Check out the ultimate guide to 16 return-to-work programs in India for women
The Staunch Book Prize aims to award thrillers where no violence against women is committed. A nuanced take on whether this is needed.
The Staunch Book Prize aims to award thrillers where no violence against women is committed. However, if women’s suffering is a reality, then shouldn’t literature portray those but with greater empathy?
I am a voracious reader, and while I read books in many different genres, the genre I enjoy the most, and which I keep wanting to read is crime fiction, or thrillers. Which is why, when I heard about the Staunch Prize, I had to introspect on the question of crimes against women, and how they are portrayed in fiction.
The Staunch Book Prize has been launched recently, and it will be awarded to “the author of a novel in the thriller genre, in which no woman is beaten, stalked, sexually exploited, raped or murdered.” The originator of the Prize, writer Bridget Lawless, has said that the idea for the prize came to her in a moment of “inspired frustration,” after seeing numerous movies featuring rape as a plot device at last year’s Baftas.
The website for the Prize argues that “violence against women in fiction has reached a ridiculous high,” and that as such novels are usually more popular and more likely to become movies or TV shows, it becomes more important to ensure that the suffering of women does not become reduced to a cliché.
Reading about the award made me take a mental walk back through some of the thrillers I’ve read recently, and I realized that almost all of them did involve abuse of women (or young girls/boys), in some way or another; and not just in the books by international authors like Sophie Hannah, Karin Slaughter or Paula Hawkins. Two of the three crime novels by Indian writers that I enjoyed last year, Chain of Custody by Anita Nair and Greenlight by Kalpana Swaminathan, placed such crimes front and center. I remember being deeply upset after reading the books and Greenlight in particular, left me extremely disturbed.
But is The Staunch Prize really needed or justified?
Crimes against women are, sadly, a part of our everyday reality. Every day our emotional wounds are made fresh as we hear of yet another woman or child being raped. We have victims of domestic abuse speaking up. We console yet another friend, sister or daughter, who has been eve teased or stalked through the streets. If the number of voices around the world speaking up are any indication, misogynistic violence is one of the biggest crimes that we are battling today.
Does it not make sense then that crime fiction should reflect it? Isn’t fiction too a weapon against such crimes? Does fiction not humanize and sensitize us to these issues?
Writing fiction about these issues places a spotlight on the issues.
By writing about it frequently, writers can help to emphasize the seriousness of the problem. And for many survivors, writing is a great catharsis that helps them process and deal with their experiences in a positive way.
On the flip side…
On the flip side of course is the point that The Staunch Prize is trying to make, that using such violence as a plot device, trivializes the issue and that when this is done repeatedly, it desensitizes us to these crimes. It argues that women need not suffer trauma before they can become heroines, and that trauma certainly should not be used to add spice to the plot.
The way I see it, both sides are valid. Using rape or harassment as a throwaway plot twist should certainly be discouraged. It is a serious issue and should be dealt as such. However, the way to do it is not by not writing about it at all.
The real challenge is to ensure that writers deal with such topics with great empathy and sensitivity.
Writer Sophie Hannah suggests that the Staunch Book Prize should rather be awarded to “honour the novel that most powerfully or sensitively tackles the problem of violence against women and girls.”
I am with her. Silence does not solve problems. Talking about issues with respect and empathy can certainly change the world.
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
If her MIL had accepted her with some affection, wouldn't they have built a mutually happier relationship by now?
The incident took place ten years ago.
Smita could visit her mother only in summers when her daughter had school holidays. Her daughter also enjoyed meeting her Nani, and both of them had done their reservations for a week. A month before their visit, her husband told her, “My mom is coming for 4-5 months!”
Smita shuddered. She knew the repercussions. She would have to hear sarcastic comments from her mother-in-law for visiting her mother. She may make these comments directly only a bit, but her servants would be flooded with the words, “How horrible she is! She leaves me and goes!”
Maybe Animal is going to make Ranbir the superstar he yearns to be, but is this the kind of legacy his grandfather and granduncles would wish for?
I have no intention of watching Animal. I have heard it’s acting like a small baby screaming and yelling for attention. However, I read some interesting reviews which gave away the original, brilliant and awe-inspiring plot (was that sarcastic enough?), and I don’t really need to go watch it to have an informed opinion.
A little boy craves for his father’s love but doesn’t get it so uses it as an excuse to kill a whole bunch of people when he grows up. Poor paapa (baby) what else could he do?
I was wondering; if any woman director gets inspired by this movie and replicates this with a female protagonist, what would happen?. Oh wait, that’s the story of so many women in this world. Forget about not giving them love, you have fathers who try to kill their daughters or sell them off or do other equally despicable things.
Please enter your email address