I have now read a handful of Jim Butcher's The Dresden Files books and there are things I like, but the things I don't like can be hard to get past at times.
I like that Butcher went with a sort of "medium" magic system where there aren't ironclad rules, but magic still works along certain defined pathways. For example; in the Dresdenverse a wizard still needs to use magic words to get spells to work, but they can be any words because magic in that universe is more focused on the intention and will of the caster, whereas other universes with more "hard" magic require the character to stick to a rigid method of spellcasting that cannot ever change if s/he expects it to work correctly (i.e. it's levi-oh-sah!). It adds a nice little dose of comedy and realistic jankiness to see him say "flickum bickus" to light a candle or just shout "fuego" to conjure a fireball. I enjoy the "redneck engineering" vibe of potions made with stale energy drinks and stored in sports bottles. However, at the same time, there are certain immutable rules and laws that magic must follow which must be gotten around in specific ways. A wizard cannot use magic to kill a living being with a soul or there will be dire consequences, but just shooting someone with a gun is totally fine. As long as there's no magic involved, it's completely out of the wizard council's jurisdiction.
Additionally, I enjoy that, since magic is based on belief and intention, there is no one right or wrong way to believe in the supernatural. Michael the Fist of God truly believes that he is a servant of the God of Abraham, divinely blessed to wield a flaming Templar sword and called to vanquish evil with it. He is literally (and figuratively) cloaked in the power of his belief and things just tend to work out for him, perhaps as if some divine being really is watching over him, but the narrative implies that Michael is perhaps just a wizard like Harry is and has simply shaped the expression of his own wizardly powers through his belief in the Almighty. Harry, in contrast, is agnostic at best and wears a pentagram that grants him the same level of spiritual protection as Michael's crucifixes do, because he believes that the symbol has power and not necessarily because it actually holds any objective importance. It's a really neat way to approach a magic system and it allows for not only a wide range of powers amongst magic users, but also provides a basis to allow Butcher to get away with a "Deus ex Machina" from time to time because, hey, magic is mysterious and we don't really know how it works. Maybe the power of love does make your fireballs stronger or maybe it's just believing harder that works better? Who's to say?
What I don't like, however… Well, I'll just say it: This book series is incredibly sexist. It just is. I've read three of the books and it is really starting to annoy me how Butcher writes female characters. He introduces every new female character by letting the audience know 1) whether or not she is attractive and 2) whether or not she is attracted to Harry. Every single villainous female character has at least one moment where she is described moaning and begging for sexual release, usually while writhing against an unwilling male character (who is also usually Harry), because being evil just makes her so hot and bothered. These villains are also usually depicted as being very attractive and young-looking women who love to show off their bodies with skimpy outfits or just forgo the clothes altogether and show Harry the goods.
Not a single male character is written in this way for even a single passing sentence and this is made most obvious when he introduces a pair of mixed-gender vampire twins, Kyle and Kelly. They are literally the male and female versions of each other, both evil and with the exact same motivations and powers. Guess which one is horny evil and which one is just regular evil. Go on. Guess. Even his evil fairy godmother is distractingly and pointlessly horny to the point that it entirely ruins any of the fun or camp that could have come from flipping the loving and kind fairy godmother trope on its head. She's a powerful being of the Nevernever who is thousands of years old and not even technically a person really, but you better believe her nips get hard at the thought of subjugating Harry. I'm also not amused by the fact that Butcher clearly thinks he isn't being horny because he says "the tips of her breasts" instead of just writing "nipple(s)". You're still writing about nipples, Jim. We can all see it.
The one female character who has yet to be grossly sexualized, Karrin Murphy, is such an aggressively over-the-top stereotype of the tough 90's cop who has to prove herself in a male dominated field full of assholes by being an even bigger asshole that it's hard to take her seriously. She's just so belligerent and unlikable even in her moments of occasional cleverness. There are times when all she has to do is listen to what Harry has to say and a massive crisis would have been completely averted, but she continues to steamroll forward with disastrous results and then blame Harry for it and the narrative tells us that this is fine because, you see, she is not an attractive woman, so she must be loud and violent instead to gain the respect of the menfolk. Still better than reading about "the tips of her breasts", I guess.
I really enjoy the plotting, pacing, and the (male) supporting characters, but I just don't know how much more I can take of reading about villainous women writhing in ecstasy. I know Jim Butcher tries to hang a lampshade on it by repeatedly having Harry proclaim that he is an outdated chivalrous gentleman and we're clearly meant to laugh at him for it, but that only works if the thing you're putting the lampshade on isn't just a lamp. Harry Dresden is a full-tilt m'lady-dropping neckbeard whose favorite outfit is a black trench coat and who loudly and often proclaims that he does, in fact, view women as fundamentally different from men in terms of their capabilities and competency and then the author has us laugh at him for it before going ahead and writing all of his female characters being fundamentally different from men in terms of their capabilities and competency. I've seen several people make the argument that you can't call an author sexist for writing a sexist character and I want to be clear that I understand that dynamic and I'm not calling him sexist for writing a sexist character. I am calling him a sexist for writing a sexist narrative.
The meta awareness of the sexism is also annoying from a narrative perspective because we get plenty of Dresden repeatedly admitting that he knows he's being ridiculous by falling for the latest incredibly obvious false-damsel-in-distress routine for the umpteenth time in a row, but then we have to watch him do it anyway without taking even the most basic precaution in the inevitable event that he's betrayed yet again. It can be a good narrative choice to have a character be aware of their flaws and still be unable to avoid falling into the same traps, but Butcher has long since crossed the threshold into just being sexist and then slapping a satire sticker on top to defend himself from the criticism he rightfully deserves.
Because I like compliment sandwiches, I'll also say that I love Bob and Mister and I love it even more that they can team up! Unnaturally large and intelligent cat? Love it. Pervy encyclopedia spirit that lives in a skull and takes payment in Playboys? Also love it.
I think I'm about done with the series as it stands now and probably won't be reading any more of it. If anyone has better recommendations for urban fantasies that are not annoyingly sexist, I'd happily accept them.
by ScyllaOfTheDepths