Agency as a Writer's Tool

[TheRedChamber]

So the Pink Orchid competition is rolling around again and, while I generally think it's a good thing and that I should support it, I always get hung-up on one part of the competition rubric.

Theme of the event: sex positivity and women as the subjects of their own lives. Women in control of their own pleasure and passion. Erotic tales where women make sense and have agency. The aim is not to turn tables and write femdom, male-bashing or revenge stories, but produce sex positive stories of women existing for their own sake and living, loving and lusting on their own terms.

Now, while I'm a male writer, about half of my stories are from either completely-female or mixed-gender character perspectives and I feel like a fair few of them would meet this brief comfortably. I've even written a bit of the old femdom male-bashing revenge in my time which, as per the rules, is going too far. Still, if I were to enter this competition, I'd want my story not just to meet the bar, but to comfortably leap over it. But, whenever I start to work this topic over in my mind, I start to fixate in on the idea of agency, wonder how much my female characters have and how could I maximize this in a story. The problem is - thinking about agency for any length of time gives me a headache.

Don't get me wrong. I've read stories on Lit where, to a hilariously disturbing degree, the female MC recieves and unquestionally follows orders from their male partners ('Go down that darkened alley. Take all your clothes off. Don't be scared by all the strange men emerging front the shadows. You'll enjoy it. Trust me. See? Wasn't that fun') and I've certainly found myself thinking 'man, that woman needs to get herself some agency, stat'

But assuming we're starting from a normal, not comically misogynistic, story outline, how useful do you find the idea of agency as a tool writer's can use to strengthen their stories?

It may be useful to give an example of a analytical tool I do use all the time with my own stories and when beta reading for others - that of Promises, Progress and Payoff. Its useful to anaylyze exactly what your initial scenes are saying to the reader in terms of what they expect the story to be, how that story is progressing in each subsequent scene and how the big promises are eventually paid off. Generally, I can apply this way of studying a plot to a given work and come up with simple answers of 'yes, everything is fine' or 'no, readers might be put off because what is delivered doesn't gel with how the promises were developed'

The issue I have with agency, is that there is a minimum agency bar under which characters are going appear to be completely unrealistic, total doormats, or else completely systematically oppressed to the point of helplessness. But above that its not clear to me the extent that raising the agency of any given characters (be they male or female) above that bar necessarily improves the story.

Lets see this in action in a Jane Austen-esque historical drama, since the constraints put on female liberty may be instructive here. Our heroine Emily has the choice to:

(1a) Marry her father's favoured choice of suitor - a staid, rather elderly gentleman who has 400 pounds a year.
(1b) Marry the dashing handsome rake with a mere 100 pounds a year.
(1c) Decide that the whole concept of marriage is a tool of the patriachy, leave home to become a highway-woman, robbing the rich, giving to the poor and undertaking a series of highly-erotic dalliances with both men and women.

If we're maximizing agency, the answer is clearly (1c) and you may be saying to yourself, Red, why aren't you already off and writing this - it sounds great. But consider that while (1c) would be highly dangerous in the real world and not something I would advise any woman to do regardless of their personal circumstances, in fiction they are all equally easy to write (in the sense that its just as easy to type 'she jumped a hundred miles' as it is to write 'she jumped a hundred centimeters') and our heroine will be suitably armoured by the plot and is sure to come to no lasting harm. So (1c) it is. But wait, this highway-robbing sounds complicated - isn't there some kind of course you can attend to learn the highway-robbing in a safe environment? Again, our choices are

(2a) Fall in with the tradional gang of mostly male highway robbers who highway-rob according to well established principles laid down and refined over centuries.
(2b) Fall in with a sole female exile who was thrown out of the first group for her slightly unorthodox approach to highway-robbing
(2c) Decide that the whole concept of highway-robbery is a tool of the patriachy and invent her own completely new method of robbery which is better and yields more riches than anyone else has ever achieved ever before.
(2d) Come to the stunning revelation that (i) sleeping under hedges in the rain sucks (ii) people get grumpy if you try to take their money off them (iii) squirrels are bastards and (iv) she probably should go back and see if choice (1a) is still on the table.

While 2a (or 2d) might be the best option if you ever find yourself in this situation, in terms of plot our Emily has merely transfered control of her destiny from her father to the gang (who probably even less have her best interests at heart) and the author probably didn't even notice. But still, why not write 2c - and again in fiction robbing a carriage with one person is just as easy as robbing it with a hundred.

I'm obviously exaggerating for effect here, but still whenever I start to plan a story with agency in mind, I find myself trapped in an endless loop of saying 'She works in a bakery, no, she owns a bakery, no, she's the CEO of a worldwide chain of bakeries and a damn good one too and her croissants are environmentally friendly too' - completely trivial to write but which somehow doesn't make the story better, it just makes her failure to find a long-term satisfaction from a lover as our story begins somehow more pathetic.

So clearly I'm overthinking things, but that's not surprising, philosophers have been overthinking freewill for centuries. I guess what I'm asking is if and how other people use this concept when planning and reviewing their own work and others? What do you think is a 'acceptable' level of agency for any character (male or female) and is there any kind of gold standard?

 

[ElectricBlue]

So clearly I'm overthinking things, but that's not surprising, philosophers have been overthinking freewill for centuries. I guess what I'm asking is if and how other people use this concept when planning and reviewing their own work and others? What do you think is a 'acceptable' level of agency for any character (male or female) and is there any kind of gold standard?

This level of analysis and navel gazing would never occur to me. I just get on and write stories with a quiet intimacy, with a man and a woman sharing consensual, uncomplicated sex, respectful, equal. Stories that garner comments like these:

stickygirl 10 days ago
So lovely to read quiet, intimate sex like this. TY

Boyd Percy#10 days ago
Very interesting story! 5

Anonymous 11 days ago
it was flawless!

Windsor66Windsor66 11 days ago
Beautiful story. Thank you

It's erotica, not Immanuel Kant!

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I think you're asking too much of the idea of agency.
In any situation, a woman will have a certain amount of agency. What makes a story about a woman with agency is that being shown. She considers her options. Maybe shutting up and letting someone do terrible things to her is her best option, but if the story tells us that she's decided that, that's still agency in my book. Non-agency is all the stories where stuff is done to her but we never hear her thoughts on the matter or why she's going along with it.

 

[NotWise]

You gave the question a lot of thought, and it sounds like you confused yourself. It isn't that hard.

Adult women in western culture commonly do have agency, and they use it as they see fit. The main thing you need to do for the Pink Orchid event is develop a character as a realistic woman instead of a sex fantasy object. Two parts there: you need to develop a realistic female character, you need to write eroticism without it becoming a purely male sex fantasy.

You can do it in a fantasy setting if the woman is still realistic. You can tell the story from a male narrator's point of view. You can do almost anything you want.

One way to write a story that fits the event guidelines is to have the plot driven by the female protagonist's conflicts and decisions.

 

[SimonDoom]

Lets see this in action in a Jane Austen-esque historical drama, since the constraints put on female liberty may be instructive here. Our heroine Emily has the choice to:

(1a) Marry her father's favoured choice of suitor - a staid, rather elderly gentleman who has 400 pounds a year.
(1b) Marry the dashing handsome rake with a mere 100 pounds a year.
(1c) Decide that the whole concept of marriage is a tool of the patriachy, leave home to become a highway-woman, robbing the rich, giving to the poor and undertaking a series of highly-erotic dalliances with both men and women.

If we're maximizing agency, the answer is clearly (1c) and you may be saying to yourself, Red, why aren't you already off and writing this - it sounds great.

I disagree with this analysis. The degree of "agency" isn't demonstrated by the choice that's made, but by the degree to which you, as the author, show the reader the "agency" that motivated whatever choice was made. A woman can show agency in completely submitting to a man in a D/s relationship.

For instance, in Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth's friend Charlotte decides to marry the horrible Mr. Collins, who previously had proposed to, and been rejected by, Elizabeth. Charlotte explains her reasons to Elizabeth, who is incredulous and dismayed by the choice. She has agency. Her choice may not seem romantic or enjoyable, but it is practical and it advances her interests under her circumstances.

I don't think one has to overthink this. My suggestion would be to make a little extra effort to show what the woman character is thinking and why she's doing what she's doing.

 

[stickygirl]

Female agency? Maybe swap the character's gender to male and ask yourself if it still rings true?

... and don't drag Jane Austen into your tawdry machinations again

 

[TheRedChamber]

I disagree with this analysis. The degree of "agency" isn't demonstrated by the choice that's made, but by the degree to which you, as the author, show the reader the "agency" that motivated whatever choice was made. A woman can show agency in completely submitting to a man in a D/s relationship.

For instance, in Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth's friend Charlotte decides to marry the horrible Mr. Collins, who previously had proposed to, and been rejected by, Elizabeth. Charlotte explains her reasons to Elizabeth, who is incredulous and dismayed by the choice. She has agency. Her choice may not seem romantic or enjoyable, but it is practical and it advances her interests under her circumstances.

I don't think one has to overthink this. My suggestion would be to make a little extra effort to show what the woman character is thinking and why she's doing what she's doing.

What you are describing is sensible but it seems to me that it could be better described as motivation. And a motivational analysis of a story makes sense and is easy to apply.

Do the characters motivations and reasons for each action make sense at each stage of the story?
If the author hides the motivations of the characters at any stage do these become clearer later?

And that's a good example of another tool an author/reader would use to look at a story.


From what I know motivation is a much older concept in literature and seems like agency is intended to be something different.

 

[SimonDoom]

Female agency? Maybe swap the character's gender to male and ask yourself if it still rings true?

Adopting this as a habit would probably answer about half the questions people ask about "how should I . . . "", including mine. Put yourself in the character's shoes and see how they feel.

 

[SimonDoom]

What you are describing is sensible but it seems to me that it could be better described as motivation. And a motivational analysis of a story makes sense and is easy to apply.

Do the characters motivations and reasons for each action make sense at each stage of the story?
If the author hides the motivations of the characters at any stage do these become clearer later?

And that's a good example of another tool an author/reader would use to look at a story.


From what I know motivation is a much older concept in literature and seems like agency is intended to be something different.

My own way of looking at the difference between agency and motivation is that motivation can be shallow and superficial. Agency suggests an exploration of what underlies the motivation and explores the choices the woman is making, and it presents those choices as being meaningful.

A woman wants to be tied up by her boyfriend. That's her motivation. Does she have agency? She might. It depends on how the author explores her decision-making process and whether the author presents the desire to be tied up as the result of meaningful choice.

The way I see it (maybe others see it differently), the use of the term "agency" shouldn't stack the deck regarding which choices a woman makes. The event is more fun if the horizon is completely open and the challenge is for the author to present decisions, even weird ones, or seemingly self-denying ones, as the results of meaningful choice.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Female agency? Maybe swap the character's gender to male and ask yourself if it still rings true?

... and don't drag Jane Austen into your tawdry machinations again

Well I'd have dragged Hardy or Dicken's heroines into my examples but they've all suffered enough. It's time those Bennett girls contributed something to society.

I'm talking about female agency because that's often where the focus lies in the discussion these days, but I'd argue the concept can be equally confusing when applied to a lot of male stories - Luke Skywalker sure does a lot of doing what he's told throughout the saga.

 

[SimonDoom]

Well I'd have dragged Hardy or Dicken's heroines into my examples but they've all suffered enough. It's time those Bennett girls contributed something to society.

I'm talking about female agency because that's often where the focus lies in the discussion these days, but I'd argue the concept can be equally confusing when applied to a lot of male stories - Luke Skywalker sure does a lot of doing what he's told throughout the saga.

Leia in Star Wars is a good example of a character with agency, at least in some scenes. She is set up as the damsel in distress, but she flips the script with her wisecracks and presence of mind. Like the scene in the death star where she takes over and blasts away at the bad guys to get them out of a bad situation.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Adult women in western culture commonly do have agency, and they use it as they see fit.

Which is why maybe the way the competition is worded is confusing to me, why is it a special challenge to write a normal woman? (yes, yes, I know, the typical lit story)

But presumably it is possible in the real world and in fiction to have different levels of agency? Its simply easier for Jeff Bezos to make big life choices than it is someone making minimum wage. A single person has more agency than a married one with five kids and a controlling or abuse spouse.

The main thing you need to do for the Pink Orchid event is develop a character as a realistic woman instead of a sex fantasy object. Two parts there: you need to develop a realistic female character, you need to write eroticism without it becoming a purely male sex fantasy.

Possibly this is where I tie myself in knots. I tend to write relationships where the male MC starts by being smitten by the female MC and the story often is about how she comes to chose him. That's very much a male fantasy but one where the ultimate agency is in female hands but with the male character judging himself up in her estimation by certain choices.

 

[firmbutgentle]

I think others have already said this, but agency is not the same as control. I try to show women who are determined and powerful in the rest of their lives, using their agency to surrender to a master, intentionally and willingly, knowing he appreciates the depth and significance of what she is doing.

 

[stickygirl]

Possibly this is where I tie myself in knots. I tend to write relationships where the male MC starts by being smitten by the female MC and the story often is about how she comes to chose him. That's very much a male fantasy but one where the ultimate agency is in female hands but with the male character judging himself up in her estimation by certain choices.

That's where you may trip yourself up, if the moral of the story is that 'provided he jumps through enough hoops he gets his way in the end'. You use the word 'smitten' and make it sound like it's her fault for doing it to him. The final consequence is 'winning' her but what does she get out of it?
I accept for purposes of illustration I may have oversimplified.

 

[Parhelical]

The point (i assume) is to give female characters an actual character rather having them exist as effigies for male desire.

And a character means they have internal psychology that they act in accord with, not that they're awarded a bunch of 'positive' traits (powerful, smart, strong, ect) and then proceed to be otherwise written as an effigy for male desire.

 

[NotWise]

Possibly this is where I tie myself in knots. I tend to write relationships where the male MC starts by being smitten by the female MC and the story often is about how she comes to chose him. That's very much a male fantasy but one where the ultimate agency is in female hands but with the male character judging himself up in her estimation by certain choices.

Up to "but with the male character...", where you lose me, that describes the arc but not the conflict in my Pink Orchid story from the first event. Use "No Brand on My Pony" as an example if you want. O thought it was a good fit to the theme of the event -- despite its male first person narrator.

 

[SimonDoom]

Which is why maybe the was the way the competition is worded is confusing to me, why is it a special challenge to write a normal woman? (yes, yes, I know, the typucal lit story)

But presumably it is possible in the real world and in fiction to have different levels of agency? Its simply easier for Jeff Bezos to make big life choices than it is someone making minimum wage. A single person has more agency than a married one with five kids and a controlling or abuse spouse.

Possibly this is where I tie myself in knots. I tend to write relationships where the male MC starts by being smitten by the female MC and the story often is about how she comes to chose him. That's very much a male fantasy but one where the ultimate agency is in female hands but with the male character judging himself up in her estimation by certain choices.

The difference between erotica and regular literature is that in erotica there's a much greater element of fantasy projection. It's easier to slip into the mode of writing a female character who behaves in a way that's appealing to a male fantasy as opposed to behaving plausibly in accordance with her own desires and principles.

It seems to me you're already on the right track, aware of the issue, and fully capable of writing a story that matches the spirit of the event. I wouldn't sweat it.

 

[lovecraft68]

Honestly, I find the theme of the competition a bit too political for my taste. It feels like appealing to the probably prevalent male authors community here, to write women in the way women see themselves or want to see themselves. It's not actually a theme, because you can write about anything, any kink, any situation, any setup, just make your women in control or rather write them in the way women would like to be written. I oppose this line of thought that a realistic woman is the woman as seen through a woman's eye, just as much I oppose the idea that a realistic man is the man seen through male eyes. That is why every picture has different perspectives, after all.
On top of all this rant, I would like to emphasize that what we write here is basically a fantasy and both women and men are going to be romanticized one way or another, and by making a theme like this, I feel hands are being tied too much.

I'm with you in the sense that where other themed contests are indeed themes(Noir, Fantasy, Geek etc..) Female empowerment is a cause, that to your point, and like everything else in this shit society, has to be politicized.

I feel causes shouldn't be tread on by people not really involved in them, or to be made light of and not be taken seriously. When I first saw the original Pink Orchid idea my first thoughts were it was a great idea, and I enjoy writing female characters so....

Then the cynic in me slapped me upside the head with the reality of the contest will be full of men trying to act like they know how women think and feel, and mansplaining it in the thread and their stories, or guys entering it to say "look at me, ladies, I'm down with you! and, hey, let's talk about my story via PM hehehehehe."

Being you brought up the political comment, I'll say that just like the people who squeal racism every five minutes, do not empower diverse people, they pander and tokenize them, an event like this leads to the same. For men its not female empowerment, its look at me nailing what all youse little womens feel

One famous post in that thread was along the lines of "If I see women working out and sweating and it turns me on, but because they're so in shape, is that empowering?"

Two male authors in that contest are infamous for BTB and non consent themes and not just in their writing, but their posting, but yay girl power, where the women at?

Its sexism masked as feminism in its purist form and nothing in that long thread from the original proved me wrong.

The fact the OP is straining so hard to figure this out and get it right shows they're not naturally capable of writing that type of concept, and that's not meant as an insult, we all can't write everything, but at that point, if you can't figure it out, why bother?

Causes aren't themes like "write a story that revolves around certain town" they should be taken seriously, and all PO one, and this one does is diminish it. Because of that I would never enter it, not because I can't write a good story for it, but out of respect. Something lost on many of the participants.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Eh, as you can see already, I have actually decided to delete my post, like 4 minutes after I posted it and before you had the chance to reply, but not before you managed to quote it . I simply felt I might steer the discussion into something that doesn't suit the general fun character of this forum. But since the rabbit is apparently out of the hat, I'll say I agree quite a lot with what you said and thank you for emphasizing the one thing I failed to mention - that this type of 'forcing' to write women in a certain way kinda diminishes the whole thing, exactly for the fact that it is not genuine, but forced.

 

[TheRedChamber]

The final consequence is 'winning' her but what does she get out of it?

She gets someone who is totally smitten with her. Ya know, romance?

But, yeah, I tend to write average guys (smart but awkward) getting above average gals, so female readers might be sceptical of the deal.

'provided he jumps through enough hoops he gets his way in the end'. You use the word 'smitten' and make it sound like it's her fault for doing it to him.

Again it's a fantasy. It's generally pretty clear he's failed to get his way in the end many times before. This is the time things worked out why is why it's the story.

Smitten means the character starts with the feeling that she's special. A man might see a thousand pretty girls in a day but this is one he feels that it would be a pity if he didn't do 'something' and is starting the story trying to work out what that something is. Generally my guys are not the type to be able to wander over and go 'Hey, how you doin'

 

[TheRedChamber]

The difference between erotica and regular literature is that in erotica there's a much greater element of fantasy projection. It's easier to slip into the mode of writing a female character who behaves in a way that's appealing to a male fantasy as opposed to behaving plausibly in accordance with her own desires and principles.

Again 'plausibility' (or 'realism' as the competition mentions) is another useful tool for looking at characters. Could this woman (along with the actions she take) exist in the real world? That's fine. And there are plenty of real world women who are appealing to men and can be mimicked in stories. Similarly 'acting consistently with established desires and principles' seems like a good test to run over a story.

The thing with agency as I see it is that the author controlling the desires and principles of the female character and also the events occurring to her, agency is always going to be something of a chimera. I think, as others have said, it's good to make the reasons why someone is behaving the way they are clear. But if I write three pages explaining why her engaging in whatever nominally degrading and filthy sexual practice is because it satisfies some deep seated psychological need left from her troubled childhood, am I'm giving her more agency that if I write that she just wants to have fun.

It seems to me you're already on the right track, aware of the issue, and fully capable of writing a story that matches the spirit of the event. I wouldn't sweat it.

I'm not too worried about my female characters generally albeit I'm perfectly happy to admit they are shaped by my own (male) fantasies and there's always room to improve any aspect of writing. And thanks to everyone whose contributed ideas and explanations to the thread. But if I enter a Christmas themed story, I want to do more than just stick a tree in the corner of an existing story. But the spirit of the event seems to be that my women need to be extra womany and this can be achieved with the addition of agency.

 

[Thefireflies]

On the importance for characters to have agency in stories, I think this is up there with people’s general desire for happy endings or some kind of positive resolution to the story. However, I don’t think happy endings or characters with agency are requirements for a good story, i.e., if a story is well told and compelling it shouldn’t matter if it doesn’t have a happy ending and/or the main character doesn’t have agency.

For example, I recently watched the excellent movie Manchester by the Sea, where the MC is a man who can’t get over a devastating life-changing mistake he made, which is a main point of the plot. This is real life for many and while the script writer could’ve gone for a happy ending or more positive resolution, I suspect it would’ve cheapened the film.

On characters with agency in the Pink Orchid event, I think that requirement is a response to stories where women are written without agency, with little reason for them to have no agency. How many stories are there where a woman doesn’t have agency and is sometimes in a less than ideal situation and can’t pick herself up, but a ‘good man', commonly the MC, comes along and saves her? Perhaps the event coordinator, Omenainen, is best to answer questions about the requirement in the Pink Orchid thread. But the way I see it one of the Orchid event's purposes is for authors to produce stories without knight in shining armour tropes, where the women stand on their own, or where the women aren't degraded as playthings etc.

 

[Lifestyle66]

"Agency is the ability to identify goals or make choices and then act upon them."

All characters I write (or for that matter what anyone writes) may have goals and make choices and act or react to the choices they made. Even someone being a BDSM sub to be used and abused would make the choice to allow that, unless they are held captive against their will. And if they're held captive, then it non-consensual.

My submission for 2022 Pink Orchid challenge described an MFC who had her own fantasy goal/"bucket list", and she chose to have her husband facilitate her achieving her Bucket List fantasy on her terms. But the story had its nay-saying detractors because the MFC's fantasy was to someday be a stripper! She took the stage and took control of the men in the club to act out her fantasy.

So, IMO the issue with "agency" is not everyone agrees with the goals and choices your character makes!

BTW: The idea for that story came from MY WIFE, who has such a fantasy and did visit a strip club with me. She just didn't get onstage because our son was there, and she didn't do the fuck scene later as in the story. So, I rewrote that real life goal of hers to allow her to act on it. But just that scenario turns many women off. Spelling it out that this was HER fantasy and goal didn't stop the complaints!

So, in my experience, a woman having "agency" is in the mind of the reader. And readers will inject their own biases in their reactions to your stories.

 

[lovecraft68]

But the story had its nay-saying detractors because the MFC's fantasy was to someday be a stripper! She took the stage and took control of the men in the club to act out her fantasy.

The people with the problem were men who have issues with women who feel empowered by flaunting their bodies and sexuality.
There are also some women who have issues with sex positive women
Those women typically have been raised or were unfortunate enough to marry the aforementioned type of man.

This thread is another over complication of what is a very simple concept, people doing whatever the fuck they want and giving zero fucks in the process. It gets complicated because men are cretins who somehow think this is a completely different thing in women than it is in men, and its not

Except that his is another trait of 'real men' to have to struggle with women being as free as they are.

The skinned knuckles and reek of CSI is always strong in these discussions.

If one stops seeing men and women and simply sees people....its a lot easier. That's not to say men and women aren't different in some ways, but there's also more in common than the people who like to fuel divide want to think.

FWIW I've found this forum a great place to practice certain teachings I've followed over the years.

 

[Bramblethorn]

What you are describing is sensible but it seems to me that it could be better described as motivation. And a motivational analysis of a story makes sense and is easy to apply.

Consider Batman and Robin (Dick Grayson).

Both these guys have motivation. In fact, they have almost identical motivation: "crime killed my parents and I must fight it." But Batman is the one in the driving seat, literally and metaphorically. Batman without Robin is pretty much the same person; Robin without Batman is something quite different, so much so that he ends up taking on a new name and costume while somebody else becomes a new Robin.

In storytelling terms, Batman has much more agency than Robin. (Though depending on the story, one could argue that the lead villains have more agency than Batman, since he's so often reacting to the consequences of their decisions.)

Or take Firefly. The series has a bunch of "strong female characters" who are good at fighting/fixing engines/sex/killing people with their minds. But the storylines tend to be driven by decisions made by Mal, and sometimes Jayne and Simon, and their antagonists; the female characters (along with Wash and Book) are more often reacting to those decisions than calling the shots themselves.

It's not exact, but asking "who feels like the protagonist and who feels like the sidekick/love interest?" might be a useful tool in thinking about motivation.