The book involves only a few female characters: Is it justified?

[tasteph1364]

The response pertaining to eras might fly if it weren't for the fact that the first book in the series (the only one I've read) uses language that makes the era unspecified. As I mentioned in my review, "...we are in an era where horses seem to be the primary mode of land-travel, bows and arrows are primary weapons, gas lamps are a luxury, and blacksmithing (Galen’s new profession) is a thriving profession.
In one passage, describing lobster traps, one character says, “it’s logistics and communication…so they just pull in enough for themselves; then sell it to fancy restaurants who overcharge so that no one can afford it...” Fancy restaurants? Logistics? Shortly thereafter, there’s a scene where, “Soldiers were practicing swordplay and doing calisthenics across the property of the fort.” And in the same description, there was, “a football field, complete with field goal posts.” In addition, concepts such as “popular reformist movement,” and “subsidizing medical care for the homeless,” just didn’t seem to jive with this story or the feel of the era." If the author could mix and match these elements of different eras, the era isn't a very good explanation for not many women. I must say that the mage-commander who arrested Meldorath was a woman. Counts for something I guess.

[tasteph1364]

Beth's character is very interesting, in my opinion Also, let us not forget about the Lord Eldus' housekeeper. She is very intriguing. She holds all the keys and knows all the secrets. Also, she would close her eyes to many evil things just to survive. She is quite memorable.

Agreed, but none of these positions are prestigious are they? Beth has potential and may be more prominent in subsequent books, but in the first of the series, women definitely are not in positions of power and prestige.

[Kevivas03]

In a way the lack of female characters does potray medieval times but the writer had the opportunity of correcting this wrong through his book. He did not and so did not do justice to the book and to women in general by excluding females from many main plots.

[shravsi]

I too felt the same while reading the first book but we should consider the time of this story happening. Moreover if you continue this series, you will find more prominent female characters, both good and bad.

[GatugiM]

It did not bother me much that there were no many female characters in the book. I understand that being a first book, Tsyz probably wanted to lay a foundation of the whole story. It might be an area where women have no major roles. Maybe women characters will help solve the issues in the region.

[Ellylion]

Beth's character is very interesting, in my opinion Also, let us not forget about the Lord Eldus' housekeeper. She is very intriguing. She holds all the keys and knows all the secrets. Also, she would close her eyes to many evil things just to survive. She is quite memorable.

Agreed, but none of these positions are prestigious are they? Beth has potential and may be more prominent in subsequent books, but in the first of the series, women definitely are not in positions of power and prestige.

With all due respect, a book character can be interesting enough without being in positions of power. Jane Eyre wasn't a queen yet she's the one of the most well known female characters in the world literature.

[Loads Rails]

As the series proceed there are strong characters than these ones in the opener of the series. But based on the setting of the novel, I think that the author is right if he does not put in any strong female character.

[Jasy95]

I feel like this is a big issue in the genre as a whole. I'm glad to hear that the later books in the series correct this issue, but I really wish authors would take more of an effort to be inclusive right off of the bat in book 1.

[A Y reviews]

It is completely normal going by the setting of the book. A woman needs to be extremely influential to rise to a position of power and authority.

[naomilupton_98]

I have a habit of reading a book for what it is and trying to not bring modern-day ideas to the table when thinking about it. However, I must agree - I do not think it is justified to have pretty much no females in significant roles. But, given that the book has a more medieval feel to it and that it is only an introduction the the series, I am willing (as a woman) to overlook it. Let's see what the rest of the series brings to the table.

[Pluma]

There definitely could have been more female characters in the book; I think that the author changed enough of the setting—adding magical elements, etc.—that the role of a few women in powerful roles would not have been too unbelievable. Even if strong female characters are added later on in the series, the first few books still could have benefited from having them as well.

[blackjack1]

why does it matter so much? there are books that involve few woman and books that involves few men. that is the way it is. especially since the author is a man himself. also, this book is set in medieval times- therefore it doesn't make much sense to give woman powerful roles.

also, what do you think the author should have done? pushed extra, unnecessary characters into the book? what would that given you? nothing good, I promise. said from experience

so yes, it is justified: Justified to write literature without worrying that someone might get offended or start a demonstration against him. Justified to not have to turn men into woman and woman into men in your story just to create nonexistent (well, existant in a book. debatable.) equality.

I apologize if anyone was offended.

[123Esther]

Yea, its noticeable that females are sidelined, I feel had they been given major roles that would make it better. otherwise the plot is still intresting

[tasteph1364]

why does it matter so much? there are books that involve few woman and books that involves few men. that is the way it is. especially since the author is a man himself. also, this book is set in medieval times- therefore it doesn't make much sense to give woman powerful roles.

also, what do you think the author should have done? pushed extra, unnecessary characters into the book? what would that given you? nothing good, I promise. said from experience

so yes, it is justified: Justified to write literature without worrying that someone might get offended or start a demonstration against him. Justified to not have to turn men into woman and woman into men in your story just to create nonexistent (well, existant in a book. debatable.) equality.

I apologize if anyone was offended.

Seems pretty impossible to escape identity politics, even when you write a novel. Everyone wants to see more of "me" everywhere. Maybe Tysz should have included more Latino characters? Native American characters? Jewish characters? And so on? And each of those characters should have had "x" role, with "x" amount of power and prestige? Somehow I am under the impression that a novel is the author's creation, complete with the characters she/he envisions. If we struggle to enjoy novels that don't include characters of specific identity groups, with specific roles, according to our personal preferences, does that say anything about us? I have no intent to offend anyone, but I certainly don't apologize if you disagree with me or are offended. I think we all have a right to express our opinions, even unpopular ones, without having to apologize...unless what we are saying actually is offensive.

[Awesomeliker]

I noticed that as well and it really bothered me. Even the few female characters are treated as if they're stupid and are sexualised. Hopefully this will change later on in the series.