Of Princess and Politics

A very common character found in young adult books of the fantasy genre is the "Rebellious Princess". Often, it is the main character who is a rebellious princess or, if the main character is a male, his love interest. Although there have been many Rebellious Princes in literature, most of the character with this archetype is female, someone nobly born (despite the name, she needn't to be royal) from a good and important family who chafes at having to learn embroidery, manners, the piano-forte, and all of the things that are socially acceptable for a young lady of her birth to learn. She instead yearns to play swords and ride horses unchaperoned, wear breeches instead of gowns, openly insults the noble guests who have come to her fathers' hall, generally talk in an uncouth manner. I don't have anything against anyone that wants to defy gender expectations and wear breeches and ride horses; you do you. However I've observed that these types of characters often dismiss politics and diplomacy as fripperies, preferring to solve problems with force and swords. As a pacifist with keen interest on diplomacy and politics, I take offense in them being dismissed as "fripperies".

A lot of fantasy takes place in worlds resembling Medieval or Renaissance Europe, so one must take account the role of a noblewoman relating to diplomacy and politics in our Medieval/Renaissance Europe. Contrary to popular opinion, princesses do not sit around all the day doing nothing but embroidery work. A princess or a noblewoman in Medieval/Renaissance Europe, especially those who live in the Continent, certainly would have been busy receiving noble guests from all over the continent, particularly female relations of their husband/father/brother's guests. Yes, they do sit around and drink tea and talk about fashion, but noblewomen in those era play an important part too in spreading information or (mis)information. In a period where neighboring countries war frequently, information is vital to the success of military campaigns or peace accords. Gossips, literally, can change how wars end.  Scandals, hearsay, and rumors can shatter pacts and alliances or form new ones.

Etiquette and manners are thus important. Frayed relations means that people would jump at the slightest opening to undermine you. A false remark blown out of proportions. A wrong gesture to the wrong person. An imaginary or not-so imaginary snubs. Dresses that are too fashionable or not fashionable enough. Any of these can be a reason for turning away would-be allies or incensing old friends. It is important for a princess, indeed for any noblewoman, to learn how to best present themselves for the advantage of her house. Embroidery too is not a mere trifle hobby. In an age where most women are illiterate, embroidery is sometimes used to code secret messages and tell stories for those who do not have access to words.

Politics and diplomacy of nations are delicate matters yet they affect millions of people. Almost all of the rulers and decision-makers are men, yes, but women held powers too, albeit in the background. In the form of wives, mothers, and sisters, women played their part in politics through influencing the menfolk. It would be an exaggeration to say that women have enough power to completely influence their menfolk, manipulating them to follow their desire, but they still have power nonetheless. And this power they achieve without swords or force.

While I'll support any girl who prefer swords over sewing, I find that the attitude some books have, deriding girls who love sewing and etiquette lessons as mindless bimbos and dismissing the importance of manners and diplomacy, to be annoying and not to mention disingenuous. Power can be achieved through force and power can be achieved without force. Power taken by force is not superior than power taken through peaceful means. In fact, as a pacifist, I shall say that power taken through peaceful means are inherently superior than those taken by force. Dresses and etiquette are not fripperies and those who indulge in them are not less just because they conform to the then-socially acceptable notions of feminine pursuits.

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!

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