REBUTTAL TO: Rinse & Re-use
A couple of weeks ago, my fellow staff member Angie O'May submitted an editorial entitled "Rinse & Re-use." The editorial covered the three categories of female characters in Final Fantasy titles. As I read her editorial, I kept thinking, "Haven't I seen this somewhere before?"
The ensuing discussion on the message boards echoed my thoughts. Someone even attempted to locate a similar editorial in the archives. However, the link they provided was not correct. It pointed to a recent editorial about women in Final Fantasy, but that editorial did not cover the archetypes presented by Ms. O'May. I decided to do some searching of my own. I dug through the archives and unearthed this editorial from December 2000. It outlines the same three archetypes, only it labels them as "Sweetheart," "Fighter," and "Cutie." I kept digging, and I found this editorial from January 2000, earlier than the previous piece. This editorial outlines the same three archetypes, except that it refers to them as "gentle healer," "strong," and "perky/cute." This is quite possibly the oldest form of this argument in RPGamer's editorial history. There are other similar editorials that attempt to categorize the women of Final Fantasy, such as this one, which dates back to August 1999.
Apparently, this is a popular topic for so-called "girl gamers." It's simple. It's easy to write. It's hard to argue against, as it's difficult to deny that archetypes are used in the creation of many RPGs, particularly Final Fantasy. In fact, as Ms. O'May asserts, such categories are used in developing characters for other forms of literature and drama. It's an easy-to-use never-fail recipe, one part of the craft of creating characters in a story.
But if only it was so cut-and-dried. Each category has gray fuzzy edges. Not every woman can be neatly stuffed into the pigeonholes of "gifted gentle healer sweetheart" / "damaged strong fighter" / "perky bubbly cutie." The lines blur somewhere in between each one. Can we honestly shove Celes into the "damaged woman" category, where supposedly it's difficult for a woman to find love, when we feel that she and Locke shared something special? Can we cram Terra into the "gifted healer" category when it's obvious that she is cursed with heartache and blessed with black magic and physical prowess? In addition, while the women can be categorized into archetypes by personality, the skill systems of each game enables them to defy those same categories. In most Final Fantasy games, any of them can be transformed into a powerful attacker, devastating black mage, or even a "gentle healer" regardless of their personality types. That is the case with the systems of FFV, VI, VII, VIII, X (to an extent), X-2, XI (each race is not bound to certain classes; Mithras can become mages and Tarutarus can become warriors) and Tactics. Nevertheless, the three basic types of feminine personalities are used as starting templates, even if the resulting character deviates considerably from the starting norm.
Here's the point: why don't we let this argument die? It's old. It's tired. It's common knowledge. Furthermore, it's time for something different. We settled the RPG archetype deal quite some time ago, which is why I did not dwell on it in this editorial.
Looking through the archives, I was able to see into the past of RPGamer Editorials. There were times when each update contained five to thirteen editorials. Some are clever; others are ridiculous. Some are inflated with twenty-six-word titles, while others are hastily-written flammable rebuttals. Topics range from the future of games to the beaten-beyond-death old school / new school debate.
In spite of the questionable quality of some of the pieces, this seems to have been the golden age of Editorials. I'd like to see the rebirth of that era. I'm not saying we should revive the moth-eaten old school / new school debate or the bedraggled "console wars." I'm simply saying that we need to consider new topics. Why not take a fresh thematic approach to a new game? Or write a thoughtful character study of a lesser-known figure? Even the old topic of the future of gaming is a gold mine. The potential for games changes constantly. Why not write an examination of the old editorials on the future of gaming and see where they were right or wrong? They could be prophetic, or they could even be off-target, like the 1950s school textbooks that showed denizens of the year 2000 wearing silver space suits and riding casually in a rocket as if it was a family car.
It's not as if any of you could not compose an editorial. Some of our readers write lengthy posts on the message board -- some of these posts would make good editorials. A little copying, pasting, and spellchecking (we'll even do this part for you) could make a pounded-out post into a decent editorial. Yes, it's easier to throw up something on the board, but it's more rewarding (and respectable) to fashion an editorial for our archives.
|
RSS feed
iTunes