The Dragon Keeper "Controversial?" Hobb and sexuality. *Major Spoilers up to RWC!

['thul]

That is a good point... authors that hit you over the head with such relationships are almost as bad as those that do whatever they can to avoid it... (well beyond just not writing it)
The best way is to include it as a sideline, where it just is. Making it special (even positively special) is truthfully incorrect... For those humans that prefer to mate with their own gender, it is considered normality and not worthy of any special note.

Is it just these beings, or has this topic drifted far from its original idea?

[Lady Laura]

Sorry for drifting I think you both made good points, and its given me even more to think about!

So back to topic... I liked how Hobb dealt with the homosexual storylines in RWC. I have some small issues with them, but I think a lot of people tend to be extra critical when it comes to portraying gay people in books. I personally am critical of that in books, as well as the portrayal of women, relationships (hetro and homosexual) and other things.

I perosnally would have enjoyed reading more about Sedric, there's still a lot about him I feel I don't know. But obviously that's because he interested me the most out of the characters, and I was rooting for him to overcome Hest's control from the start of DK.

I think on a basic level, some people may see Hobb's portrayal of Hest as a typically "bad" sterotype of an overly dominant, cruel gay man. And Sedric could be seen on a basic level as the weak, submissive gay stereotype. I actually read quite a few reviews of the RWC, where the reviewer thought Hobb was giving a negative portrayal of gays. It made me wonder if they had been reading the books properly, or if they had actually finished them. I think Hobb was showing that gay people are just as likely to be weak or cruel as straight people are. And in terms of Sedric being weak, he grows stronger and developes considerably by the end of DH, just as any straight characer might develope and overcome their problems. So although at a first glane, it may seem that Hobb is stereotyping her gay characters, I think there is a lot more to it than that!

['thul]

yes, there are "good" and "bad" characters of both sexual tendencies in the books... A prime example of the "bad" heterosexual is Jess... Not sure entirely who might fit the bill of "submissive heterosexual", though...

[Nuytsia]

I think reviewers are pretty well clutching at straws if they are saying the RWC books have 'stereotypically dominant' gay character/s and 'stereotypically submissive' gay character/s..... I mean what do they want?
Characters with no distinguishing features at all?

['thul]

reviewers usually want things they do not get.

[Lady Laura]

I admit before i read the RWC books, I had been reading up on reviews out of curiosity. The impression I got was not good, there was a lot of criticism of the portrayal of "stereotypical gay characters" and other things too, but that stood out the most for me. I started reading DH expecting some awful things LOL But I was happy to be proved wrong, and now I am wondering if the reviewers understood the books at all. I might go and see if I can find some of those reviews again

[Farseer]

...I think Hobb was showing that gay people are just as likely to be weak or cruel as straight people are. And in terms of Sedric being weak, he grows stronger and developes considerably by the end of DH, just as any straight characer might develope and overcome their problems.

I agree. Certainly some people may feel that their comment re stereotypes are justified but then Sedric ends up with Carson, a very un-Hest-like character...someone who gives Sedric back more of himself rather than seeks to take it away. The very same could be said of Alise, earlier the submissive one in her relationship with Hest, and Leftrin (as for a 'straight' example that mirrors that of Sedric's relationship post-Hest).

If Sedric had fallen into yet another relationship where he was being dominated, then maybe people may have had something to use in the stereotypical gay debate. Maybe. Even then, it would still mirror many relationships I directly know of where women and men fail to escape dominating partners within hetrosexual relationships. They escape out of one only to fall into another. If it is fairly common in heterosexual relationships, how can it truly be deemed stereotypical in homosexual ones? It just IS.

Still, in a totally different location and group of people, the ratio of dominant relationships (regardless of their being heterosexual or homosexual) may be minimal, in others significantly higher. For me, it is the personalities of those involved that truly determine the outcome, not their sexual orientation.

On that, while I acknowledge the obvious referencing and implications etc, I really don't tend to look at books or characters in terms of gay or straight. They're just a snap-shot of a given moment in time or just 'people'. And I certainly never look at a plot and think, "There really should be more or less homosexuals in this story or else it's not true-to-life" , in much the same way that I don't look at a fantasy book and think "There should be more or less magic or dragons in this story or else it's not true fantasy".

If we had dragons about the place who could make comment, some of them may say that they got offended that they were being cast into stereotypical dragon roles throughout the books but then, suddenly, we'd have a dragon like Heeby come along and blow that debate to bits. Stereotypes exist because there are people who fulfill the stereotype (as much as those who want to buck the stereotype hate that! ). To completely put aside stereotypical behaviour from within a plot would delete a good proportion of any society and would ultimately be as unrealistic as having over-included the stereotypes and ignored the rest.

My understanding or interpretation is that this is what Hobb portrays at every level...that these 'extra' things don't matter...male, female; homosexual, heterosexual; physically sound, physically deficient; of the land, of the sea; educated, uneducated; free, enslaved; rich, poor; dark, light; human, non-human; barbaric, refined; under the protection of Eda, overseen by Sa...it's the small, everyday choices we make that count.

I could be wrong and I say these things knowing that the RWC are the books I have delved into the least? I am looking forward to reaching it during my re-read though, so I can come back and go over comments!

EDIT: To be honest, I think even the term "straight" vs gay creates a stereotypical mindset...the antonym of straight is bent or askew and this word play alone conjures up all sorts of immediately negative images for the members of the group that is "not straight". Doesn't it? END EDIT

['thul]

Fairly well said...

For anything to be normal, something else has to be abnormal...

[Nuytsia]

Fairly well said...

I suspect this be high praise from those beings

I concur!

[Lady Laura]

That was very enlightening, Farseer You made a lot of excellent points and gave us all a lot to think about!