lacks the sophistication of men.

You can see why this kind of thinking can be a problem, especially since most of these characters crop up in YA/Romance fiction. And then that's not touching the whole glamorization of violence. Full disclosure: I'm a pacifist and I don't appreciate the way that YA novels these days have fights and battle as their main shtick. I know that's a really common way to put some action into your book and make it more interesting, but there are ways to write a good and gripping book without having a fight every two pages. And international peace discussion is thrilling too! I mean, how many people can actually say that they help prevent WWIII by  inviting Russia and America's leader over for dinner? That's riveting stuff, folks! The sauce of your steak determines if people die!

And one of my main problem these kind of "strong" characters is that they rarely have some kind of an emotional response to the consequences of their own action. Human beings are not meant to hurt each other (no matter how those pessimists think), and if they do, they'll likely to have serious mental issues. You can't just blowup a building and the only thought you have is whether or not the Main Love Interest has feelings for you. Even the most hardened and experienced warriors have a high chance of developing PTSD, and you expect me to believe a sixteen year-old girl goes about her life without a care after killing hundreds of people?

Of course there are people who thinks about burgers and ducks before they snipe someone in the head; people cope in different ways. But the thing with these characters is that they do not feel anything. Oh, their inner monologues is filled with purple prose about how Main Love Interest makes them feel all funny inside and they don't like it because Warriors Aren't Meant to Have Emotions, but they are mostly flat characters, unable to comprehend or display any emotion besides anger and selfishness. They cannot have any emotions, ever, because they are awesome and they are strong and emotions are flaws and if they have flaws then they are not strong. They sometimes have a tragic past that cements their position as rebels in society, and a convenient Freudian explanation to why they have such hard personality.

Generic cookie cutter backstory and Mary Sue-like perfection (though they try to deny) does not make a "strong" character. Ironically, the writers effort to differentiate their female characters from the others have resulted in bland characters that are strong only in their physics and weak in everything else.

There are a lot of things that I have in my mind about this issue, particularly how the media and fandom treats flawed female characters and the thinking that "nonviolence=weak" that is so present in many YA novels and their fandoms. But this is ten o'clock, I have yet to brush my teeth and do my prayers; I shall have to bid goodbye for now and see you next time.

Review: The Weaverbirds by YB Mangunwijaya

So! I finally finished this book. It's been, what, four months since I borrowed it? And I only finished it now. Lovely. The school library is going to rake in lots of money.

This book is, well, it's not difficult, per se. I just had a hard time of getting into it. The book had the double sin of a) written in 1st person and b) contains a lot of sentimental Indonesian-esque romance that I don't really like. Romance is fine, but Indonesian authors tend to have this style that whatever romance they wrote is going to end up really sappy and/or cheesy. Since most old novels are written in 1st person (my most hated POV) and have these sappy romance (that my cold heart does not understand), you can see why I don't really read them much.

But as a book connoisseur, I have to read a lot of books, crossing genre and time, even if that means I have to get out of my comfort zone. Or spend four months reading a 300 page book. 

Okay. So. The review. Right.

The Weaverbirds (Indonesian: Burung-Burung Manyar) tells the story of Setadewa (Teto) and Larasati (Atik). Teto is the son of a KNIL soldier, KNIL being the private army of the Dutch colonist in Indonesia, and an Indo mother. Atik is still Teto's cousin of some sort; her mother is the adopted daughter of Teto's father's uncle. Teto's father comes from a blue-blooded native Javanese family, but he likes being "Dutch" more.

During the Japanese occupation, Teto's father joined the rebellion, and was subsequently caught. Teto's mother was kept as a mistress by a Japanese official to protect Teto's father, and Teto was left in the care of Atik's family. Teto vowed that he will avenge his parents, and joined KNIL once he was old enough. When the Japanese left however, Teto was faced by the Republican factions; that is people who wanted and have declared Indonesia's independence. Teto viewed the Republicans as ex-collaborators with Japan, and thus viewed Indonesia's independence as not something that they earn, but something that is given by Japan. Not to mention, after the war, the fate of his parents is still unknown. Thus, begins Teto's quest to "help" his homeland and find the truth about his parents.

 Structurally, the novel itself is divided into three parts: a prologue of some sorts that tells the story of Teto and Atik's childhood, a middle part consisting the bulk of the action, and an epilogue. 

I find the concept refreshing, because Indonesian novels often have this black-and-white view of the world, that the good guys will always be good and the bad guys will always be bad. This is a boring, not to mention unrealistic, point of view of the world. The good guys is not always good and the bad guys are not always bad. So it's really refreshing to see a flipped perspective; the Republicans became the antagonist and the colonizing Dutch became the protagonist.

Maybe it's because of this I find the middle part to be the most exciting of the three. It details Teto's struggle to reconcile his vision of Indonesia, and the Indonesia he's seeing right now. Teto does not go to war because he hates Indonesia; he loves Indonesia and wants to free her from the Republicans whom he viewed as Japanese collaborators. Teto's mother frequently becomes a sort of allegory for Indonesia herself, in the eyes of Teto: she was a happy housewife in the Dutch period, only to become a trapped mistress in the Japanese occupation, and later institutionalized after the war. Indonesia too, according to Teto, is subjugated but happy during the Dutch period, trapped in a broken promise during the Japanese occupation, and has become insane in her independence.

Teto's views and behaviors is a departure from the usual Indonesian heroes that is usually portrayed as calm and polite even in the midst of gunfire. Here, Teto is brash and foul-mouthed, but he had the heart of a lion, and a firm principle taught by his father. He's an intelligent boy; he knew in the middle that what he's doing, what KNIL and him are doing, is basically worthless but still he fought because his father taught him not to run away from a fight. And by God, he didn't, even if it meant sacrificing his only chance on being with the girl he loved.

I expected Atik to be one-dimensional and flatter than a cardboard, but she was quite fleshed out, which is a nice surprise. Atik too is struggling that she may or may not have feelings for Teto, her childhood friend slash distant cousin and a traitor to the Republic. Atik herself works for the Republic, even becoming an aide for the then-Foreign affairs minster. She has to learn to reconcile her loyalty for her motherland and her affection to an agent of the enemy.

The prose is wonderful and this is one of the few first-person POVs novel that I actually like. YB Mangunwijaya conveys Teto's feelings so perfectly that you can't help to root a little bit for the Dutch, if only to give Teto his happy ending. The changing of POVs is something I severely dislike in most modern novels since it's just hella confusing, but Rama Mangun (as he's affectionately called) uses it so efficiently to portray the characters' feelings, to let us see the two-sides of the coin, that I can't complain about it.

My problem with this novel is that we really don't see Atik and Teto's relationship developing properly. Literally 70% of their screentime are spent apart from each other. We only get to see their interaction in the beginning and in the end; they rarely interact in the middle part. When I first read Teto declaring his love to Atik in his inner monologue I was like "bruh? You only met this girl for two months, tops!" It feels odd to me because they only met each other for a short time in their childhood, and it didn't really make sense for both of them to be violently in love with each other. They talked about their closeness a lot, but we don't actually see how close they are, or how their closeness develops in the first place. As individual characters, they are well-developed, but as a pairing they are not.

I also have issues with the length of the first part and the third part. The first part should be longer, and the third part should be shorter. The ending is firm and resolute, but the execution is off. There's a lot of padding in the third part but the last pages seems rushed, as if the author has a page limit and he's nearing that limit so he better wrap the story up. The conflict in the last part just kind of...hangs there with no development whatsoever beyond a few short paragraphs. I didn't even realize there's a conflict until 3/4 in. Inserting a new conflict at the end of the book is pretty unusual, so I understand if the author wants it to be done quickly, but if that's the case then why does he insert it in the first place? It's completely unnecessary and throws the reader off.

There's also this bizarre subplot involving a minor character that does not have anything to do with the plot, whatsoever. The pages for that, I think, can more efficiently used instead to flesh out the story more, but alas it does not happen. The third part is the most boring of them all, part of the reason why this takes me a long time to finish after whooshing through the middle part.

It is a good book, and it is a good story, but it's marketed everywhere as a love story, and I didn't really feel the whole romance angle. As a war-novel, it's good, it's great; I would've given it a four-star. But you have to call an orange an orange, and as a romance novel it's very unsatisfying. This, coupled with other plot issues and pointless padding, reduces the grade to only three-star.

Final Rating:


Book Information:

Title: Burung-Burung Manyar (English: The Weaverbirds)
Author: YB. Mangunwijaya
Pub./Edition: Fourteenth edition. Jakarta: Djambatan, 2004 (orig pub. date: August 1981)
ISBN: 979-428-560-9


Worldbuilding: So You Want to be a Dictator

After a post about social class, it is only proper for me to follow it with one that is all about maintaining social order. There are a lot of ways to keep the people in check, from fairly pacifist ways to outright militaristic ones, but since dystopians are all the rage nowadays, let's take a look a look at the militaristic ones, shall we?

There are different ways for a dystopia to control the masses: some do it by spreading the love (a la Brave New World), some by spreading fear and 'love' (a la 1984). A firm government and good social order helps keep those pesky rebels from disrupting the system. After all, the rebellion's power is through the people, they draw their strength from the average Joe's discontent, and if the average Joe is content or blissfully unaware of their own oppression, the rebels could not gain much ground.

If I am a head of a dictatorship, the first thing that I would like to do is silence the educated middle-class. Most revolutions in the modern world happened because of a disgruntled middle-class. They have a level of education higher than those of the lower-class, while having power less than those of the upper-class. They have enough education to know better than to swallow propaganda without discerning it first, and enough distance to the ruling class to not enjoy the privileges; in short they make a perfect target for the rebels.

A lot of ways can use to pacify the middle class, but if I'm a dictator, I would try to isolate them from the other classes as much as I can, restricting their travels. The middle class is the administrative force of the country, they do the work that was too smart for the lower-classes and too inane for the upper-classes. Ordinary office workers, typing away in their cramped cubicles, is prone to boredom, and have to be entertained somehow. Boredom leads to curiosity and curiosity kills the cat, fuels the rebellion, and topples the government.

But their work is also important to the long-lasting of your government; after all war is not only fought in land and water but also in papers and archives. He who controls the present controls the past and he who controls the past controls the future. One must not interfere with their work, lest productivity goes down, and the government becomes less efficient. A shift-system can solve this problem, giving each worker a day each week for holiday, and then those day gets rotated randomly every few months so as not to create a routine, which bores the worker.

You don't have to do much with the upper class, since the privilege they get from being in the ruling class is enough incentive for them to stay compliant, but take care of those power-hungry social climbers who's looking to seize your power for their own. Eliminate them, discreetly. But do not kick someone that's already surrendered to you, since it will create mistrust of your government. When your enemy is down, help them, so they will forever become in debt to you.

The lower class is an easy job. Since they are not kept for their intellect, mainly for their muscle, you can give them many leeway. Ply them with mindless entertainment, trashy books that lowers their brain cells, orgies. Set them free; since they're not bright anyway they won't pose much harm. You have to be careful, however, to not let them in contact of anything educated or subversive. The proles are content and happy and free in their ignorance, and if you put silly ideas into their brain (like rebelling for example) their freedom will bite you in your ass.

The key on maintaining your rule as a dictator is by isolating each respective class, dividing them, hacking them into pieces until it's virtually impossible for them to unite. A solid, united society is not great for your government. Divide them. Sow seeds of distrusts among them, seeds of discord. Condition them to think that it's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and it's useless to think about anyone other than themselves. Sever any familial and friendship ties between individuals. This way, it will be easier to control them, since they are more than willing to turn at any subversive person, even if those subversive person is their own parents.

Maintaining a social order is simple, really: indulge the lower-class, appease  the middle-class, control the upper-class, and set them against each other. Lots of surveillance helps too, since they can be used to easily monitor any subversive activity. Oh, and don't forget cruel and unusual punishment for those who goes against you.

And that's what it takes to be a dictator!

In the Style of Sei Shonagon: Part I

Vexing things

When one has written something thoughtful and beautiful and the computer suddenly freezes, forcing one to restart it, losing the writing in the process. Upon rewriting it later, it does not look as thoughtful nor as beautiful.

When one sees a beautiful dress and the only thing separating one from that dress is one's body and wallet size.

When one is anxious to start and buy a new book, only to realize that an important life-changing exam is looming by and the 'correct' thing to do is study for the exam rather than read a book. One knows that one can start the book whenever while the exam only happens once in a lifetime but it determines one's course of education for life, so the right thing is to study for the exam. That does not make it less vexing.

Worldbuilding: Social Class and All That Jazz

Good morning, everybody. I have just woken up from a wonderful sleep; it is Saturday today and I don't have any school, for once. Now, I would like to introduce to you to my new series, Writer's Woes, where I discuss a topic that makes us writers unable to sleep at night. From worldbuilding to research, everything will be talked about in Writer's Woes.

For my first topic, since I had just come from a fresh research-binge, I would like to talk about one of the aspects of worldbuilding that's crucial for anyone writing an original novel in an original world, whether it's a dystopian sci-fi or utopian fantasy: social class. A little bit disclaimer might do: I am in no ways a professional sociologist, but I have studied a bit about social class in school, and since I am writing a novel set in a class-heavy world I have researched about it quite a bit. So I know a little about social class.

When writing or reading a novel, I want it to have a little bit of realism, no matter how far-fetched the premises seem to be. Yes, I know, I might be overzealous to demand realism in a novel about magics and elves and orcs, but my point is that no matter how fantastical the world is, it still needs to make sense. Every world must have a good explanation about how they work, even if it involves some artistic license in science or applied unobtanium. A novel with a good worldbuilding, in my opinion, must have a world that is consistent and solid in the context of the novel itself. So even though it may not make sense for it to happen in real life, if the novel gave sufficient evidence of it, then it passes. Too much handwaving and paradoxes (contradictory statements in the novel itself) will lead to plotholes, something that will confuse the reader.

A big part of creating an original world is creating a some kind of social structure e.g. social class. Most novels that I have read have are influenced by class whether they like it or not, from a dystopia with a rigid caste-based system or a utopia where everybody is equal. Some are done quite well, some...not quite so well. It is my hope that anyone reading this will come out having a better understanding of class and social dynamics, and able to write a social system that will not fold like a paper tiger.

First of all, let's break down the social structure. One of the simplest social structures is to divide society into three, neat little parts: the landowning nobles, the merchants who control the means of production, and the people who serve them. This structure works because the nobles own the land, and sometimes the people in it. Nobles protect the land and lead the country, they make the regulations and form governments. Since all of the nobles came from prominent families, they are highly respected and able to hold their position on top of the social food chain because of the power they have over society.

The merchants do not have the same social standing as the nobles, since many of them came from common families who do not own lands. But they own the means of production, and they can produce goods, so that makes them more important than the unskilled labors. Note that though I call them 'the merchants', artisans, craftsman, and skilled labors also belongs to this social class.

Servants are in the bottom of the social food chain, because they do not have lands or means of production. Since they are unskilled labor, the only thing they can do is to be servants to the other two classes.

These kind of class system can be found in pre-industrial society, because more often than not, landowning nobles control most of the capital. Without factories, agriculture is the main employer. Nobles own the land, charge rent from their farmer-tenants, and buy goods for their castle from the merchants. As such, they control the flow of the capital.

During the Industrial Revolution, factories are built and agriculture becomes increasingly mechanized. Suddenly, you need less people to plow the fields and more people to work in the factory. Merchants play a big role during this period, because the main employer has shifted from the nobles' farms to the merchants' factories. Goods are produced faster and cheaper, enabling the merchants to reap big profits.

As such, the class system shifted. It is the merchants who control the capital, and now they dictate the flow of money. Nobles still play a big role in their capacity as leaders, but their influence is greatly diminished. Merchants are still below nobles in the class system, but they're slowly moving up, now that they have money, and they don't like being bossed around by some stuffy old aristocrats who are poorer than them.

(Wealthy merchants vs old aristocrats is actually the basis of the conflict in the French Revolutions. The bourgeois did not take kindly of being bossed around by the aristocrats, and they rebel. I really could write a whole series of blog posts about this, but I digress...)

Which brings us to my second point: class system exists only under the compliance of society. Ironic, right? Here we are trying to get rid of class in our daily life while it's because of us it exists in the first place. Without society's compliance, the class system won't work, deflating like a particularly bad souffle. How do you get society's compliance, you ask? Why, by indulging whichever class is more important on the eyes of society. For example, a religious society may view religious duties as being more important than money and thus hold priests and the clergy higher than nobles and merchants. Militaristic societies may have soldiers on the top, and those pesky diplomats in the bottom. A far-off fantasy world where glass is rare may deem people who has glass marbles more than those who do not.

If you determine what value/commodity your world appreciates the most, then you can start working on your class system based on that. The top is those who adhere to society's standards and has access to those commodity/value while the bottom is those who don't. Then, you can expand the middle ones by determining their relationship in the distribution or flow of those commodity/values. It can be as simple as a three-tier class system or a complex caste system.

And another thing that an author needs to consider is the social mobility between the classes. You have to determine whether it's possible to move between classes, and if so, how? A society without social mobility has a very poor social structure and thus prone to shakeups, which is a good setting for dystopia. Be very careful also when you select traits that determine your faction/classes, especially those who are based on abstract concepts like talents. Remember, just because your father is an amazing painter doesn't mean you can paint.

Well, I think that's about it. I started at a sunny morning and now it's afternoon and rain clouds are starting to form in the sky, how the time passes! With this, I conclude my post and hope that you found something beneficial beneath this jumble of words.

Until next time. xx

onwards, to the great unknown

To be a writer, you have to write. To be a good writer, you have to write, to learn how to tell the world about how you really feel, how to tell your story. A good diarist I am not, and when humanity have advanced so much that you can write your thoughts on a piece of computer to broadcast to the world, why not take advantage of it? I am not ashamed to admit that I write more consistently with an audience; knowing that someone somewhere is reading my work and eagerly waiting for the next installment is a good motivation. Even though it may not be so at first, I try my best to be consistent and update frequently.

And even if my audience is only a lone spambot, I will still try to keep a schedule, for my own sake. After all, I write not for society, but for myself, first and foremost. I write not for fame or money (though they are a wonderful side-effect) but for my own enjoyment, my own pleasure. And if my work also brings pleasure to other people, then I am more than happy to share it with them. If my work upsets and angers some people (for the wrong reasons), then I do not care. My opinions are my own and I do not care if they are against yours. I will not compromise my integrity for all the money in the world, I can promise my audience that, at least.

(Besides, consumerism is so overrated)

Thus begin my journey through the deep dark, winding forests of Blogger that are full of spams and dragons but also knights in shining armor and princesses in designer dresses. It will be a long and hard trip with rock-filled roads hindering my path, and I am but a novice in the worlds of blogging, but I say it will be a fun ride while it lasts, and while I'm here I want to share the adventure with you.