If you’re a fan of watching films or reading novels, you’ve probably been introduced to the character trope of the manic pixie dream girl before. She is the whimsical and dreamy girl who has a magic intuition of the world that far exceeds that of the male protagonist’s. It is this intuition and her unique understanding of things that help the male protagonist change, grow or fall in love. She’s ‘not like other girls’ because there is something raw and effortlessly natural about her.
The term was first coined by a film critic by the name of Nathan Rabin who described the character trope as ‘existing solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.’
This character trope of the MPDG has received heavy criticism, especially during the 2010’s with people realising how unrealistic and one-dimensional she is. Rabin’s definition definitely has a ring of truth to it because the character is what male writers/authors have come up with to create the ‘perfect’ woman. At the end of the day, however, she is merely a misogynistic ideal – a side character who plays an important role in helping the sheltered male protagonist realize and understand things without having any purpose herself. So other than serving as a catalyst for male transformation, the MPDR seems to serve no other purpose.
It’s a shame that since this character trope is so common, it has lead to the categorization of the ‘other women’ who aren’t quirky and beautiful like the MPDG. By pushing the ideal of the uniqueness of the MPDG, other women who do not fit this stereotype are thus portrayed in a much more negative light by comparison. For example, if the MPDG is fun, other women by comparison are immediately bland and boring or if she has a complex view on life, it categorizes other women as dull and simple. Her uniqueness makes them basic and undesirable, leaving them with no space to normalize their imperfections.
However, criticizing this character trope does not mean that her personality traits like her quirkiness are necessarily bad. They are just highlighted at an unrealistic level leaving out what actually makes her human. She is perfect yet she only serves as a supporting role and never the lead. It was never her traits that were the problem, it was the way the MPDG was perceived and idealised. Nathan Rabin himself later on disowned the term because instead of creating awareness like he had hoped, it was used as a condemnation against all quirky female characters.
Actress Zooey Deschanel’s character, Summer, in the film, 500 Days of Summer is an example that has often been used for describing a MPDG. However, it is actually the perfect example of the depiction of the false image that the MPDG produces. The male protagonist, Tom, romanticizes Summer and believes that she truly is his dream girl despite her telling him multiple times that she isn’t looking for a serious relationship. In the end, Tom sees her for who she truly was instead of what he wanted her to be. She was a character who had her own dreams that didn’t revolve around the male protagonist which is what makes the movie so good, in my opinion. There is a sense of realization of what the movie is all about for the viewers when we watch Tom and Summer part ways.
The case is worse for many male authors who fail to give their female characters depth and complexity. For example, the way women’s physical appearances have been described by male authors has been a running gag for a long time. Writing it from a male perspective, it often comes across as highly sexualized for no apparent reason except to give men a female lead they can sexualize. All these points allude to how misogynistic some portrayals of female characters can be, as their entire existence is reduced to catering to the male fantasy. The MPDR is one such trope which serves this exact purpose.
People, especially male writers/authors who are guilty of creating MPDR characters, need to realize that women aren’t just one dimensional. They are not the submissive and exploitable ideals that men fantasize about. Women deserve movies where the female character is loved not because she is flawless but because she is worthy of love despite being complicated, messy and non-ethereal. The MPDG is idealized because too many men are intimidated by women who refuse to let their lives revolve around them. Instead of letting them incorporate one too many clichés into books and movies, we can instead question filmmakers and writers and challenge them to include characters that can reflect our lives accurately.