Jump to content

The Witcher on Netflix.


Macklunkey

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I know virtually nothing about The Witcher. All the internet has been able to tell me is that it's about a magical James Bond who spends most of his time having sex with random women. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that it's more than that though. . . right? I'm not really into love triangles, either.  

I'd think the internet offers plenty more than that on the Witcher. Witchers are human who have been mutated and can use limited amounts of magic. They are trained their entire lives to kill monsters after an event in the world allowed monsters populations to rise and begin really hurting people. So, you've got Geralt, the White Wolf, a Witcher who travels about taking out contracts, but what made the first book interesting was that--it was a collection of short stories--and each contract he took was a twisted/subverted form of a classic Fairy Tale. Beauty and the Beast and Sleeping Beauty are two I remember best.

The stories always never end up about him just killing a monster though. They are often much more complicated than that. The books have sex, I can only imagine explaining Game of Thrones as a story about a magical James Bond like imp who mostly has sex with prostitutes. The reductive nature of such a view tells me you have asked the wrong part of the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2018 at 1:10 PM, Simon Steele said:

I'd think the internet offers plenty more than that on the Witcher. Witchers are human who have been mutated and can use limited amounts of magic. They are trained their entire lives to kill monsters after an event in the world allowed monsters populations to rise and begin really hurting people. So, you've got Geralt, the White Wolf, a Witcher who travels about taking out contracts, but what made the first book interesting was that--it was a collection of short stories--and each contract he took was a twisted/subverted form of a classic Fairy Tale. Beauty and the Beast and Sleeping Beauty are two I remember best.

The stories always never end up about him just killing a monster though. They are often much more complicated than that. The books have sex, I can only imagine explaining Game of Thrones as a story about a magical James Bond like imp who mostly has sex with prostitutes. The reductive nature of such a view tells me you have asked the wrong part of the internet.

I might have to start thinking of Tyrion as James Bond the Imp next time I reread the books now.

I decided to start reading The Last Wish to see what the series was about. So far it's pretty good--engaging prose and stories, although hard to follow at times (that may have to do with the language barrier; I have no idea how to pronounce most of the names). There are a lot of expository monologues, and the dialogue is kind of a modern/medieval hybrid, which is an. . . interesting choice, to say the least. I'm very interested in seeing the role of women in this story going forwards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2018 at 5:47 PM, Theda Baratheon said:

Also SO MANY CHARACTERS in Witcher 3 have Welsh accents!!!! The Welsh crones....oh be still ym beating heart. I LOVE those disgusting, twisted ladies.

The music during those crones sequences was phenomenal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I might have to start thinking of Tyrion as James Bond the Imp next time I reread the books now.

I decided to start reading The Last Wish to see what the series was about. So far it's pretty good--engaging prose and stories, although hard to follow at times (that may have to do with the language barrier; I have no idea how to pronounce most of the names). There are a lot of expository monologues, and the dialogue is kind of a modern/medieval hybrid, which is an. . . interesting choice, to say the least. I'm very interested in seeing the role of women in this story going forwards. 

I wouldn't say the role of women in the Witcher 3 (the only game I've played) is terribly enlightened. I think "strong female characters with agency" is all well and good, but if it's mainly because they are witches who can turn you into a toad if you piss them off, that's not terribly enlightened for women in general. 

I find it's an interesting dilemma for medieval fantasy in how the world treats women. Do you go for women generally having a status more or less the same as in our medieval times (not much more than chattel), or do you create a whole different gender dynamic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I might have to start thinking of Tyrion as James Bond the Imp next time I reread the books now.

I decided to start reading The Last Wish to see what the series was about. So far it's pretty good--engaging prose and stories, although hard to follow at times (that may have to do with the language barrier; I have no idea how to pronounce most of the names). There are a lot of expository monologues, and the dialogue is kind of a modern/medieval hybrid, which is an. . . interesting choice, to say the least. I'm very interested in seeing the role of women in this story going forwards. 

No! NO! I didn't mean to do that to Tyrion! Oh well. I think a lot of the dark gamer corners of the net will give you bad views of the Witcher, while both the games and books are interesting and different. I was expecting an action-based series, but you're right, so much of it is dialogue, monologues, philosophizing. I'm re-reading the Last Wish right now--after having finished the series, so many things I missed are already popping up. I love it. It's layered in strange ways.

I think the second book though, the Sword of Destiny, is the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I wouldn't say the role of women in the Witcher 3 (the only game I've played) is terribly enlightened. I think "strong female characters with agency" is all well and good, but if it's mainly because they are witches who can turn you into a toad if you piss them off, that's not terribly enlightened for women in general. 

I find it's an interesting dilemma for medieval fantasy in how the world treats women. Do you go for women generally having a status more or less the same as in our medieval times (not much more than chattel), or do you create a whole different gender dynamic?

I'm trying to keep an open mind, since a lot of women seem to really love this series, but I'm already rolling my eyes a bit at how every woman Geralt meets throws themselves at him, even if it would make more sense for them not to. One of the complaints for the series that I've heard a few times now is that there's a pattern of Geralt having sex with a woman, only to then kill her a few pages later, which is something I find bothersome.

We shall see. Hopefully my concerns are unfounded, but right now I'm still skeptical. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I wouldn't say the role of women in the Witcher 3 (the only game I've played) is terribly enlightened. I think "strong female characters with agency" is all well and good, but if it's mainly because they are witches who can turn you into a toad if you piss them off, that's not terribly enlightened for women in general. 

I find it's an interesting dilemma for medieval fantasy in how the world treats women. Do you go for women generally having a status more or less the same as in our medieval times (not much more than chattel), or do you create a whole different gender dynamic?

I’m one of thos annoying feminists :P and I absolutely love the sorceresses in The Witcher 3. I really love them and the way I was playing the game Geralt is totally respectful towards them all: he genuinely likes and admires sorceresses and “strong ladies” and I think that’s pretty cool and also...are you forgetting Ciri!?! She’s amazing!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I'm trying to keep an open mind, since a lot of women seem to really love this series, but I'm already rolling my eyes a bit at how every woman Geralt meets throws themselves at him, even if it would make more sense for them not to. One of the complaints for the series that I've heard a few times now is that there's a pattern of Geralt having sex with a woman, only to then kill her a few pages later, which is something I find bothersome.

We shall see. Hopefully my concerns are unfounded, but right now I'm still skeptical. 

I’ve never played the first game or the second or have read the books but my play through through Witcher 3 hasn’t Geralt genuinely admiring and respecting the sorceresses and Ciri who is the other main character of the game is a totally complex and wonderful character. 

The drones are some of the best most disgusting villains I’ve ever seen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I wouldn't say the role of women in the Witcher 3 (the only game I've played) is terribly enlightened. I think "strong female characters with agency" is all well and good, but if it's mainly because they are witches who can turn you into a toad if you piss them off, that's not terribly enlightened for women in general. 

I find it's an interesting dilemma for medieval fantasy in how the world treats women. Do you go for women generally having a status more or less the same as in our medieval times (not much more than chattel), or do you create a whole different gender dynamic?

Witcher 3 is better than 2 (or, from what I've heard, 1) in that regard. At least 3 has Ciri and the various female Skellige characters. Also, I think Yennifer at least is more well-rounded and interesting then just "super powered witch." Since I haven't read the books though, I don't know if its 3 or 2 that is closer to how women are portrayed there.

More generally, I think too many fantasy writers miss the historically accurate nuances of medieval society; either going all in on "women have no rights and no role in this story (except for maybe a princess or evil queen)" or "this super enlightened society, arguably even moreso than the present day, and everyone is equal." The Medieval period covered several centuries and a pretty massive geographic area, depending on when and where you're talking about, and what level of society you're looking at, the rights and available societal roles of women varied quite a lot. It was during the early Renaissance where women's rights started getting restricted all over Europe and there was a lot of re-writing history to claim that's the way it always was. But, for instance, if a fantasy writer was basing their world off of 12th or 13th century England or pre-1204 Byzantium, women wouldn't be the equal of men, but would at least be recognizable as independent beings with a relatively solid list of rights (insofar as anyone did).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Witcher 3 is better than 2 (or, from what I've heard, 1) in that regard. At least 3 has Ciri and the various female Skellige characters. Also, I think Yennifer at least is more well-rounded and interesting then just "super powered witch." Since I haven't read the books though, I don't know if its 3 or 2 that is closer to how women are portrayed there.

More generally, I think too many fantasy writers miss the historically accurate nuances of medieval society; either going all in on "women have no rights and no role in this story (except for maybe a princess or evil queen)" or "this super enlightened society, arguably even moreso than the present day, and everyone is equal." The Medieval period covered several centuries and a pretty massive geographic area, depending on when and where you're talking about, and what level of society you're looking at, the rights and available societal roles of women varied quite a lot. It was during the early Renaissance where women's rights started getting restricted all over Europe and there was a lot of re-writing history to claim that's the way it always was. But, for instance, if a fantasy writer was basing their world off of 12th or 13th century England or pre-1204 Byzantium, women wouldn't be the equal of men, but would at least be recognizable as independent beings with a relatively solid list of rights (insofar as anyone did).

But fantasy inspired by these time periods ISNT supposed to be totally historically accurate though? Otherwise they’d just write historical fiction and not fantasy. I love medieval history - and I think as you say it covers centuries and various countries so there are locations and periods that totally differ so you can play around with it a bit if you’re only using it as inspiration for your fantasy world. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Do you go for women generally having a status more or less the same as in our medieval times (not much more than chattel),

 

Except they weren't, certainly not in many European medieval societies, and the perception that they were "not much more than chattel" is pretty ahistorical. Ironically, fantasy fiction perpetuating this myth over the last century (and Victorian revisionist history for the century before that) is one of the reasons it persists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Theda Baratheon said:

But fantasy inspired by these time periods ISNT supposed to be totally historically accurate though? Otherwise they’d just write historical fiction and not fantasy. I love medieval history - and I think as you say it covers centuries and various countries so there are locations and periods that totally differ so you can play around with it a bit if you’re only using it as inspiration for your fantasy world. 

For sure. My point is more that those authors who claim that they need to have all their female characters be completely subservient/ignored/mistreated because they do want to be historically accurate are talking nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fez said:

For sure. My point is more that those authors who claim that they need to have all their female characters be completely subservient/ignored/mistreated because they do want to be historically accurate are talking nonsense. 

Oh I see :) I misinterpreted.

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Except they weren't, certainly not in many European medieval societies, and the perception that they were "not much more than chattel" is pretty ahistorical. Ironically, fantasy fiction perpetuating this myth over the last century (and Victorian revisionist history for the century before that) is one of the reasons it persists.

Yep. I’m not a medieval historian but a fair amount of my studies have been on texts written during the medieval period and I’ve been surprised at how wrong some myths have been. Women as little more than chattel is incredibly over simplified and catorgorically not true: don’t get me wrong as a woman I never want to travel in time to the past...unless Jamie Fraser is there...but there are some really interesting things concerning women like welsh medieval laws believing women who claim they have been raped and punishing the rapist, one example. Yes the church held up a view of ideal women that was quite restricting but that doesn’t tell us at all what women were actually like, especially poorer working women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I’m one of thos annoying feminists :P and I absolutely love the sorceresses in The Witcher 3. I really love them and the way I was playing the game Geralt is totally respectful towards them all: he genuinely likes and admires sorceresses and “strong ladies” and I think that’s pretty cool and also...are you forgetting Ciri!?! She’s amazing!!

No, I'm not forgetting Ciri. She's not a sorceress, sure, but she's metaphysically empowered. So she's kind of in the same boat as sorceresses. I think the sorceress characters in the game are great, and they are pretty well rounded as characters, it's just that it's a trope that is probably overused in fantasy to cover the "strong female quota", and it's arguably lazy to do so.

I did forget the Skelliges, like the Nordic societies they are based on, women do have a stronger position than in other contemporary societies, though it's still a mostly patriarchal system. In the game, the an Craite succession is assumed to be a man even though technically a woman can throw her weapon into the ring, and it seems it's  unusual for one to do so.

From the game there's also Ves, though she's barely in the game, and her main contribution is being hot headed, having a very low cut blouse (totally impractical as far as combat protection goes) and Geralt (and Roche) having to come to her rescue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

No, I'm not forgetting Ciri. She's not a sorceress, sure, but she's metaphysically empowered. So she's kind of in the same boat as sorceresses. I think the sorceress characters in the game are great, and they are pretty well rounded as characters, it's just that it's a trope that is probably overused in fantasy to cover the "strong female quota", and it's arguably lazy to do so.

I did forget the Skelliges, like the Nordic societies they are based on, women do have a stronger position than in other contemporary societies, though it's still a mostly patriarchal system. In the game, the an Craite succession is assumed to be a man even though technically a woman can throw her weapon into the ring, and it seems it's  unusual for one to do so.

From the game there's also Ves, though she's barely in the game, and her main contribution is being hot headed, having a very low cut blouse (totally impractical as far as combat protection goes) and Geralt (and Roche) having to come to her rescue. 

But do the complex, multi-faceted memorable Male characters FAR OUTWEIGH the female characters in The Witcher 3 video game ? Because I’m not sure they do. I like the director of the theatre in novigrad as well (Irena, I believe) and the bard Priscilla who has the beautiful song about Geralt and Yennifer. 

And again The Crones. Brilliant characters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Fez said:

Witcher 3 is better than 2 (or, from what I've heard, 1) in that regard. At least 3 has Ciri and the various female Skellige characters. Also, I think Yennifer at least is more well-rounded and interesting then just "super powered witch." Since I haven't read the books though, I don't know if its 3 or 2 that is closer to how women are portrayed there.

More generally, I think too many fantasy writers miss the historically accurate nuances of medieval society; either going all in on "women have no rights and no role in this story (except for maybe a princess or evil queen)" or "this super enlightened society, arguably even moreso than the present day, and everyone is equal." The Medieval period covered several centuries and a pretty massive geographic area, depending on when and where you're talking about, and what level of society you're looking at, the rights and available societal roles of women varied quite a lot. It was during the early Renaissance where women's rights started getting restricted all over Europe and there was a lot of re-writing history to claim that's the way it always was. But, for instance, if a fantasy writer was basing their world off of 12th or 13th century England or pre-1204 Byzantium, women wouldn't be the equal of men, but would at least be recognizable as independent beings with a relatively solid list of rights (insofar as anyone did).

I think a story like A Shard of Ice could easily have become "women are evil, I hate them." But it's well written and explores the complexity of a dysfunctional relationship quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...