The Manic Pixie Dreamgirl

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about “Mary Sue” and how it’s become a problematic, catch-all term for any female character who seems “too good.”

But in the last year, I’ve seen another term going around to describe and dismiss female characters: Manic Pixie Dreamgirl.

The Manic Pixie Dreamgirl, like the Mary Sue, had a genuine critical origin. The term was originally used to describe zany, freespirited female characters who exist solely to teach the depressed, overworked male protagonist how to see the brighter side of life. (Feminist Frequency goes into more depth here).

I say originally, because the term has mutated to the point that it is used even if a female character is well-developed and the center of her own story. It’s used to immediately dismiss any female character who is not completely mature and sensible, who is a bit hipster and unconventional, who has a sense of fun, as “not good enough.”

Take, for example, New Girl‘s Jess Day. Jess is the series’ main character. She is intelligent and accomplished in her job, with goals and interests and emotions all her own. But article after article criticizes her as a Manic Pixie Dreamgirl, because she “rocks polkadots,” wears ribbons in her hair, sings little songs as she goes about her day, is an elementary school teacher, and is, for all intents and purposes, the kind of female character we don’t usually see on TV.

And these things that are seen as unrealistic, as innately dismissible? They are traits that many real women also possess. Real women that I, at least, know. When my college roommate wears frilly skirts and big bows in her hair, is she being less acceptable as a woman? Would a TV show about our lives be criticized because we had giant soft toy strawberries on our futon and fairy lights all around the walls? My mother is a elementary school teacher, and she also sometimes sings about what she’s doing… my friends and I reference Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter all the time… and yes, I like to buy everything in a bright shade of pink. But I’m pretty sure that we are all real, worthwhile women, rather than examples of a trope.

In the end, “Manic Pixie Dreamgirl” has become another way of indirectly criticizing anything for being too “girly,” supporting the idea that women are only acceptable if they don’t act too radically feminine. By using the term Manic Pixie Dreamgirl in this way, critics, even feminist critics, imply that female characters (and so women in general) must be “mature” in a very specific kind of way to be acceptable. They must know what they want in life, have high-powered (or at least not-traditionally-feminine) jobs, dress sensibly, and shun anything seen as too girly or childish. Because girliness is still linked with a lack of intelligence, with shallowness, with a somehow lesser form of being. It’s something for real, mature women to look down upon and say, “You should respect me, because I am not like that. I am not like those other girls.”

As Jess herself says in New Girl:

I brake for birds. I rock a lot of polka dots. I have touched glitter in the last 24 hours. I spend my entire day talking to children. And I find it fundamentally strange that you’re not a dessert person. That’s just weird, and it freaks me out. And I’m sorry I don’t talk like Murphy Brown. And I hate your pantsuit. I wish it had ribbons on it or something to make it just slightly cuter. And that doesn’t mean I’m not smart and tough and strong.

Some people may find these female characters annoying, as they would be annoyed by any real person they met who had baby animals on their checks. And that’s OK. No one is obligated to like anybody, and we all have our pet peeves. But by seeing the somewhat whimsical, fun-loving female characters as nothing more than a negative trope, by giving them a label that immediately dismisses them as unrealistic and unwanted, we are creating yet more restrictions about what a real, acceptable women is allowed to be. We are buying into the expectations that women must be the mature, sensible ones, and that any shred of stereotypically femininity is an innately bad thing.

And that is not OK.

05 comments on “The Manic Pixie Dreamgirl

  • Donna , Direct link to comment

    I came here (again) after wanting to send a friend the “In Defense of Sansa Stark” article you brilliantly wrote. I read the Brienne article (Which i also loved, she is my second favorite character next to Sansa) and saw this.

    I hate the actual “Manic Pixie Dream Girl”. I hate it, because a LOT of men have this idea that that’s what a “perfect” girl is. It’s not real.

    BUT i wanted to say that you used Jess as your example and i *love* “the New Girl”. Oh, I wanted to hate it. Because on outward appearances Jess is a MPDG. But after watching the show (and especially the episode you referenced) I fell in love with Jess and she is not a MPDG.

    She’s got similarities, it’s true. But she gets sad. She makes mistakes. And most of all, she doesn’t prop up the other guys in the show. That’s what makes her different than the trope. I could actually see myself meeting a woman like her and being friends with her – because she has flaws and emotions and realness that relates only to her, not as something that would make a man feel better about himself.

    • Rhiannon , Direct link to comment

      I love New Girl too! I don’t think Jess is a “manic pixie dream girl” (which is an annoying trope), but I think she’s an example of a character that people call a MPDG, just because she’s fun and quirky and girly and different. I think she’s a great character, precisely because she has that quirkiness, but still exists entirely for herself, and has realistic emotions and failings. She reminds me of friends I have, rather than, well, a dream version of a girl.

      Can’t wait for the new season to start next week!

  • jayme , Direct link to comment

    It irritates me slightly that you only draw attention to the one manic pixie dream girl type who is outrageously girly, as if to imbibe the spirit of a manic pixie dream girl, once has to wear bows in their hair and patent shoes on their feet. My favourite manic pixie dream girl types existed before they were categorised as such: Natalie Portman’s Sam in Garden State, and Kirsten Dunst in a few things, but particularly Claire in Elizabethtown. Women who were not particularly girly, but were troubled in their own ways. They had issues with self-esteem, but none with projecting confidence and optimism into their days. They didn’t want or need a man to define them, instead, they enriched *his* life with their honesty and their pure enjoyment. These are my manic pixie dream girls, and they don’t have to dress a certain way or prefer desserts or be asininely childish at most times to have a fun spirit.

  • Gwen , Direct link to comment

    You make the perfect point. A MPDG is defined by her relationship with and effect on the man who meets her.

    I hear this often in relation to Sam of ‘The Perks of Being a Wallflower’, which slightly more accurately focuses on how she is the love interest of the very unhappy, very broken male protagonist. But the depth of their relationship comes about when he is allowed past that exterior and she admits that she’s also pretty broken. (Also, significantly, she and Patrick follow the same basic relationship pattern with Charlie.) Also at the end of the book they’re friends and she goes on with her life.

What do you think?

%d bloggers like this: