A book, some ponderings and a little fantasy meta

[baleanoptera]

Catherynne M. Valente : The Orphan’s Tales: In the night garden , Vol. I

I recently read Valente’s book, and first let me say I truly enjoyed it. I might even love it a little. So I wanted to write a little about the book, but since I’m apparently incapable of writing about a book without skittering in all directions I also ended up writing about female characters and some pondering on if this is a collection of fairytales or fantasy literature. You are here by warned. ;) Also - there are a few tiny spoilers in here, but nothing major and nothing you wouldn't find on the dust cover.

The main frame of The Orphan’s Tales takes place at night when whispered stories are weaved into a wonderful tapestry. The storyteller is a strange young girl who has stories inked on her eyelids, like a swirling black mask. She is the orphan of the title, and these are her tales.

The second part of the title In the Night Garden is particularly apt for Valente likes the shadow and dusk side of things. She seems so side with the witches and the monsters of the fairytales, and desires to show that what might look ugly doesn’t necessarily act ugly. Foul is fair and fair is foul indeed.

Valente’s world is drawn from quite lot of cultures. There are traces of Arabian Nights, of Russian fairytales, of Inuit stories and African tales – and her brilliance lies with her ability to weave this all together and make a coherent, fantastical world. There are several protagonists, and some really scary villains. And all of it is described in a very poetic language that manages to thread the fine line between descriptive and fascinating, and flowery, purple prose.


Most of the stories have a feministic tilt, with the exploration of the witch character being a red thread. Why did she become a witch? How did she become one? And what does being a witch mean? It feels like Valente wishes to lift the veil a little and let us see what is behind the traditional fairytale witch. You know - the one in the cottage who is ugly and cranky. I would say her exploration of the witch character is very successful and fascinating, and might be enough in itself to recommend the book.

One of the things I really like about Valente’s stories is that the female protagonists are allowed to be female and womanly. They are not just masculine ideals with tits. Now that might sound like a very strange way of putting it, but what I mean is the trend that strong female characters are given all the classic male characteristics of the strong hero – like talking tough and witty, fighting hard and being generally kickass. In fact their femininity is usually downplayed to show that they are just like one of the guys. They play pool, chug back beers and have a witty riposte for everything. Now this is fine and fun and I really like those characters - but lately it seems that all strong female characters embody this same ideal. And that to me is just as annoying as all female characters being damsels in distress.

Very rarely is there a female character that is strong, without being a fighter or a tough talker. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for strong female characters – in fact I would love more strong, female characters – but I would just like a little variation in the ways they are portrayed. A person can for instance be strong, quiet and a mother. After all quite a lot of women are mothers, but very rarely is a main character a mother. And that just strikes me as odd.

I think this is one of the reasons why Eowyn from Lord of The Rings is still one of my favourite heroines. For yes, she rides into battle, she kills the Lord of the Nazgûl, and then she hangs up her sword. The first times I read the book this last action disappointed me, but now it is one of the things that I truly love about Eowyn. For by hanging up the sword she in no way renounces or diminishes the glory of her action. Instead she shows how flexible and strong she is as a character. If the house and family is one sphere and the field of battle is another – then Eowyn is one of the few characters in the book that moves between these spheres, and she does so without relinquishing any parts of her character. In fact the masters them both!

To get back to Valente’s book – one of the things I truly liked about her book was that she had this variation in the female characters (and in her male characters too). They had all manner of positions, roles and ranges – and that made for a lovely reading experience. And yes, quite a lot of them were mothers.


Fantasy or fairytale?
- A story within a story within a story.

Valenta has based her book on fairytales, and especially Arabian Nights with a storyteller at its centre, and its weave of stories. The fairytale legacy is also evident in many of the characters and events that take place in the stories. There are Princes on Quests, scary Wizards and fantastic Beasts.

A great deal of the stories are centred around metamorphosis; from monster to human, human to monster, shy girl to witch ad unwanted child to fox.
Valente’s description of metamorphosis is always one of pain, blood and fluids. It’s messy and disgusting, and not very fairytale like. There is no cloud pink smoke that goes “Puff!” and changes everything. In Valente’s world changes hurt! In many ways this clashes with the classical fairytale where murder and foul deeds are usually given a rather straight forward description; “And then he chopped the troll’s three heads off!” In The Orphan’s tales it would be described a lot more graphic and gory. This gives the impression that even if her stories are based on fairytales, the fairytale legacy is more of a framework.

In addition, and unlike fairytales, all Valente’s stories are in a way connected and linked. Most of the characters are recurring or referred to by others at least once, and the general feeling is more of pieces that together form the complete puzzle, than standalone stories. This is why, despite the fairytale format, I would say Valente’s book is more fantasy than modern day fairytales.

Another thing that for me tilts the book in the direction of fantasy is the presence of the quest-structure. This I feel is one of the classic templates of a lot of fantasy literature. There are heroes, and they are on a quest for something. For instance in Tolkien the main structure is the ring-quest. (Now Tolkien was one, if not the first, to use the quest structure – so no quarrel with him. It’s just an example.) This quest motive is also present in for example Feist’s Midkemia series, Robin Hobb’s series, Peter Beagles The Last Unicorn etc. This same quest-structure is visible also in Valente’s book.

But she gives it a twist that is truly interesting – she operates with several quests and she sometimes she pokes a little fun at them. As for instance this passage from "The prince and the Goose"

“And so the Prince left her, having found a Quest after all. He chased its tail into the high mountains tipped with snow like wise men’s beards, and laid before him smooth like as a dress. He did not mind the difficulty of the terrain, being, after all, a soldier, though it was more tedious than he thought a Quest would be.
For instance, he had not guessed how much of the body of a Quest was simply walking. He walked until three pairs of shoes were ruined, cursing his lack of a horse.”

True, the quest-structure is present in quite a lot of fairytales as well, but it sometimes seems such a dominate steeple of modern fantasy that if there is a quest structure I automatically get fantasy associations. (This might be just me though. My brain is sometimes programmed strangely.)

All in all I enjoyed this book immensely, and I’m very much looking forward to Volume II that will be released this fall.

Catherynne M. Valente has a web site here. It contains some info about her, the books and also links to her net-published material

Comments

[richlayers.livejournal.com]

I love Eowyn. She's the character that I assess every other female fantasy character by. They don't have to match up to her personality, but I do think that they need to have that kind of strength to be truly interesting.

Hmm a post all about fairy tales... You know where I think you should repost this. ;)

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

Yay! Another Eowyn lover. She is by far one of my favorite female characters - not only because she has the strength both to fight and to stand by her family when Theoden is under Saruman's curse, but she also has this amazing adaptability and determination. All while she feels so very, very human.

a post all about fairy tales... You know where I think you should repost this. ;)

hee. But is it fairytale-ish enough? I was worried that I had strayed to far away from fairytales as such. But no?

[richlayers.livejournal.com]

It's good enough for me, and I'm the boss, so you're in! ;)

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

Hee - yes boss! I'll see if I can have it up tomorrow. The weekend has been insanely busy, but tomorrow looks like a have of quiet. Yay! (That is the best thing about working at a museum - it is closed on mondays. *g*)

[nutmeg3.livejournal.com]

Just the title of this book is Your discussion only makes it sound moreso. Onto the ever-growing list it goes.

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

Yay! It was a very fascinating and gripping book, and I love her use of fairytale conventions.

And I hear you in regards to the ever-growing list. I think my amazon wish list is six pages long now - and will probably turn into seven pages before long.

[nutmeg3.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I seem to have messed up my original comment. I'm sure I meant to say the title was fascinating or intriguing or something like that.

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

hee. Well, the meaning came through regardless. :)

[fictualities.livejournal.com]

Valente's books sound fascinating. Thanks for posting about them! I'm definitely putting them on my to-read list.

And yeah, it's pretty irritating when female heroines aren't allowed to be female. I like a good fight scene as much as the next person, and Eowyn ROCKS when she chops off the head of the witch-king. But I get uneasy when stories seem to imply that the only way for women to be a central character is to abandon all concerns but the ones our society has stereotypically classified as "male." That kind of protagonist does nothing to disrupt the strict binary opposition between male and female spheres of action that leads to "female" values being denigrated -- values of nurturing, etc. I guess I'd like to see better-rounded male AND female characters.

Do you know, oddly enough the fantasy writer who consistently does this best is (IMHO) Terry Pratchett. Maybe I'm totally off-base here, but I LOVE his female characters -- he doesn't turn them into saints, and he doesn't turn them into Conan. Characters like Granny Weatherwax just, you know, do things. Like Pratchett's male protagonists, they're complicated and interesting and not reducible to stereotypes.

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

That kind of protagonist does nothing to disrupt the strict binary opposition between male and female spheres of action that leads to "female" values being denigrated

Exactly, and this is by no means a problem reserved for female characters. By setting up the "Masculine-tough guy with the wisecracks" as the preferred heroic form, a standard is also set for male characters. A man is hero only if he is tough, witty etc. Now, true - male characters have a few more stereotypes to play with - like the stoic loner - but very rarely do you see a male character with characteristics "female" values.

Terry Pratchett has some absolutely wonderful female characters. I love Granny Weatherwax, so you will get no argument from me there.
And what I adore about Pratchett is that characters like Granny are not a single incident (even if her case is rather exceptional. ;) ), and their place in society is not one of constant opposition. His female characters function well in society - except when they choose to stay away from it. And if they have problems with society it's nothing more than what the male characters have.

[sunnyskywalker]

Oh, this sounds like a fascinating book. And I like your points about heroines - I've been thinking lately that as much as I like women who go out swashbuckling with the men, the women who don't can be just as tough and interesting but are often overlooked. I remember when I was little thinking that Buttercup in The Princess Bride was really wimpy and annoying - why couldn't she learn to fight? - but now I'm appreciating her a lot more. I mean, she eventually tries to move on and does the one thing she loves (horseback riding) rather than stay in her room, while Westley becomes a sarcastic pirate who probably killed a lot of people. I think Buttercup is more on the right track there. She has the toughness to go through all the near-death situations without becoming jaded or turning into a warrior, which is pretty impressive.

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

the women who don't can be just as tough and interesting but are often overlooked

Exactly - and might I just say that I love you brining up Buttercup as an example. :D She is a very good example of a heroine that doesn't have to be swashbuckling to be kick ass.

I don't know, have you read George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" series? (It's very, very good - so if you have not I would highly recommend it). But he also manages to have heroines whose strengths lie in different places than fighting, and it does one so good to read it.
Then there is Rowling who also has a few good heroines. (more book verse than movie verse there though)

[sunnyskywalker]

I read the first book of that series, but I read it at totally the wrong time - I had just had surgery and was grumpy, so when my slight knowledge of the Wars of the Roses spoiled some major plot points for me, I got mad at the author for not subverting my expectations enough and didn't get the next book. Silly me. But I've heard so many good things about the series that I want to try again and pay more attention, because I know I missed a lot. I've been hearing all these things about passages that seemed like ordinary description that turned out to have major clues and thematic things and all this stuff I love, so I'm definitely going to pick it up when I get a chance.

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

Do pick them up. I loved the first book and half way through the second book I was hooked. By book number three I was slightly obsessed. He does base somethings on the War of the Roses, but twists things slightly - and you don't realize the big twists before book two and three. hee.

And yes, these are books you need to pay close attention to - and meta discussions are a must. (I think that is one of the reasons I love them. they lend themselves so excellently to discussion. ;D)

[sunnyskywalker]

I figured out right after I grumpily took it back to the used book store that I'd totally missed a bunch of stuff, and that there must be a ton of twists in the next books, and I have been kicking myself ever since :D

[baleanoptera.livejournal.com]

Hee. Then kick yourself over to the nearest book store. *g* No seriously - they are good books, and I think you would enjoy them. Even if he bases a lot of his plot on historical event he puts enough twists to make it worth it. And this also means he has a rather good historical knowledge - so no glaring mistakes.

And he has wonderful, wonderful characters. A lot of whom you start out hating, and then end up loving.