Read on Twitter
Time for a rant. I've long had a problem with this quote by author S.M. Stirling: "There is a technical term for someone who confuses the opinions of a character in a book with those of the author. That term is idiot." (1/?)
I get what Stirling's saying—just because author has a character say something that doesn't mean author believes or supports it.
But too many people use the quote to negate legitimate criticism. To say you can't critique any words an author puts in a character's mouth. (2/?)
But too many people use the quote to negate legitimate criticism. To say you can't critique any words an author puts in a character's mouth. (2/?)
Which is of course total BS. Anything an author writes is fair game for criticism. And while sometimes an author may not believe or support what they're having their characters say, other times they do. (3/?)
Example: Ayn Rand's characters frequently say exactly what she believes, with her fiction being a thinly veiled polemic where main characters always triumph over strawman arguments of others.
Stirling's quote would have us believe this isn't legit criticism of her fiction. (4/?)
Stirling's quote would have us believe this isn't legit criticism of her fiction. (4/?)
Which is of course nonsense. Even most admirers of Rand's philosophy—of which I'm absolutely not one—admit she was not a great fiction writer.
So please, stop using this quote to shut down discussions and critiques about what characters say. (5/?)
So please, stop using this quote to shut down discussions and critiques about what characters say. (5/?)
So remember, sometimes authors do let their characters speak for them. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes literary criticism is fair. Sometimes it's not.
But stopping discussions and critiques with a heavy-handed and insulting quote is rarely the right thing to do. (6/6)
But stopping discussions and critiques with a heavy-handed and insulting quote is rarely the right thing to do. (6/6)
