I was thinking about this topic while grocery shopping this afternoon. MOST of the fantasy heroes' outfits/armor are grossly unrealistic whether we're talking Conan or Xena or various computer games.
Oh, totally. The DS woman above has slightly more practical armor than the standard, but it still doesn't look like real armor would. And neither does any of the armor worn by pretty much any fantasy character, male or female.
What I was very vaguely gesturing at, though, is that there's a difference between the ways in which fantasy art depicting men and women is silly. Male characters are usually powerful and heroic, and their ridiculously impractical armor is meant to make them look more bad-ass and imposing. If flesh is showing, it's usually heavily-muscled, bad-ass-looking flesh. The male characters will be in strong stances, looking right out at the viewer, or else engaged actively in battling other characters in the art. The focus for female characters is less on power and more on sexiness. The parts of their bodies left uncovered by armor are not muscled-looking and powerful - they're soft and curvy, even when muscles would make more sense (a lot of fantasy heroines have very soft-looking, slender upper arms. Even when they're holding gigantic swords overhead. Bzuh?). There's a big tendency in fantasy art to show female characters looking down at the ground, or vaguely off to one side, instead of at the viewer or right at another character. They're often posed passively behind a male character who is engaged in some activity.
That's the kind of art that I've gotten used to in gaming products, and it's why something like the DS cover image is so appealing to me. She looks like a character I'd want to play, myself, rather than like a supporting cast member of some kind for a main male character.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Boobie digression
Date: 2007-04-11 05:42 pm (UTC)Oh, totally. The DS woman above has slightly more practical armor than the standard, but it still doesn't look like real armor would. And neither does any of the armor worn by pretty much any fantasy character, male or female.
What I was very vaguely gesturing at, though, is that there's a difference between the ways in which fantasy art depicting men and women is silly. Male characters are usually powerful and heroic, and their ridiculously impractical armor is meant to make them look more bad-ass and imposing. If flesh is showing, it's usually heavily-muscled, bad-ass-looking flesh. The male characters will be in strong stances, looking right out at the viewer, or else engaged actively in battling other characters in the art. The focus for female characters is less on power and more on sexiness. The parts of their bodies left uncovered by armor are not muscled-looking and powerful - they're soft and curvy, even when muscles would make more sense (a lot of fantasy heroines have very soft-looking, slender upper arms. Even when they're holding gigantic swords overhead. Bzuh?). There's a big tendency in fantasy art to show female characters looking down at the ground, or vaguely off to one side, instead of at the viewer or right at another character. They're often posed passively behind a male character who is engaged in some activity.
That's the kind of art that I've gotten used to in gaming products, and it's why something like the DS cover image is so appealing to me. She looks like a character I'd want to play, myself, rather than like a supporting cast member of some kind for a main male character.