Subversion In Fiction

Writing About Writing #7

New To Gibberish? Check out Navigation for Newcomers!

---

Turning Fiction On Its Head

In a Note recently I suggested three possible topics for a writing-about-writing post. All three will get written, but this is the one you liked most. We’re talking about Subversion In Fiction.

When we’re talking about Subversion, we’re talking about subverting reader expectations. Subversion means to “turn upside down”, and originally had the sense of “destroy or overturn”. Subversion is all about turning expectations on their head. In the LOTR movies when the bad dude says “no man can kill me” and Eowyn says “I am no man”, that’s subverting expectations. The bad dude expects a man, the audience expects a man, most “tropes” play to the male-hero-killing-the-dragon-lord situation, and suddenly, bam, it’s a woman.

Reader expectations take two forms¹, and so “subversive” fiction generally takes two forms. The first kind of expectations are reader expectations brought into a book from the real world. The kind of fiction that speaks to this is usually some kind of commentary on society, has some kind of social message. The second kind of expectations are expectations established by the author within a story. The kind of fiction that speaks to this usually involves the author breaking the rules established in the beginning of a story.

A good example of the first kind of subversion (contra Real Life) might be Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, where he “turns upside down” the notion of firefighters stopping fires but rather starting them; all written words are anathema and all books must be burned. This is a pretty explicit commentary on the value of the written word to society.

A good example of the second kind of subversion (contra Authors Rules) might be Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot², where he establishes the famous Three Laws of Robotics and then spends the entire rest of the book breaking those rules in new and interesting ways.

This has been, so far, a cursory overview of what subversion is, and my goal with this essay is to explore a little bit about what makes subversion effective and some ideas for how to make subversion a tool in your writers toolkit.

Subversion Is Contrast

In the original note where I suggested Subversion as a topic for exploration,

Leigh Parrish

points out that “it feels like everything’s been subverted to infinity.” This speaks to ineffective uses of subversion.

We want to figure out what makes an effective use of subversion so that we can turn around and weaponize it to add flavor to our own fiction.

I have said before³ that I think of a good story like a good joke, that it needs “set up” and “payoff”. Subversive fiction is not exempt from this, and I think this is our first pillar of effective subversion. Subversion illustrates—dare I say points a spotlight at contrasts. For the contrast to be effective, both the starting point and it’s subverted opposite need to appear within the book.

This is a big claim so let’s take time to explore it⁴.

Subversion contra Real Life means we are turning some real life expectation on its head. Let’s say the real life expectation is that dogs are mans best friend, and we are going to write a story exploring this. There’s two ways we can go: The opening scene, we take a classic scene where a fire is started in the house and a man is fast asleep in his bed, and suddenly his CAT springs into action and calls 911 and wakes up the man. The man, now rescued, thanks his cat and remarks how cats really are mans best friend.

This scene is only subversive insofar as it is playing on a scenario we the reader already know and recognize. Every year there’s one heroic dog-saves-man story that makes headlines, and we’ve probably heard a story exactly like this with a dog instead of a cat. In this scene, the reader is doing all the work. The author is relying on a common real life experience to make the scene effective⁵.

The second way we can go is to offer a clearer sense of contrast. A duplex catches fire, one neighbor has a cat and one neighbor has a dog—the neighbor with the cat gets out alive and the neighbor with the dog gets burned/needs help from the cat neighbor.

I can hear your stifled guffaws already: how is this materially different from the first scene? The difference is the contrast. We see the thing being subverted in this scene, the dog owner being harmed by the un-doglike dog, and the cat/cat owner playing the hero. The relationship has been turned on its head.

Fahrenheit 451 presents this contrast in the form of a secret society of readers later in the story. I, Robot⁶ presents this contrast in the very first story, in the ironclad nature of consumer trust in the laws. The point being: the story ought not assume prior reader knowledge, and should take great pains to introduce the baseline and it’s subversion so the entire “story-joke” is contained within the text and not context-dependent.

Subversion Is Intentional

What else makes subversion effective in fiction? I think Fahrenheit 451 and I, Robot point to another clue: It’s on purpose. It serves the story.

The thing-being-subverted ought to be an important and deliberate part of the story you are writing, otherwise the obvious question is “why is it there in the first place”. I, Robot is about the role of robots in society and the good (and harm) they can do. Fahrenheit 451 is about the role of the written word in society, and the good (and harm) it can do⁷. The point is—the book is about the thing, and the subversion is a way of showcasing it/highlighting it.

Let’s take a moment to remember that Subversion is a tool in the writerly tool-chest and not a required element in fiction. Because it is not a required element, it doesn’t have to be there—and so if it is there you need to make sure it is serving the story in some way.

A great way to do this, and probably the best⁸ way to do this, is to make the thing-being-subverted central to the conflict of the story itself. The entire story of Fahrenheit 451 is actively wrestling with the tension between society and the written word. I, Robot establishes rules and then goes about breaking them in newer and more creative ways in order to show the positive and negative limits of robots on society. Subversion is used to emphasize and enhance the conflict.

On Serving The Story

Let’s take a moment to talk about ineffective subversion, so we can come back around to how to “serve the story” with everything we put in and not just subversion.

Ineffective subversion of Real Life would look something like this: Imagine a classic western story, gunslinger riding a horse, a reluctant hero, a villain in his own eyes—a picture is forming in your head already⁹. In order to make the story quirky and stand out, the author subverts Real Life by making his sidekick a talking dog. The rest of the story plays out as normal, and the sidekick being a dog is an excuse for jokes but nothing else.

I’m setting up this straw man because you’ve seen this before, it’s very popular: familiar side character is different because they are now [choose your own attribute]. If the side character’s only unique feature is having this trait, then the trait is substituting actual characterization. Having a talking dog sidekick is kind of funny, and it’s an excuse to make “ruff-riders” jokes, but if you imagine the same character as a human and nothing in the story changes, then…the character being a dog is not serving the story. The character might not be serving the story either.

What about ineffective subversion of rules established by the author? This can be harder to identify, because sometimes author break their own rules for convenience, and sometimes they don’t realize they’ve broken their own rules, and sometimes the rules aren’t really so explicit as to be easy to notice. Superman is probably a great example of this—there’s no real limits given to his power, so there’s no way to check for internal consistency whenever he does something incredible. That’s not really subversion though—subversion for Superman might be him being stabbed with kryptonite but by some previously-hidden strength he’s able to overcome it and it’s not actually his weakness but rather it makes him stronger. This defies a previously established rule, and because Superman has basically no other weaknesses¹⁰, it weakens him as a character because it removes his last vestige of relatability to human audiences.

What you can glean from the strawmen I have set up¹¹ is that if you’re going to do something unique and subversive, the story almost has to be about that thing¹². If you’re going to make a cowboy sidekick a dog, that has to be addressed and that has to create problems for the MC, which drives character growth and is part of the conflict of the story. If you make the cowboy sidekick a dog and don’t address it, it’s a gimmick that doesn’t change how the story goes, and that’s not an effective use of subversion¹³.

Thrilling Conclusion

Let’s round this sucker out. You are a creative, you are a writer. You want to make your work interesting, and so “Subversion” is a tool you want to put in your tool-chest. You have to know what it is you’re subverting (real life ideas being brought into the work of fiction, or rules you establish yourself), and you have to know how to make them serve the story (make it part of the conflict, make it drive character development). Show the audience the “before” so they understand the “after”.

Don’t try and do too much with your fiction. Throwing in a lot of unique what-if’s can be fun to think about, but if it introduces too many conflicts that can’t be addressed, or if it doesn’t address them at all—it’s not serving the story, and it’s shortcutting the hard work of effective character development.

Take the time to work with your stories slowly, make sure your ideas are clear and thought out and serve the story.

---

Photo by Randy Jacob on Unsplash

---

What Do You Think?

1. Can you think of examples of ineffective subversion that confirm my suggestions? What makes it ineffective?

2. Can you think of examples of effective subversion that defy my advice? What about it is effective for you?

3. It’s hard to talk about craft because there’s few, if any, hard rules for how to write well. There’s only suggestions and best practice. What do you think about when you think about subversion in fiction?

Thank you for reading! God bless!

1. I say, confident that there are no other forms

2. Check out this review by

Kailani B.

3. This would be a good place to quote myself saying this. I can’t remember. If you find a place where I say this please tell me.

4. This is a good place to remind you I have no credentials or qualification and you have no reason to listen to me.

5. To be crystal clear, this is a reductive way to examine a story. A good author could take my opening scene and turn it into a cutting satire about mans relationship to pets. For the purposes of this article, I’m setting up my own strawmen and then knocking them down with devastating effect. Checkmate, analysts!

6. On reading the Wikipedia page to confirm my biases conclusions, I realized that I, Robot was itself a subversion of the trope of Robots turning on their masters, which was in vogue in science fiction at the time. But this is still included in Asimov’s very first story in the collection, where society is technophobic and not automatically trusting. Asimov begins where the real world is, and moves them via his three laws to the subversive point he wants to make.

7. Not all subversion has to be expressed as “the role of [thing] in society and the good (and harm) it can do”. Subvert this formula in your own writing.

8. I have zero qualifications. None. This is a totally baseless claim. My profile says “caveat lector”.

9. Except for those of you with aphantasia, you’re probably seeing a black void right now. But go with me, here.

10. Superhero fans, don’t @ me

11. Not to brag or anything, but my K/D ratio vs. strawmen is out of this world

12. Once more: I have NO CREDENTIALS WHATSOEVER.

13. CAPISCE???