10 KiB
What bugs me from children's fiction
-
Author: u/None *
-
URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/1u5tqx/what_bugs_me_from_childrens_fiction/
-
Score: 18
-
Created: 2014-01-01T15:53:04
Post:
Most of the most popular kids book series of the past few years have had one thing in common. The 39 Clues, Harry Potter, Percy Jackson/Heroes of Olympus/Kane Chronicles, Artemis Fowl, even Series of Unfortunate Events and Young Merlin. (Ooh, and Star Wars, if that counts.) That's that the protagonists of these stories get their "interestingness", if you will, from something out of their own control. Predestined greatness.
-
The kids in 39 Clues were born into special bloodlines.
-
Harry Potter's parents were wizards, and his mom gave him magical blood protection, not to mention the whole prophecy thing. Prophecies are a tell-tale sign of predestined greatness.
-
In Rick Riordan's series, the protagonists are descended from gods.
-
Artemis Fowl's parents are/were rich.
-
The kids in Unfortunate Events were rich and had nasty family members.
-
Young Merlin is born with all sorts of special powers.
-
Anakin was the immaculately-born "Chosen One" to bring balance to the force. Once again, another sign: "Chosen One".
-
I'm probably missing a bunch, feel free to share if you think of any!
To me, this fits the "long lost uncle bequeaths millions in inheritance" trope. These kids are special. These kids are extraordinary. And not because of their own actions! Because they were given that extraordinary-ness by adults.
There are admittedly a few exceptions to this rule. For instance, The Hunger Games trilogy (and, to a lesser extent, the knockoff series Divergent)... While not rational, per se, they surely could fall under the "soft rational" or "medium-hard science fiction" category.
Anyways. Just wanted to get that out there.
ETA: Ooh, ooh, I thought of another one that doesn't use this trope: The Mysterious Benedict Society. Excellent books. And I think they actually would fit the general characteristics of rational fics, as listed in the sidebar. Hmm...
Comments:
u/LordSwedish [+14] Q Continuum (18 minutes later)
You make a good case but the main "interestingness" about Artemis Fowl is his intellect. He has to manage the finances or his family would be ruined anyway. Besides, if anything the thing he got from his parents would be criminal contacts rather than wealth.
u/None [+3] (23 minutes later)
Mm, that's true. Though his butler/bodyguard - whatever his name is - saves him from death numerous times, and that's a result of his parent's wealth. I'd say that there's less to it than you think.
Either way, if a boy with Fowl's intellect was born in a poor family instead of a rich one, for instance, he'd not be able to achieve anywhere near the magnitude of awesomeness that AF did.
u/LordSwedish [+1] Q Continuum (36 minutes later)
Fair enough. I believe that if he had the same childhood but with less money he would still amass a fortune fairly quickly but it's true that he wouldn't have Butler and it would be questionable whether he would have discovered fairies. I still think that it doesn't carry the spirit of "inherited awesome" in the same way that the Percy Jackson books do.
u/None [+3] (56 minutes later)
Oh, definitely. Riordan's series are horrible; I think it didn't help that he started with "dyslexia and ADD (or ADHD, or whatever they call it now) are symptoms of awesomeness" and went on from there. A protagonist with dyslexia and awesomeness might be reasonable... But not a protagonist with dyslexia because awesomeness.
u/iamzeph [+6] (7 hours later)
David Brin wrote a good essay to this effect in 1999, "Star Wars" despots vs. "Star Trek" populists, lambasting Lucas and the SW movies
u/StrategicSarcasm [+4] Chaos Legion (13 hours later)
Well yes, you could argue that the stories are something out of their control based on their birth, but that's such a narrow definition. Every story has that plot. If the plot involved something within their control, they would end it without any drama. Everyone is given their "interestingness" by something out of their control, because they were born with certain genetic predispositions and brought up in a society that wanted to raise them a certain way.
In The Hunger Games, there is a lot that is special about the main characters. They had to be born in a specific situation where they would participate in the hunger games, and they had to be determined enough to win. They had to be the right people in the right time, just like rich people or wizards. Sure, the determinism about it is less blatant, but it's just as true.
u/None [+3] (21 hours later)
Well, there's two things to say here.
Duuude, you should totally read Diane Duane's Young Wizards series. No chosen ones there!
Unfortunately, a realistic portrayal of a lower-proletarian lifestyle doesn't really allow for "and then the kid had a brilliant opportunity to get his hands on Applied Phlebotinum, become a magical knight, and save the world from dragons." Usually even the pettiest Applied Phlebotinum is kind of confined to the middle classes. In fact, the life of a truly impoverished person is so difficult that they'd Miss the Call because they're too busy struggling to eat or pay rent. It's hard to tell stories about kids that poor.
u/smischmal [+2] (25 days later)
It has been a while since I read A Series of Unfortunate Events, but if I recall correctly, a big part of what made the Baudelaire orphans interesting as characters was that they were very clever and resourceful. Violet was an inventor and Klaus was well read (Sunny was an infant, and thus, somewhat less of interest, to me at least). The money mostly served primarily as a lure for the villians of the stories.
I think the kids would have turned out pretty interesting even if they weren't wealthy and terribly unlucky.
u/maniexx [+1] (22 hours later)
I think this stems from the fact that in children books the protagonist tends to be young, and you know his story from the beginning. In adult fiction you meet character after he has already achieved something, and therefore there's no need for any pre-destination. So I wouldn't blame the authors for that, it seems inevitable.
u/MrFrumpish [+1] (4 days later)
Oh God, don't get me started about Frodo Baggins. "Sam, the ring is MY burden."
u/MrFrumpish [+1] (4 days later)
Allow me to leap to the defence of the Artemis Fowl series. Yes, he was born to a rich family. However, Artemis' defining characteristic in my opinion is his technological genius and unrivalled planning abilities. This is due to a combination of his father teaching him well from a young age, investigating through his own curiosity, and having the resources to successfully do so. These factors, all of them either inherited or merited, serve to breed the most versatile character possible. In addition, he does not simply exploit his money for the purpose of such, he later meets people who are better at planning than him, and we're able to outsmart him. Though he is humbled from time to time, Artemis always adapts to his fallacies in order to overcome adversaries. He learns more about sustainability as well, and the books present ecological problems in a rational face that appeals to Artemis' own conservative mind. This way, yes, Artemis was born in an advantageous position, though nothing as pretentious as being "the chosen one", but this is the starting point for years of interesting character development and constantly improving rationality.
u/kairisika [-1] (3 hours later)
While Harry Potter's parents were wizards, he lives in a world of wizards, so that's not anything special. He was born in-world normal, in what happens to be a fantasy world.
u/None [+5] (5 hours later)
He lives in a world of wizards, but it was his parents who fought Voldemort, attracting his attention and leading to Voldy attacking Harry. And the only reason Harry survived was because of something his mom did!
u/kairisika [+1] (5 hours later)
it was the prophecy that attracted attention to him, though his survival was attributable to his mother.
I didn't think his survival was much of a thing though. The world thought he was special because he had lived, but the author didn't - it was just backstory.
Now, the fact that he had a prophecy about him (or only one other person) made him previously special, but that is separate from the wizard making him special.
I'm not arguing that there were not external factors, just that his wizardhood didn't matter any more than the fact that I'm a human is special (though it too gives me superpowers over most creatures I might meet).
u/traverseda [+7] With dread but cautious optimism (7 hours later)
He was a secret double wizard. Parsletongue, marked by prophecy...
u/None [+1] (7 hours later)
And yet if he hadn't been saved by his mother... Not to mention that his mom's magical love shield was the only reason he survived the encounter with Quirrellmort at the end of Book 1.
Either way, the prophecy, as you yourself say, is what makes him special, and that's a telltale sign of predestined greatness. Ooh, that's what I could name this trope! Predestined greatness. I'll edit OP.
u/kairisika [+1] (8 hours later)
yeah, that makes sense.
u/None [+2] (21 hours later)
Except that he kinda was born rich, too.
u/kairisika [+2] (a day later)
OP has edited the comment. It used to state that he fell into the trope due to being a wizard, which is wrong as mentioned. As in other comment, I did not disagree with the other aspects that apply to him.