POC as Origin Story

An ubiquitous element of the superhero genre is the origin story. How did this extraordinary individual get these amazing powers? Is he an alien from a dead planet powered up by our sun? Was he bitten by a radioactive spider? Was she forged from clay and empowered by the Greek gods? Did he have a ridiculous budget and some deeply unhealthy coping mechanism after the death of his parents?

In Urban Fantasy we see a trend of another origin story to explain the special magic a protagonist has. Being a POC - or having a POC ancestor at very least.

To be clear here, we’re not talking about having a magical POC protagonist. This is Urban Fantasy, your characters will have magic or other woo-woo, it’s kind of what this genre is about and we’re definitely in favour of several of those characters being POC.  Awoke, The Shadowmancer, The Keys Trilogy, Rayne Whitmore Series, World of the Lupi and many others are not problematic because they have POC who happens to have magical abilities - far from it. They have magic and are POC but at no point did the books try to suggest that their woo-woo exists BECAUSE they are Black or Asian.

Equally we’d expect many of these POC, their lives and their magic to be affected by their ethnicity and culture. We love and celebrate books like The Black Dog’s Drums, which excellently incorporates Yoruba derived religions into the setting, the world building and the characterisation. The same applies to the Habitat Series and the Egyptian elements of the Shadowchasers Series. The Jane Yellowrock Series links a lot of Jane’s woo-woo to her being Native American - but being Native American also informs her characterisation and her history. It’s not just a convenient label to justify her accessing exotic woo-woo. The Changeling Sisters has a lot of the magic related to Korean, Latinx and Hawai’ian culture - but that’s because it has Korean, Latinx and Hawai’ian characters whose ethnicity is an integral part of who they are, the world building and the story. Ultimately they work because there is considerable research and respect for the source material - something we can see with depictions of western mythologies like Irish and Norse in, for example, the Iron Druid Series.

We want more of this, so much more; with both white and western dominated media there are so many stories this genre could be telling by integrating POC and the mythologies and magic of other cultures and I’m still mourning that some of these series have come to an end.

But that isn’t achieved by having books treat Voodoun beliefs, Rroma heritage, or Native American ancestry as the same as a Freak Lab Accident, super-soldier serum or a Green Lantern Ring.

A glaring example of this, as well as why it’s so problematic, comes from Midnight Texas. This has the special prize of having Manfred have his psychic powers in the books because of a Native American ancestry. And in the TV series because of his Romani ancestry. It says a lot about how a minority culture has been represented that you can easily exchange one for another and not really change the story, magic or anything else.

Ancestry is a common trick in these origin stories - after all, if Superman can get his powers from being an alien, why can’t Jeremy in the Otherworld series get his hands on some quasi Japanese Ofuda from his absent Japanese mother? Hemlock Grove threw in some basic Romani stereotypes to go with their using being Romani as why characters were psychic and… werewolves somehow. Twilight is also notorious for creating an entirely fake Native American mythology to justify the presence of a pack of werewolves. The appalling on several levels Houseof Night series also went with that Native American woo-woo - deciding to have the protagonist, Zoey, be Cherokee - but only so they could introduce lots of woo-woo and turquoise and smudge sticks and a whole fake mythology while the Mercy Thompson Series is pretty notorious for treating all the Native Americans in the book as walking avatars of woo-woo. Literally all of them.

In all of these cases the actual ethnicity, culture or characterisation that should stem from having a POC character is absent. The writers weren’t interested in creating fleshed out, well researched and developed POC characters or in respectfully portraying and representing non-western cultures in a way that showed research and regard. They want the woo-woo. They want the different, the exotic, the alien.

In many ways it’s similar to how many book and TV series will introduce a monster from a non-western culture for a more “exotic” episode-of-the-week that we’ve spoken about tbefore… why have a werewolf when you can have a wendigo? And it shares the same flaws -  deciding one of your main characters is POC or has POC ancestry purely so you have some backstory for their woo-woo isn’t representation or respectful. It’s appropriative and it’s belittling - it clearly sends the message that the writers are pretty indifferent about these actual cultures and just wants something suitably dehumanised and “exotic”, something that is sufficiently “other” to most of their readers to justify why they would have such different powers. For DC that meant an alien from Krypton. For Urban Fantasy a Romani or Cherokee are considered alien enough.

Consent in Romance - Love at First Woo-woo

Romance will always be one of the central elements of Urban Fantasy - and is certainly the foundation for Paranormal Romance. Naturally, there are many many tropes that are dubious or troublesome when it comes to romance (and more than a few that are mockable), but in our society where rape culture is so entrenched, there are few things more damaging and more disturbing than the many issues around consent.

We have already spoken about magical romances that bind the couples together, removing their consent to leave - but now we look at the foundation of so many of those romances.

We have referred to this in the Lexicon as Love at First Woo-woo, but often it is far more pervasive and destructive. Whether it’s magical bonds, the whims of some deity, magically induced lust or some other convoluted reason, all too often we see the woo-woo swoop in and the characters squished together into a romance.

Whether they want it or not.

Whether they chose it or not.

Whether they would ever choose it. Even when it goes against everything they want or dream or stand for. The woo-woo has spoken. Choice, autonomy, sex is irrelevant.

Magical sexual attraction seems to be the mildest form of this - and we have no end of incubi/succubae/witches et al who simply must have sex or are overwhelmed by the woo-woo lust for each other. Anya Bast’s Witch Series, is a classic example, elemental witches are drawn to each other by the woo-woo. The sad thing is it’s completely unnecessary - there’s no reason why these characters couldn’t have just found each other attractive - but no, there had to be coercion. There has to be that external pressure that forces that sexual step

There has to be an excuse.

At the core a lot of these tropes stem from the enduring, sexist, trope that a sexual woman is evil. A woman who pursues sex is a slutwhorejezebel and terribad awful, to be shamed and condemned. Nice Girls don’t sully themselves with the dreadful, awful sex and reach shakily for the smelling salts and the fainting couch, pearls clutched in a death grip, at the very idea. The only way your pure shining womanhood can possibly use her sinful ladyparts is if it isn’t her choice - or, more accurately - her FAULT. It’s very closely linked to the trope where a woman says “no” and has to be “worn down” by a male love interest until her defences are finally breached.

This is epitomised by the Anita Blake Series where we see Anita having one of the most expansive sex lives of any protagonist ever - but had to be dragged kicking and screaming to every sexual encounter.

It’s a tragic trope and the prevalence of it - that women need to be able to blame magic for them actually having sex - is why I still repeatedly praise series like Yasmine Galenorn’s Otherworld series that show pro-active, sexual women who enjoy their sex lives without any magical nudge to justify them getting down. This shouldn’t be praiseworthy, this shouldn’t stand out - but sadly it does

Of course this trope goes beyond reinforcing the idea a “good” woman needs to have an excuse to have sex - we can’t stress enough how often this violates consent.

Twilight is an especially infamous example of this trope - where magical “imprinting” results in werewolves (nearly all male) bonding with their love interests after just looking at them - making the relationship pre-ordained. And consent? Well one of these “women” who is “imprinted” on is actually a small child. The other a baby in the womb - but we’re assured they’ll have an attentive, loving caring future-boyfriend to dote on them until they come of age.

That’s called grooming. It’s a crime. And even if they don’t touch that girl until she’s 18, honest, that’s still a lifetime of brainwashing to impose on her. No reasonable person can call this consent.

While Twilight is extreme because of it’s involvement of children - it’s not alone. Nalini Singh’s Psy/Changeling series has changelings begin the “mating dance” with their chosen mates - even when those mates are completely uninterested not just in love, but in emotion at all! But the woo-woo has spoken! Personal consent, lives, beliefs or inherent nature are irrelevant! Sherrilyn Kenyon’s Werehunters form magical bonds - again before any real acquaintance has even been established. Eileen Wilks World of the Lupi series has mating bonds so strong they can’t even move too far away from the other! They’re literally joined at the hip!

It’s not just shapeshifters (though they do seem to dominate for some reason) - the Black Dagger Brotherhood (which has never seen a terrible romance trope without claiming it) has vampires getting in on the bonding-at-first sight nonsense as well.

This is another element that has to be emphasised of this trope - nearly all of these bound-for-life-at-first-sight people are virtual strangers. It emphasises not just a lack of consent but also strikes us as lazy writing. You could build a relationship, you could write the things about the other that attracted and endeared your protagonist. You could write them falling in love as they come closer and see all the wonderful qualities. Or, woo-woo could strike within seconds of seeing each other and they could be happily skipping down the aisle before they even know each other’s surname.

Consent in Romance: Being Able to Leave

Alphario, rippling romance hero, tenderly checks the chains properly restraining his beloved, the sweet Captiva. Carefully he ensures that she has taken the proper dose of the addictive drug she can only possibly get from him and they lovingly share a kiss before he leaves, romantically checking the bars and locks the cell door behind him. They will live together Happily Ever After - there will be no escape.

This is, I hope, not generally considered the most romantic of scenarios. At very least some pretty extensive bondage consent will have to be discussed before hand - yet time and again I see romances end in such a way that the participants are bound together; lovingly, happily, certainly - but still bound, unable to leave should either party actually want to do so.

This is something that is very rarely addressed in Paranormal Romance - and for good reason. After all, a Happily Ever After is usually the goal here. No-one really wants to think of their sexy vampire romance ending because Vlad has filed divorce papers and they’re now fighting for custody of the werewolf puppies. That’s fairly understandable (however, it has to be said I do want to read that story). So, no, I’m not saying the genre needs more books about relationship break down and love affairs turning sour.

But it does need the ability to leave to still be part of the romance. It doesn’t mean either party has to take it - but it has to be there because part of consent is the ability to withdraw it. Consent is not a one shot deal, consent is not a “sign on the dotted line, that’s it FOREVER”. Consent should not leave the parties feeling like the signed in blood. Consent is the ability to change your mind, to say it’s over, to say you’re done and be able to head for the door even if you never open it.

A lot of the books I’ve read in Paranormal Romance/Urban Fantasy don’t have that for various reasons. One of the most common of which are mystical bonds - some kind of magical woo-woo that chains the characters together eternally with no presented possibility of either character being able to break that bond. The two love interests fall in love (or, in extreme cases, see each other) and the magic hits - they are now glued together by the woo-woo of True Love FOREVER.

There are so many examples of this, there’s no way I could count them all. The Black Dagger Brotherhood series has the male vampires create mystical bonds to their wives (this involves lots of smelling and occasionally lethal violence to any other man who dares to come near her) which is made very clear is permanent. In fact, it’s so permanent that if one partner should die the other will usually passively suicide. It’s also used as an excuse for violent jealousy and several times us being told (romantically, of course) that there’s no way a male vampire would ever let his mate go. Even if she wanted to.

How… romantic. Restraining order anyone?

Keri Arthur plays with shapeshifters bonding for life in the Damask Circle world and Spook Squad series. Actually, this trope tends to be trotted out especially often when wereanimals are involved: Werewolf bonds can also be found in Wolf Haven, the Mercy Thompson and Alpha & Omega series, the World of the Lupi series and the Psy-Changeling Series - which has just about everyone forming woo-woo bonds

Twilight has werewolves “imprinting” on their mates - something that is clearly meant to last for life (including when said imprinting happens with children, babies and foetus. Yes pass around the brain bleach, I’m sure we could all use a dose).

I cannot see these as romantic. What is romantic is two people staying together for the rest of their lives because they love and adore each other and every moment together brings joy. What is not romantic is being magically shackled together so they cannot possibly leave. Chaining them together doesn’t prove love and isn’t romantic - the characters stay together forever because they have no choice in the matter. That’s not romantic and it’s not consent.

It’s not just mystical bonding though - a lot of the time I see couples that are solidly welded together with angst. Overwhelming, needy, my-life-is-over-without-you angst. This is often mistaken as utterly romantic that this person is so invested in their love interest that they physically cannot stand to live without them - but it’s dangerous, it’s creepy it’s coercive and it’s even abusive.

In Fiction, No-one is Forced by Circumstance

When a book or TV show is fiction, it’s made up. Everything within it is created.

I can see your bemused expressions now - why have I started stating the obvious? Well, by a lot of the excuses people make for various issues we criticise in books, it feels like some people aren’t grasping it.

In particular, this happens when we describe a character as being problematic in some way - maybe they’re a stereotype or trope, maybe they have bigoted attitudes, maybe their relationships are a hot mess of problems, maybe everything’s just a wall-to-wall hot mess. But we describe the problematic issue and someone counters “but X forces them to be/do/think that!”

But this forgets that “X”, whatever X is, only exists because the author put it there. The author isn’t a historian presenting their research, or an anthropologist loyally relating their observations. The author is the storyteller, the author is the one who built this world, every aspect for it, and if they have created an element that “justifies” some prejudiced, bigoted or problematic element then that has been their choice to do so. We cannot pretend or act like this is out of their hands.

There are so many examples of this - let’s take werewolves. Female werewolves are often super-duper rare - making the few female werewolves highly desirable and hunted by the male werewolves (like Elena in Kelley Armstrong’s Women of the Otherworld) or making female werewolves so rare they have a very male dominated cast (Patricia Briggs’ Mercy Thompson Series) or there just cannot be female werewolves for REASONS - which are probably related to werewolves being so traditionally masculine and aggressive and hairy (Eileen Wilk’s World of the Lupi series, Gail Carriger’s Parasol Protectorate series).

The scarcity of female werewolves is used over and over as a justification for women living in a sea of men, or for women being super-precious and hunted or needing lots of aggressive “protection”. It’s not a trope! It’s just the rarity of women! It’s just how werewolves ARE!

Except for the fact that werewolves are not actually real. If this is just how the werewolves are, then it is because the author chose to make them that way - you can’t excuse a problematic story element by creating a problematic world element.

We see this repeatedly when supernatural Alpha Male “heroes” are aggressive, violent, angry, “protective” and controlling, the excuse is usually that this is part of their nature. Werewolves are possessive and violent. The vampires latch on to their mates (in the Black Dagger Brotherhood) or can’t control themselves (Twilight). There are any number of abusive tropes that are justified because the man gets a supernatural pass - the abusive nature is part of their werewolf/vampire/weremanatee nature.

These creatures are not real, these creatures do not have to be this way. Their natures are conscious choices on the part of the writer and, as such, cannot be a “get out” of tropes they embody.

While supernatural creatures are a classic example, we can also see a lot of similar excuses arising from the cultures created in the books.

Again, Patricia Briggs’s Mercy Thompson series has the werewolf pack that is deeply misogynist and homophobic. Cassandra Clare’s Mortal Instruments Series has a homophobic society. George R R Martin’s Song of Ice and Fire has a society that is such a hot mess of misogyny that I don’t think they have any industry other than prostitution. It’s the first society ever whose economy is entirely reliant on war on sex-work. Again, all of these cultural bigotries are choices of the author - these are fictional societies, subcultures and often entirely new worlds with new religions (and dragons); there is nothing forcing the bigotries of our world onto their societies beyond authorial choice.

At what point are fans being screwed?

Fans can be wonderful, passionate, amazing people (they can also be aggravating, obsessive and more than a little scary). To be a fan is to really invest in a series, to invest time and energy and passion and hopes and enthusiasm - and money.

Definitely money. Fans love their precious and will reach into their pockets, grab the plastic and buy all kinds of things associated with their beloved series. They’ll lay out money for the next book as soon as it comes out, they’ll buy DVD series - and much much more. Just having the name of the beloved show or book on something will guarantee invested fans will show up desperate to hand over their cash.

And content creators, producers and certainly marketing people know this too well and are quick to cash in. There’s gold in them thar fanpoodles!

But there’s ways and means to cash in on that resource - because some tactics employed are downright sketchy and certainly show very little actual respect for the fanbase. In fact, the need to screw every penny out of the people who have made a series such a success can feel pretty damn contemptuous.

Probably the first thing that springs to mind is merchandising - but to be fair we don’t really see a problem here. Sure we’ll laugh at people like George Lucas’s notorious merchandising everything that can possibly be sold (and it was wonderfully lampooned in Space Balls), but if fans want to buy Game of Thrones playing cards or glasses or a Dragon Egg paperweight (it’s a rock! You’re buying a damn rock! IT’S A ROCK!) then more power to them

Because it’s honest. What you see is what you get. If you really want to drop your money on Game of Thrones beer (and yes, yes you can) then you know what you’re drinking and for how much. It’s the fanpoodle’s choice and it’s clear what they’re getting - nor are even the most dubious items required to continue to be part of the fandom. You may get super geek points for having that statue of Lord of the Ring’s Gollum or the genuine City of Bones Shadow Hunter make up - but it’s not an essential for anyone following the series.

No - there are far more dubious ways to reach into the fan’s pockets

Especially when the series hits the television or movie screens. Urban fantasy has caught the attention of visual media. There is no such thing as a fanpoodle who isn’t giddy with delight to see their favourite series turned into a television show. The fanpoodles have much to dance about with Twilight, True Blood, Game of Thrones, The Mortal Instruments, The Vampire Academy, The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, Bitten, The Hunger Games, The Walking Dead and The Vampire Diaries having all made the leap from the page to either the television or the large screen and there are more in the works. Since these new shows or movies are all based on very successful books, movie and television producers can agree to fund them with a modicum of confidence that they will be a success. These converts from books have yielded great financial rewards and once the gravy train starts rolling in, actually pulling into the station is more difficult than starting the damn train in the first place.

By all accounts neither the books or the movies of the Twilight series were great. In many ways the Twilight series is a literary disaster but it made money. There is nothing interesting about any of the movies but they also made money. The only problem for the producers in this case is that Twilight is a finite story. It has a very definitive beginning, middle and ending but when the money is that good why not stretch it out just a little bit more - especially when this can result in $281,275,991 USD. The problem, of course, is that there certainly was not enough plot to justify splitting Breaking Dawn into two movies, but hey, since people will pay, to hell with integrity.