Savanna's Reviews > Stardust

My high expectations for this book (the first I've read of Gaiman's) were badly disappointed. The writing was poor, the story cliché and shallow, and the content problematic. I've read that Gaiman is better with graphic novels, and that seems likely. He obviously has some talent, so I'm hoping this book is just a miss.

One issue I had with Stardust was the writing itself. Gaiman tries to write an "adult fairy tale" with what I think are terrible results. The tone is light-hearted and sarcastic, but it really isn't funny when it tries to be. Perhaps to make his story "adult," Gaiman is sure to include occasional scenes of sex and grotesque violence, but they seem awkward and out of place in the otherwise juvenile text. The plot and character development are extremely simplistic (as is the dialogue) in a way that would be better suited to a parable, but Stardust otherwise follows a more usual novel tone, so the suddenness and implausibility just come off as poor writing. The writing basically seems like a failed attempt at Piers Anthony's Xanth novels that is neither clever nor funny nor original.

This book makes heavy-handed use of basically every fantasy trope in existence. From the dry tone, it seems as though Gaiman's poking some deserved fun at them, but if there's meant to be an undertone of light-hearted criticism in Stardust, I couldn't find it. Why draw so heavily and randomly from these devices when they do nothing to round out Stardust's unimaginative world of Faerie, or to flesh out the flat characters and plot? By haphazardly including every familiar trope, Gaiman makes his story bland. I'm left wondering what the point was since it didn't seem to be satire but clearly tried for a sardonic approach. I'm sure he could have made an original, immersive, and interesting world filled with unique institutions and creatures, but he didn't even try. I don't get it.

My third and biggest complaint with Stardust was just how utterly offensive the protagonist, Tristran, is. I don't think good books need to have likeable characters, but Tristran is so problematic yet presented so uncritically (none of the book's sarcasm seems directed at him and his goodness is emphasized throughout) that I get the feeling I was supposed to like him, or at least not find him intolerable. I'm surprised not to have read more criticism of Tristran since for me he was such a dickhole. I'll briefly sum up some of the story here to show why, so if you care about vague spoilers, ignore the rest of this review.

Tristran sets out to capture a fallen star for the woman of his dreams. Who is she? What background have they shared? Why is this man so dedicated to her? All questions that could have fascinating answers, but irritatingly Gaiman employs the tired old story of a man being hopelessly in love with the most conventionally beautiful woman he knows entirely because of her beauty. (I'm again confused by this choice since Stardust is allegedly meant to shake up the genres of fairy tale and fantasy.) Pretty objectifying, sure, but he's young, so I cut him some slack initially. Then we read about how Tristran is just so darn ~*in love*~ that he regularly hangs out outside her window and watches her undress. This is not portrayed as weird or predatory; the book implies a "boys will be boys" attitude about this super creepy invasion of a woman's space. That's when I started to call shenanigans on the story, but it just got worse.

Tristran finds out that the fallen star is actually a woman. He finds her crying because she broke her leg falling from the sky. (Yes, it seems the plot is derived from the world's worst pickup line.) So surely our hero, who is by all accounts a nice young man, and who is after all so very in love with his girl back home who doesn't want anything to do with him (poor Tristran! I can't imagine why) will help this damsel in distress! Wrong. He tricks her, literally shackles her with a magic chain, and FORCES HER TO WALK WITH HIM ON HER BROKEN LEG SO THAT HE CAN GIVE HER AWAY AS AN OBJECT SO THE HOTTEST GIRL IN TOWN WILL SLEEP WITH HIM. That actually happens. Cue a series of typical fantasy adventures. The star (who has a name, Yvaine, but is mainly just referred to as "the star" by protagonist and author alike) begs him to release her, tells him how miserable she is, and cries all the time.

A true manic pixie dream girl, though, she's sure to tell Tristran to make sure he eats enough and doesn't wear himself out—fulfilling her secondary female role as indiscriminate caregiver alongside her primary role as piece of ass. But then she manages to escape, and Tristran feels betrayed and upset. Why won't the sexy ladies in his life just let him abuse them yet!? He suddenly comes to the realization that she's a human and that it's pretty fucked up to have enslaved her, but despite this abrupt stroke of sanity, he's determined to capture her again. He doesn't seem concerned about how fucked up he's being: he simply can't help it because he's in love (an answer everyone else and the author himself seem to accept). Cue more tired scenes with random descriptions of nipples and gore, and he's caught her again.

Then as suddenly as every other development in the story, "the star" seemingly develops Stockholm syndrome when they conveniently arrive at their destination and finds herself now to be in love with our dear, admirable, and ever so refreshing protagonist. Too bad she's a present for the other sexy lady! What I presume was meant to be luckily for her, our poor Tristran is friendzoned again when the object of his infatuation confesses that she loves someone else. She doesn't even want her present (how ungrateful!). Dejected Tristran wanders back to Yvaine, where they abruptly declare their undying love for each other and proceed to live happily ever after.

A dick through and through, Tristran also exerts his masculine, manly machismo when his estranged mother is freed from her own lengthy period of slavery to announce at the end that Tristran is actually heir to a powerful kingdom. (Of course he is!) Mom says how important it is to her that they go back in grandiose procession as a family after her forty years living as a slave in a wagon, but brave, manly, virtuous Tristran sticks up for himself with brave, manly virtue and tells his freshly liberated mom (also a perfect 10) that that's not his style (how humble!) and that he and his lady-object will show up sometime unannounced instead. He sure showed her! Way to stand up for yourself, Tristran!

What I find most disturbing is that Tristran's blatantly misogynistic tendencies seem to be regarded as acceptable by Gaiman himself, while Yvaine's quantum of independence is laughed off as bitchiness. Tristran, who unabashedly objectifies women and literally enslaves Yvaine, is continually described as sentimental, passionate, and caring. Meanwhile Yvaine is described throughout as "hot-tempered" (even in the synopsis), yet the only things she does that aren't hyper-subservient are to insult Tristran (her slaver) and run away after making sure he's resting and has had enough to eat. This character is so mild-mannered and forgiving that she forsakes her independence (what's left of it) to spend her life with the man who so powerfully abused and degraded her. More than that, at the book's weak ending, when the witch who has been hunting her the entire time confronts her, Yvaine forgives the witch and KISSES HER ON THE FOREHEAD before wishing her well. Yet it is the absurdly gentle and obscenely forgiving woman character who is so stereotypically dismissed by Gaiman as uppity, emotional, and wild while the grotesquely selfish and openly cruel male protagonist is celebrated as a victim of passion. This is a sickening reinforcement of rape culture that is neither innovative nor subtle.

So on top of the bad writing, confusing style, and general flatness, I found Stardust pretty offensive because of its treatment of women (I could go on about the lesser characters but I won't). It seemed like Tristran's misogynist exploits were all presented without a hint of reproach, as he won all the typical fantasy hero rewards and was described as sensitive and kind. I've definitely been super critical of him for this, but these weren't incidental issues within the story: they were central to the plot. Plus, in a book written by a contemporary author trying to challenge convention, it's extra difficult to let slide a story that's both poorly executed and deeply rooted in sexist stereotypes.

BONUS BIGOTRY: I also noticed Gaiman twice used the pejorative racial slur "Gypsy" (which is never okay unless you happen to be Roma) and described Native Americans as "savages."