One thing I really dislike in trans YA fiction is what we might call the Crying Game style twist
I managed to see The Crying Game without knowing the famous twist in advance and consequently it registered to me as a brilliant feint on the movie's part: Dil isn't keeping any secrets, has no reason to believe her new boyfriend isn't aware of her body as well as her gender; her trans-ness is only a shocking reveal because we're in Fergus' perspective and the possibility never crossed his mind. Fergus is the one who's actually lying about who he is—on the lam, not quite ex-IRA—and it almost gets them both killed. He deceives; she does not. I thought that was great. I understand this does not change the fact of his visceral negative reaction to finding out what Dil thought he knew all along, however, and so doesn't ease the hurt of his transphobia or the film's structure that directs the audience to be surprised along with him.
[edit] Having typed all of this out, I'm wondering about authorial intent. It was very clear to me watching in 2006 (yes, I know, I live under a rock) that the problem was all on Fergus' side. I would like to think the assumed cisnormative audience was supposed to be startled by Dil and then realize they had no reason to be, especially not with Fergus still passing himself off as "Jimmy" and Dil not knowing about his past. But this was 1992 and I don't know if Neil Jordan thought that way. I suppose I should see if there's a published script.
no subject
I managed to see The Crying Game without knowing the famous twist in advance and consequently it registered to me as a brilliant feint on the movie's part: Dil isn't keeping any secrets, has no reason to believe her new boyfriend isn't aware of her body as well as her gender; her trans-ness is only a shocking reveal because we're in Fergus' perspective and the possibility never crossed his mind. Fergus is the one who's actually lying about who he is—on the lam, not quite ex-IRA—and it almost gets them both killed. He deceives; she does not. I thought that was great. I understand this does not change the fact of his visceral negative reaction to finding out what Dil thought he knew all along, however, and so doesn't ease the hurt of his transphobia or the film's structure that directs the audience to be surprised along with him.
[edit] Having typed all of this out, I'm wondering about authorial intent. It was very clear to me watching in 2006 (yes, I know, I live under a rock) that the problem was all on Fergus' side. I would like to think the assumed cisnormative audience was supposed to be startled by Dil and then realize they had no reason to be, especially not with Fergus still passing himself off as "Jimmy" and Dil not knowing about his past. But this was 1992 and I don't know if Neil Jordan thought that way. I suppose I should see if there's a published script.
The New Inn sounds great.