Lilith Iyapo, Lilith's Brood (Xenogenesis). She makes it possible for a new world to exist and has the strength of character to accept that she may be seen as many things other than savior. She survives through adaptability (change) where others fail for their stubborn rigidity. A common theme in Butler's work.
In Cornwell's later books Scarpeyta seems more neurotic than strong. Smart and methodical, yes. Strong, not so much. That's why I picked out Lucy Farinelli instead.
Yes, I thought of her when I posted my list. I would also name Galadriel, not least because of how she rejected the lure of the One Ring. She was every bit the equal of the Istari in wisdom, as well.
I think Queen Esther from The Bible is pretty strong, even if you only believe the book to be fiction. She could easily have been beheaded by the king because she barged in on him doing kingly-things, e.g. sitting. But she had the courage to help her people, the Jews, no matter what problem she faced. I think she's pretty cool. If you haven't read the book of Esther, I think you should just to see what I mean, and it's the only book in the Bible that doesn't mention God, so Atheists and people of other religions are free to explore it in-depth. When I think of more, I'll post again.
Well I feel kind of ridiculous not mentioning her given my signature, if nothing else. I'm just going to use the excuse that I have a lot on my mind at the moment.
Well, yes. Though given the state of women's rights at the time, the double standard may be justified. To be fair, she's not one of my top examples. I didn't even remember her at first Oh, and another vote for Dagny.
I'm giving points to Salander for being strong and not a dick, which many archetypal 'tough gal' characters turn out to be.
Lucy shows quite a bit of vulnerability herself. She shows quite a bit of emotion as she has her growing pains, and later when she realizes and finally reveals her sexual orientation.
Vulnerability and emotion are not incompatible with strength. Lucy isn't perfect. She doesn't always make the best choices, but she is true to her values, and doesn't let anything keep her from what she sets her mind to. Kay, on the other hand, is increasingly fretting about what other people think of her, what they are plotting with regard to her life, etc. Her paranoid musings are getting hard to take.
Lucy was weak enough to shoot the man that raped Kay rather than just arrest him. I think that more than showed her emotions do in fact become a vulnerability.
As I said - not always the best choices. Her decision was to end that threat, permanently. But still a strong female character. Lisbeth Salander doesn't always play by society's rules either. We could go on with this indefinitely, but my point is that a character, male or female, doesn't have to be an emotionless robot to be strong. Nor does he or she need to ignore what those emotions demand.
Hermione! Nice catch, you. Anne of Green Gables. Definitely not my choice. The Wife of Bath from Canterbury Tales.
I'm surprised no one mentioned Katniss Everdeen. I think she's too boring to be a person worthy of this thread. Not just 'cause the movies watered her personality down. (Hunger Games) I think those books are absolute trash. And that's why I love reading them. OOps sorry for the double post.
Scarpetta from the series of the same name By P. Cromwell. Special Agent Tara Shores from Wired Kingdom by Rick Chesler. And not to beep my own horn, but beep beep! First Star General Zlada Volkov/Red Wolf.
It's funny, I read the title of this thread and then started reading it backwards, starting with the last comment and I constantly thought about Jane Eyre, only to realise at the end that she started all this I don't really see the feminist that most feminists like to see in her, but I think she is really a great example of a strong woman, instead of a woman who does manly things. Nothing wrong with that (and I really hope I won't start a riot by saying this), but I do think there is a difference. The aforementioned Porgia is also someone I would qualify. I have yet to see an adaptation that does her justice though. The real tragedy of that play is that it has become a tragedy. Shylock became the main character instead of the villain. I understand why it happened, but it was honestly one of the very few Shakespearean comdies that had me laugh out loud, in great part due to Porgia. However, if Shylock becomes the protagonist, she becomes the villain and that usually turns her in some stuck-up brat, instead of the strong woman who finaly got everything she could hope for against all odds and will now do everything she can to protect it. I'm not sure about Lady Macbeth though. She was a woman who saw a way to quickly get wealthy and took it, but afterwards collapsed under guilt and killed herself. I wouldn't call her strong so much as I would call Macbeth weak, but perhaps that's just semantics. Another character by Shakespeare I find fascinating is Tamora from Titus Andronicus. The play itself is a bit too brutal for my sake, but this is the one play where I would say that it's really more about the bad guy (or girl, in this case) than the protagonist. She surrendered, but was done great wrongs, so she takes revenge. Hard. I think there are many women in Shakespeare that I would consider strong of character like Cordelia in King Lear, or Desdemona in Othello. They may have accepted their fate at some point, but they made a concious choice and chose to stick with it, no matter what. I think that defines character. But I'm off rambling again. It's been a while since I've contemplated stuff like this, sorry. Interesting topic! In the end, I think, it mostly depends on what your definition is of "a strong woman". It'll differ per person and on that the characters we choose will also depend.
