Should protagonists lie?
The oathbreakers in #LordoftheRings have been on my mind recently because of Tony Abbott and because of one of my protagonists who 'might lie under threat'. It struck me sometime ago, and scholars of myth and fairy stories discuss this, that lying is more often a female weapon than a male one, and this might be why deceit gets such bad press in stories more broadly.
A male protagonist might use physical strength, aggression and profiency with swords and clubs to defeat his enemy but these weapons are not generally available to female protagonists. Without wanting to become embroiled in the nature/nurture debate, most men are stronger and more aggressive than most women, so in a typical sword fight between a man and a woman, the woman is more likely to reach exhaustion first, or, unless she's defending a child, be less driven to kill.
Verbal weaponry however is available, and females tend to have more sophisticated verbal skills than men. Thus, why not write a female protagonist (not antagonist) who lies to protect herself or to get what she wants?
There are good reasons why writers don't tend to and one is that lying is seen as bad, regardless of the motivation. Given that lying is a more useful weapon for females rather than males, it's been argued that most writers, regardless of sex, adopt a patriarchal stance in terms of their 'good' characters lying.
Promises, pledges, swearings and oaths come from preliterate time when 'your word was your bond' and 'keeping your word' meant that you could be relied on, sometimes in extremely dangerous and precarious eras. It linked closely to loyalty and bonds that were extraordinarily deep and meaningful. Thus, the spoken pledge, in all it's forms, remains ingrained in us as something immutable.
So when politicians lie, and then make light of it, or don't admit to it, the damage goes to the heart of trust, and when we write characters who lie, we hesitate--when it is our protagonist.
A male protagonist might use physical strength, aggression and profiency with swords and clubs to defeat his enemy but these weapons are not generally available to female protagonists. Without wanting to become embroiled in the nature/nurture debate, most men are stronger and more aggressive than most women, so in a typical sword fight between a man and a woman, the woman is more likely to reach exhaustion first, or, unless she's defending a child, be less driven to kill.
Verbal weaponry however is available, and females tend to have more sophisticated verbal skills than men. Thus, why not write a female protagonist (not antagonist) who lies to protect herself or to get what she wants?
There are good reasons why writers don't tend to and one is that lying is seen as bad, regardless of the motivation. Given that lying is a more useful weapon for females rather than males, it's been argued that most writers, regardless of sex, adopt a patriarchal stance in terms of their 'good' characters lying.
Promises, pledges, swearings and oaths come from preliterate time when 'your word was your bond' and 'keeping your word' meant that you could be relied on, sometimes in extremely dangerous and precarious eras. It linked closely to loyalty and bonds that were extraordinarily deep and meaningful. Thus, the spoken pledge, in all it's forms, remains ingrained in us as something immutable.
So when politicians lie, and then make light of it, or don't admit to it, the damage goes to the heart of trust, and when we write characters who lie, we hesitate--when it is our protagonist.
No comments have been added yet.
