I hate being pigeonholed as a woman, and I’m sure men hate it too. It’s amazing to me how utterly sexist this viewpoint is. Humans are humans. Passivity is not inherently female. That may have been a social construct enforced on women at various times, but it’s certainly not a given. I myself don’t fit into that construct but I don’t view myself as masculine just because I’m not a pushover, or I’m driven. I mean look at all the women throughout history! Look at the women around you! I’m all for trying something new. Writing a passive character and making the story interesting seems like a fun challenge. But making this some man/woman patriarch battle? I hate that take.
Hi Shaina - I couldn't agree more. This trend of pidgeonholing the sexes seems to be picking up speed lately just when it felt like it was finally disappearing. It's pretty frustrating. I don't know anyone who frames their world this way :-(
This was a great analysis. I can't imagine setting out to create a passive protagonist, but I'm sure I would be told that's because I'm a part of the problematic patriarchy and I ooze a desire for intentional growth and purpose. God forbid.
Every second someone chooses to read our stories, they are making a conscious choice not to do something else. If the very nature of reading requires a self-directed act, that should tell us everything we need to know about what people expect of the protagonist on the page.
The original article not only strikes me as ridiculous, but also inadvertently sexist. There's a strange notion that only strong female characters are the only female characters with agency, and that's simply untrue. A character's actions may be curtailed by their personality and circumstances, but even quiet or timid characters can have goals they work towards.
Hi Leigh - Exactly! I think that's a great point. And sometimes the most interesting characters are the shy or retiring ones because they make us curious to see how they might achieve their goals despite their reticence.
Agreed. I used to be a big Jane Austen fan back in the day, and it makes me think of the difference between Pride and Prejudice, which everybody knows and loves, and Mansfield Park, which is pretty obscure unless you're an Austen nerd. The heroine of MP is often disliked by the fans, since she's shy, retiring, and often unsure of herself. But she also is the one who stands her ground when nearly everyone she knows is trying to pressure her to marry a man she doesn't love. She's sometimes accused of being too passive, but quiet and passive aren't the same.
Leigh, you've taken me back thirty years! I read Mansfield Park for A Level English, and I found Fanny Price absolutely wonderful. She may have come across as quiet, too 'good', but I saw this as very normal, relatable behaviour for someone who was finding it difficult to find her place in her new, very different surroundings.
We - three boys, four girls - were asked which character they each most identified with, and why. One very laid-back girl chose Lady Bertram, as she did very little apart from sitting with her feet up, but all of the others chose the misbehaving, fun-junkie Crawfords, and were lauded for it.
Shy and retiring Rebecca picked shy and retiring Fanny, and never lived it down!
“I want to read about all the inmates who punched their way out of that pretty little prison. I’ll take a double order of patriarchy over whatever the hell they’re peddling.”--YES!!!
Coincidentally there’s an action movie called Sucker Punch about a group of women trapped in a mental institution who regain their agency while trying to escape. Thought that seemed apt to mention haha 😆
Nick Carraway, the narrator of THE GREAT GATSBY, is a passive protagonist. He contributes to the story and is a catalyst and enabler in getting Jay and Daisy together. Yet, no one cares about Nick. The Action Protagonist gets all the attention.
I think people who champion passive protagonists also embrace the status quo. Deep down, they hate change. Active protagonists bother these folks because those types of characters drive change - for better or for worse.
Thanks, John! Could not agree more! Change is definitely unsettling, as is being the one who has to initiate it. Being passive (i.e. relinquishing responsibility) is comforting for some people, but it's taking the easy way out.
I think you could have stopped at "crock of shit" and it would still have been a great read and right on point. The only logical or at least legitimate reason for associating action with masculinity would be if the writer was implicitly referring to Yin and Yang. But I have to say that whenever I read articles or pronouncements by such people -- which I try to do as seldom as possible as I value keeping my blood pressure under control -- I have the impression that they're the least enlightened people on the planet, and in no way convincing as role models, whether intellectual or otherwise.
Well said. I'm not deny that there are differences between the sexes, as with Yin and Yang, but I dislike this extreme stereotyping and putting of people in boxes. I thought we were trying to evolve past that 2 dimensional thinking, not reinforce it. It's probably in the interests of my mental health to ignore a lot of this stuff, but sometimes I can't help myself when it's just so ridiculous ;-)
Great observations, as usual. Passive protagonist? Blech! The article you site makes me wonder if the author wrote a story at some point that no one wanted to read and had to come up with an excuse... oh, yes, “the patriarchy “! That’s it. 🙄 Lol.
Do you think that a character is passive if, although they very much WANT to actively go after their goal, they're largely UNABLE to be active?
(My MC in my WIP is trapped in an asylum and, although she desperately wants to get out, she spends a big chunk of the novel keeping her head down and NOT doing things that might upset the doctor in charge. I didn't think of her as a passive person — her character is very bold! — but I'm beginning to worry that she counts as a passive character. And the problem with that is that it's easy for a passive character to be a boring one 😭)
Hi Zena, That's a really interesting question! I do think a character can be perceived as active by readers despite their inability to engage in much outward action. Intention and desire are active, propulsive emotions whether or not their aims are fulfilled. If anything, I think having their goals thwarted helps to create tension within the story. But this probably only works if the character is doing something to foster that tension (as opposed to passively resigning themselves to fate).
Even if your character doesn't appear to be doing anything externally (because it might upset the doctor), you describe her as someone with a bold character. I think if you can show some of the inner conflicts she must feel when she wants to say or do something she knows she can't, forced by her circumstances to restrain herself, or how she is continually dreaming of ways to escape, readers might be able to see her not as passive but as a survivor. I hope that made sense!
Thanks for your response! I do show her inner conflicts and her ideas for how to get out, etc, so hopefully it works. Ultimately, I guess the proof is in the pudding and I'll have to see what beta readers think... Thanks again!
Hi Libor, and welcome. I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. You are very welcome to express your views here, or to respectfully respond to another commenter, so long as it is relevant to the discussion. I just ask that you please refrain from advertising on my newsletter. Thank you!
I hate being pigeonholed as a woman, and I’m sure men hate it too. It’s amazing to me how utterly sexist this viewpoint is. Humans are humans. Passivity is not inherently female. That may have been a social construct enforced on women at various times, but it’s certainly not a given. I myself don’t fit into that construct but I don’t view myself as masculine just because I’m not a pushover, or I’m driven. I mean look at all the women throughout history! Look at the women around you! I’m all for trying something new. Writing a passive character and making the story interesting seems like a fun challenge. But making this some man/woman patriarch battle? I hate that take.
Hi Shaina - I couldn't agree more. This trend of pidgeonholing the sexes seems to be picking up speed lately just when it felt like it was finally disappearing. It's pretty frustrating. I don't know anyone who frames their world this way :-(
Sexist is right. I wrote in one of my articles recently (in a book review: https://terryfreedman.substack.com/i/106780019/interim-review-the-lives-of-marva-delonghi-by-jody-j-sperling) that I happened to like kick-ass women, and it's true: who wants to keep company with a wimpish victim? But I think depicting un-pushover behaviour as masculine is, frankly, sheer laziness. As you say, we're all human
Thanks, Terry! I could not agree more. And I did thoroughly enjoy the review :-)
This was a great analysis. I can't imagine setting out to create a passive protagonist, but I'm sure I would be told that's because I'm a part of the problematic patriarchy and I ooze a desire for intentional growth and purpose. God forbid.
Every second someone chooses to read our stories, they are making a conscious choice not to do something else. If the very nature of reading requires a self-directed act, that should tell us everything we need to know about what people expect of the protagonist on the page.
Thanks, Brian! And well said! I found this concept of passivity so alien. I can't imagine many readers would relate well to it either.
Oops, hit send too soon.
The original article not only strikes me as ridiculous, but also inadvertently sexist. There's a strange notion that only strong female characters are the only female characters with agency, and that's simply untrue. A character's actions may be curtailed by their personality and circumstances, but even quiet or timid characters can have goals they work towards.
Hi Leigh - Exactly! I think that's a great point. And sometimes the most interesting characters are the shy or retiring ones because they make us curious to see how they might achieve their goals despite their reticence.
Agreed. I used to be a big Jane Austen fan back in the day, and it makes me think of the difference between Pride and Prejudice, which everybody knows and loves, and Mansfield Park, which is pretty obscure unless you're an Austen nerd. The heroine of MP is often disliked by the fans, since she's shy, retiring, and often unsure of herself. But she also is the one who stands her ground when nearly everyone she knows is trying to pressure her to marry a man she doesn't love. She's sometimes accused of being too passive, but quiet and passive aren't the same.
No, quiet and passive are definitely NOT the same :-)
Leigh, you've taken me back thirty years! I read Mansfield Park for A Level English, and I found Fanny Price absolutely wonderful. She may have come across as quiet, too 'good', but I saw this as very normal, relatable behaviour for someone who was finding it difficult to find her place in her new, very different surroundings.
We - three boys, four girls - were asked which character they each most identified with, and why. One very laid-back girl chose Lady Bertram, as she did very little apart from sitting with her feet up, but all of the others chose the misbehaving, fun-junkie Crawfords, and were lauded for it.
Shy and retiring Rebecca picked shy and retiring Fanny, and never lived it down!
Pitch perfect as ever, Jacquie. I mean, agon - it’s sewn into the very word!!
Thanks so much, Adrian! What a great point!
“I want to read about all the inmates who punched their way out of that pretty little prison. I’ll take a double order of patriarchy over whatever the hell they’re peddling.”--YES!!!
Coincidentally there’s an action movie called Sucker Punch about a group of women trapped in a mental institution who regain their agency while trying to escape. Thought that seemed apt to mention haha 😆
It's funny you mention that movie because a friend recommended it to me a while back and it was definitely interesting!
Definitely liked it back when it came out. Not sure how it’s held up since then. Enjoyed the article very much btw. Great job 👏
Thanks! Yeah, I don't remember all the story details but I remember it being weird and visually striking :-)
I've learned so much from this post - it's one I'll be returning to again and again! Thank you for another tremendously thought-provoking read. 😊
Thank you, Rebecca! I'm so glad you found it worthwhile! Sometimes when I'm writing these things I wonder if I'm even making sense ;-)
You certainly make sense, absolutely! 🤣
Thanks, that's always good to hear (especially since there is a typo in my previous comment, haha ;-) Doh!
And again! I need a cup of tea!
Nick Carraway, the narrator of THE GREAT GATSBY, is a passive protagonist. He contributes to the story and is a catalyst and enabler in getting Jay and Daisy together. Yet, no one cares about Nick. The Action Protagonist gets all the attention.
Hi Charles - I haven't read that one since high school :-| But from what I remember, Nick Carraway is an interesting example, thanks!
You're welcome. It is a pleasure to read a non-political essay on Substack. - so thank YOU.
I hear you on that! :-)
Excellent analysis.
I think people who champion passive protagonists also embrace the status quo. Deep down, they hate change. Active protagonists bother these folks because those types of characters drive change - for better or for worse.
Thanks, John! Could not agree more! Change is definitely unsettling, as is being the one who has to initiate it. Being passive (i.e. relinquishing responsibility) is comforting for some people, but it's taking the easy way out.
I think you could have stopped at "crock of shit" and it would still have been a great read and right on point. The only logical or at least legitimate reason for associating action with masculinity would be if the writer was implicitly referring to Yin and Yang. But I have to say that whenever I read articles or pronouncements by such people -- which I try to do as seldom as possible as I value keeping my blood pressure under control -- I have the impression that they're the least enlightened people on the planet, and in no way convincing as role models, whether intellectual or otherwise.
Well said. I'm not deny that there are differences between the sexes, as with Yin and Yang, but I dislike this extreme stereotyping and putting of people in boxes. I thought we were trying to evolve past that 2 dimensional thinking, not reinforce it. It's probably in the interests of my mental health to ignore a lot of this stuff, but sometimes I can't help myself when it's just so ridiculous ;-)
Great observations, as usual. Passive protagonist? Blech! The article you site makes me wonder if the author wrote a story at some point that no one wanted to read and had to come up with an excuse... oh, yes, “the patriarchy “! That’s it. 🙄 Lol.
Thanks, Amanda! That's too funny, but I think you're onto something there! haha ;-)
😉😁
Do you think that a character is passive if, although they very much WANT to actively go after their goal, they're largely UNABLE to be active?
(My MC in my WIP is trapped in an asylum and, although she desperately wants to get out, she spends a big chunk of the novel keeping her head down and NOT doing things that might upset the doctor in charge. I didn't think of her as a passive person — her character is very bold! — but I'm beginning to worry that she counts as a passive character. And the problem with that is that it's easy for a passive character to be a boring one 😭)
Hi Zena, That's a really interesting question! I do think a character can be perceived as active by readers despite their inability to engage in much outward action. Intention and desire are active, propulsive emotions whether or not their aims are fulfilled. If anything, I think having their goals thwarted helps to create tension within the story. But this probably only works if the character is doing something to foster that tension (as opposed to passively resigning themselves to fate).
Even if your character doesn't appear to be doing anything externally (because it might upset the doctor), you describe her as someone with a bold character. I think if you can show some of the inner conflicts she must feel when she wants to say or do something she knows she can't, forced by her circumstances to restrain herself, or how she is continually dreaming of ways to escape, readers might be able to see her not as passive but as a survivor. I hope that made sense!
Thanks for your response! I do show her inner conflicts and her ideas for how to get out, etc, so hopefully it works. Ultimately, I guess the proof is in the pudding and I'll have to see what beta readers think... Thanks again!
Hi Libor, and welcome. I'm afraid I don't understand your comment. You are very welcome to express your views here, or to respectfully respond to another commenter, so long as it is relevant to the discussion. I just ask that you please refrain from advertising on my newsletter. Thank you!
No worries, and thank you! :-)