“Virtue signal” is a term that gets thrown around a lot today in media criticism.
As with any other term used in media criticism, it runs the risk of being devalued through overuse. People begin to use it beyond its standard definition; over time, the term becomes so watered-down and broad as to be meaningless. It is therefore important to step back once in a while to confirm that the criticism still holds its original value.
As of posting this essay, I have used the term “virtue signal” in four Recent Reads reviews. The most recent, Jade City, is what inspired me to write this analysis. In that book, Fonda Lee engaged in such blatant virtue signaling that I feel compelled (or perhaps triggered) to write an in-depth dissection to explore where she went wrong and how her mistake could be avoided. That dissection swiftly exceeded the bonds of what was reasonable for the book review. Therefore, I have decided to expand upon the topic further, drawing upon examples from past reviews, so that we can really explore what virtue signaling entails and why it is bad for the objective quality of literature.
The series will be split into two parts:
Part 1: Establish definitions and criteria, then explore examples from past Recent Reads
Part 2: Dissection of Jade City as an in-depth case study
This analysis will specifically focus on virtue signals in literature. However, many of the concepts and approaches covered here can also apply to other forms of media, such as TV shows, film, and even visual art.
CRITERIA
To start: what even is a “virtue signal”?
Definition
Unlike some media criticisms, “virtue signal” actually has a dictionary definition (sometimes in the form “virtue signaling”). Merriam-Webster defines “virtue signaling” as:
“The act or practice of conspicuously displaying one’s awareness of and attentiveness to political issues, matters of social and racial justice, etc., especially instead of taking effective action.”
An important thing to consider here is that the use of “virtue” here does not reflect any objective truth or morality. It is applied in the context of a pretense. This term can therefore be applied in objective literary analysis regardless of whether the “virtue” being signaled is supported by any broader ideology or whether any given critic or audience members agrees that it is indeed virtuous.
Application
When applied objectively to literary analysis, virtue signals are elements included within a book that call attention to the author’s virtue.
That last phrase of the Merriam-Webster definition is particularly relevant to literature. The simple fact of the matter is that virtue showcased in literature is almost never “effective action”. You can take as many grand moral stands as you want in a work of fiction, but literature needs to earn its influence on the real world. Narratives must be crafted to resonate with audiences, convincingly arguing for virtues that might otherwise be brushed off or ignored. A message that is simply slapped into the story for the author’s moral validation does not have the framework to support this real-world impact. It therefore serves no purpose except to call attention to the author.
I do want to emphasize one point: while virtue signals are often tied to themes, messages, and commentary, not ever theme, message, or commentary is a virtue signal. Sometimes the author is genuinely trying to convey an idea to the audience. Even when this is done poorly, that does not necessarily mean that it was being done to call attention to the author. Likewise, it is possible for virtue signals to be hidden in good writing. It’s just that these aren’t usually criticized because the quality of the writing makes the virtue signal much easier to ignore.
Why It Matters
Virtue signals ruin immersion. They draw readers out of the narrative. Any badly written commentary can do this, but virtue signals are particularly detrimental in this regard. By putting a spotlight on the author, they remind us of the artificiality of the narrative. I therefore don’t think that it’s hyperbolic to say that virtue signals invalidate the literary experience.
Intention
One issue with using “virtue signal” as a criticism in the real world is intention. A person may be making a genuine effort at virtue, only to get unfairly accused of virtue signaling because of poor presentation, misunderstanding, or a bias by the person applying the criticism. It’s impossible to fully know a person’s intentions unless they explicitly announce those intentions.
However, I don’t believe that this problem applies in literature.
The author chooses every single word that goes into a final work. Every inclusion is a deliberate decision, either in the original introduction or the decision not to remove or change it in the editing process. Therefore, if something in the text comes across as a virtue signal, the author consciously or subconsciously chose to write it that way. If this was somehow completely unintentional and missed during editing, then the author is still on the hook for flawed writing, as it was his or her mistakes that created the impression of a virtue signal.
(Note that this can apply to translations of a work without applying to the original. Sometimes translators can introduce virtue signals through their choices of how to translate or localize the material. Those of you familiar with issues in recent manga and anime translations know what I’m talking about.)
Categorization
I feel that it is helpful to break virtue signals down into two categories.
Category 1: Closed System Virtue Signals. These are virtue signals that are evident within the text itself, without any additional information on the author.
Category 2: Open System Virtue Signals. These are virtue signals that exist within the text but are subtle enough that outside context on the author (such as an author bio, interviews, social media, or marketing) is needed to identify them.
In my experience, Category 1 virtue signals are the most common. The only examples that I could name of Category 2 virtue signals are all from J.K. Rowling’s Twitter activism, which has recontextualized otherwise innocuous elements and inclusions within her books. An argument could be made that Category 2 virtue signals don’t truly exist within literature itself, but rather are outside virtue signals that happen to involve literature.
EXAMPLES
With definitions established, let’s look back over previous books that we’ve reviewed on Recent Reads and see how they measure up. I’m not going to get into every book for this. Only the ones that I called out for virtue signaling or which could potentially have had virtue signaling will be mentioned.
For the purposes of this analysis, I will be critiquing identity politics separately from other messages (if identity politics surface). My reasoning for this is twofold. First, this is type of virtue signal that is relevant to the Jade City dissection that’s coming in Part 2. I want to clearly separate out relevant points of reference. Second, virtue signaling for identity politics has become incredibly prolific in the past decade or so. The full reasons for this trend exceed the limits of this analysis; I’m just going to say that, given how easy it is to virtue signal for identity politics (in terms of the minimal commitment that authors need to make), it makes sense to explore other virtue signals separately so that these other virtue signals can be given the focus they deserve.
Also, I will be assuming that only Category 1 virtue signals are present in this case. Trawling the social media and marking for every author and book referenced here to find Category 2 virtue signals would take time that I simply don’t have. If you are aware of a Category 2 virtue signal in any of these works, please feel free to share your argument and evidence in the comments.
All right, with all that set up, let’s dive right into the examples.
Foundryside
Identity Politics: No (Sexual Orientation)
The relationship between Sancia and Berenice was the first homosexual relationship that I flagged as being fetish material. This is not the same thing as a virtue signal. Yes, Bennett does appear to be inserting his personal fetishes into his narrative, and that calls attention to him, but that is not the same attention as him actively signaling his virtue.
The simple fact of the matter is that homosexuality is treated as utterly normal in this setting. This is made most clear when a side character (Orso) encourages Berenice to pursue the relationship: the fact that Berenice is going after another young woman doesn’t even come into the discussion. (This will be very relevant when we get to Part 2.) Because of how homosexuality is treated in this setting, there is no virtue to be wrung out of the relationship.
Other Messages: No (Classism)
As ham-fisted as the preaching about classism and the evils of slavery are, time was taken to integrate them into the world. They don’t just pop up to call attention to Bennett’s virtue. Even Sancia’s lecturing of the other characters is just a poor payoff of ideas that were previously set up.
Hostage of the Empire
Identity Politics: Yes (Sexual Orientation), No (Feminism)
Midway through the third book, Emmett introduces a homosexual couple for a single POV chapter. Said chapter contributes nothing to the broader narrative outside of establishing that Emmett wrote a homosexual couple into the story. By itself, this isn’t a virtue signal. This series has a vast number of POV characters, many of whom get a chapter with no apparent value. The chapter could also be written off as yaoi fanservice.
The reason I learn towards this couple being a virtue signal is the epilogue. To be clear, this is the epilogue of the final book of the series. It is the last farewell for our characters and the story. Yet, of all the characters who could be included from this sprawling, character-driven epic, Emmett felt it was necessary to provide us with an update on the yaoi couple and throw in a line (which I regrettably can’t quote, as I didn’t bring my copy of the book to Japan) about how everyone should be free to live their own chosen lifestyle without anyone bothering them. Anyone with minimal awareness of Western social issues will recognize this message as a line commonly evoked for defending homosexual lifestyles.
So … yeah. Emmett virtue signaled here. She injected an unnecessary message in a manner that would maximize visibility with minimal effort or impact to her narrative. It contributes nothing outside of displaying her personal virtue.
The self-serving nature of this inclusion is particularly glaring when one considered just how, given her vast number of POVs, she could have easily made one or even two of the more important characters homosexual without straining credulity. I thought that the character Fourth Prince was homosexual until it was revealed that he had the most chaste heterosexual romance out of any of the characters in the story. The fact that Emmett relegated the homosexual characters to an afterthought reeks of tokenism (a form of identity politics virtue signal where a character is included just so that the author can claim to have represented that character’s demographics).
On the feminism side of things, one thing I had failed to mention in my review of the Hostage of the Empire series is that Yala is something of a feminist hero chafing under the restrictions of the Patriarchy. However, much like Lee did for Shae in Jade City, Emmett made this fit organically in the setting.
By the standards of her culture, Yala is an incredibly conservative character in matters of femininity. Her culture is far more restrictive for women than the new land in which she finds herself. When she does start to chafe against the restrictions of her patriarchal culture, it is for reasons that are entirely supported by the narrative and the context of her environment, and her push back against those restrictions are less about overthrowing a system that accomplishing her personal goals.
This theme of women struggling in a patriarchal system was earned, and the focus put upon it is entirely warranted within the context of the narrative. This is therefore not a virtue signal.
Notorious Sorcerer
Identity Politics: No (Sexual Orientation)
Siyon and Izmirlian engage in homosexual activity because that is the nature of the pornography that Evans wanted to write. She makes no attempt to claim moral accolades for it or to call attention to her personal views of homosexuality. What’s more, the specifics of this example raise two interesting points that can be compared to both Foundryside and Jade City.
First, unlike Foundryside, homosexuality is implied to not be widely accepted in this setting. This is based about the fact that Nihath (supposedly) has an in-house lover and yet chose to marry a woman (whom he’s apparently making no efforts to sire an heir with, the marriage isn’t even succeeding in terms of continuing his bloodline). This was poorly written, but it had the potential to be milked for a virtue signal. Evans could have thrown in a line to validate homosexuality, thereby earning validation for herself for her Stunning and Brave decision to speak out on something that has substantial public support in the areas where this book would be sold. She chose not to do that. Given that she openly calls her own book an “exercise in self-indulgence”, that’s a pretty big step.
Second, Zagiri, much like Orso in Foundryside, encourages the relationship. What makes Zagiri different is that, while Orso felt like he was speaking as a character, Zagiri felt like a mouthpiece for Evans (as mentioned in Part 2 of the Notorious Sorcerer review). Again, Evans had an opportunity to validate homosexuality and thus get validation in return, but she chose not to. Zagiri just provides generic relationship advice without ever touching on sexual orientation.
Other Messages: No (Classism), Yes (Contraceptives Access)
I did not mince words about the handling of the “the poor, the unsheltered, the foreign” oppression narrative in this book. However, Evans at least tried to integrate it into the setting. It was sloppily done, but the framework for it did exist. Furthermore, it is not confined to a single scene, but instead drives an entire subplot. This is poorly handled messaging, but it is not a virtue signal.
The contraceptives message is another matter. While I did not explicitly call this out as a virtue signal in Part 5 of the Notorious Sorcerer review, it absolutely is one by the standards we’ve established here. The idea that the contraceptives vendor would be a victim in the scenario presented to us is contradicted in that same scene. Evans knew her message didn’t fit, acknowledged that it didn’t fit, and chose to crowbar it in anyway. Contraceptives are not discussed at all outside of this scene – in fact, I don’t think the contraceptives vendor appears again after this scene, only being referenced in passing as being the one who set off a flood of alchemists seeking Zagiri’s help. The extreme incongruity and limited scope of this message reveals that it is a virtue signal by Evans to support a cause in which she is personally invested.
The Stardust Thief
Identity Politics: Yes (Gender Ideology), No (Feminism)
Two lines. That’s all it took. Abdullah did not have to insert those two lines of dialogue to make sure the audience understood that she had a nonbinary character. It made no sense to explain this in-world, as it fits within the established rules of the setting and is something all of the characters present should have been aware of. It offers no clarification to a modern audience, who will already be aware of how pronouns are handled within the modern zeitgeist. The only reason to explain the concept was to guarantee that the audience understood that the author, Chelsea Abdullah, had written a nonbinary character. This is an open and shut case of Category 1.
While I felt that Abdullah’s handling of masculinity within the book is emblematic of her personal beliefs, she wasn’t putting focus upon it. Her female heroes are also incredible without beating down the male characters (even if the beating down happened anyway). At worst, any feminist ideas in this story are a poorly executed theme.
Son of the Storm
Identity Politics: Yes (Sexual Orientation), Yes (Gender Ideology)
While I did praise Okungbowa for managing to make a multi-page rant that shares his personal stance of homosexuality feel completely natural to the story, it is still a multi-page rant that very clearly exists to share the author’s personal stance of homosexuality. He uses homosexual characters to tell us that the existing regime is bad by milking their suffering. This is outrage baiting the audience, but more important to this analysis, it calls attention to him having the virtuous perspective by letting us know that he believes that what the existing regime does is wrong. The narrative doesn’t bother to explore homosexuality in this setting outside of this instance. This rant was therefore entirely about drawing attention to Okungbowa’s own beliefs.
(Esheme’s sexual orientation, by contrast, is not a virtue signal, but given how she’s used for Okungbowa’s sexual fantasy, that’s not exactly a win.)
Okungbowa’s introduction of a nonbinary character appeared to be a conscious effort to avoid virtue signaling. A pronoun was dropped, and the introduction moved right along without wasting the audience’s time on unnecessary clarification. He then undermined this by throwing in a whole paragraph later to praise said non-binary character for being Stunning and Brave for opposing oppression that he never bothered to write. Again, this serves no greater narrative purpose. It was just about calling attention to Okungbowa’s beliefs.
Other Messages: Yes (Environmentalism)
Most of the other messages slapped into the readers’ faces are not virtue signals. They’re just shallow. One of them, though, is a virtue signal: environmental stewardship.
This message is utterly baffling within the narrative. Resource exhaustion due to the greed of Bassa is explicitly associated with the deterioration of the continent, namely the deterioration of rainforests into savannah (though with how it is worded, the apocalyptic tides on the coastline might also have been blamed on Bassa’s greed). The issue is that this is a medieval world. We have no establishment of mass greenhouse gas production or anything else that would shift global climate. We have some grounds to believe that they are polluting their local water supply, but that is a local problem, not one that should impact the lands on the opposite side of a massive forest (which is not downslope from said water supply). It’s possible that this is a magical problem, but the narrative does not make this clear.
It really feels like Okungbowa brought up environmental stewardship because he wanted the audience to know that he supports good environmental stewardship. His other messages all at least have some tangential connection to the story. This one only serves to highlight his personal views.
The Fall of Reach
Yes, I know that I said in my review that this book is honest about being a video game tie-in. It still has some interesting points to consider for this discussion.
Identity Politics: No (Feminism)
The SPARTAN-II Program recruited both boys and girls for its program, with there being a roughly even split between the sexes (rather than a few exceptional girls being thrown in the mix). At first glance, this might appear to cater to the trend in modern feminism of ignoring biological differences that give men advantages over women in certain professions, but there are actually very clear lore reasons for this recruitment strategy. The augmentations for the SPARTAN-IIs had a high lethality rate. The genetic markers that ensured survivability were not dependent on sex. Furthermore, the augmentations of the SPARTAN-IIs were primarily intended to allow them to safely use MJOLMIR power armor. If forced to choose between one more dead male candidate and a female candidate who has slightly less physical strength but can wear the armor (not to mention having a SPARTAN-II’s reaction time and intellectual prowess), the correct choice is a no-brainer.
Other Messages: No (The Military-Industrial Complex is Shady)
The Fall of Reach could have leaned into the unsavory practices of the SPARTAN-II Program to milk popular criticisms of the military-industrial complex. The Silver Timeline TV show certainly did. Instead, the story acknowledged both the flaws of systems and the justifications that decent and rational people might use for the program. It was a very nuanced take that didn’t exist to call attention to Nylund.
STRIKING JADE
Hopefully, all of that has laid a good foundation for when and how the criticism of “virtue signal” might be applied. Now we can move on to the reason for this dissection.
In Part 2, we will delve into Jade City. While this book overall was incredible, the virtue signal that Lee perpetrated using Anden was distractingly blunt. I think it’s an important lesson for us all as to what not to do.
It’s all coming in two weeks. I hope to see you all then.
