Some things sound so obviously good that they don't need to be examined. One of those things is the idea of Representation in fiction; movies, television or books. Entertainment where some people are conspicuously absent would seem to be an obvious problem, right? A person doesn't have to be "woke" or any sort of feminist to occasionally watch an old television show and realize (for example) that all the scientists and astronauts in an old movie are men. It's as glaring an anachronism these days as watching a show where everyone is chain smoking cigarettes.
Entertainment should reflect the diverse nature of real life and society because, in the end, fiction has to be even more real than real life. If nothing else, it makes that entertainment more interesting to introduce characters with a variety of backgrounds and challenges.
And so we're told that diverse fiction is BETTER fiction.
The way that this rather obvious truth is often framed, often discussed, is that fiction needs Representation. Which is about where it all starts going off the rails.
Representation has to be understood as a "term of art". But for once, it's actually really close to the real meaning of the word. Is there someone in the TV show that you're watching, in the book that you're reading, that represents you?
So, lets do this with "me" and the 1950's era space show with the 100% male scientists. Do I want the representation of "me" to walk into a scene and present as a blonde ditz? Not really. Do I want me to be the antagonist, a saboteur? That would be interesting, but it wouldn't be how I'd like to be represented. Do I want me to be a complication to the plot? Do I want my representative to be screwing around with married men and causing discord on the team? Do I want it to be a bit part? Do I want bad things to happen to me? Do I want to fail over and over again? What do I want?
At the end of the day, it turns out that what I really want is a Mary Sue self-insert into the story. I don't want "me" to be immoral, ineffective, counter-effective, vain, criminal, deceitful, conflicted, untrustworthy, or stupid.
I want to be heroic and loved by all.
Except that would be really bad fiction. Not BETTER fiction. BAD.
The whole concept of Representation ties characters and the creative process to the need to make someone feel good about the character that represents them. If you're handicapped, for example, it's not Representation to have a handicapped character in a movie if they turn out to be a jerk or a criminal.
People joke that when you're watching a crime show and there are a variety of suspects that the white man will be the guilty one. Or the Christian rather than the Muslim. It happens often enough that people notice. Because if the criminal is the Black woman or the trans kid or the Asian in a wheelchair, that character will be seen as the Representation of everyone somewhat like them. And clearly that would be hate.
I want to be heroic and loved by all. Doesn't everyone?
Characters put into a story for the purpose of Representation aren't always poorly written. They're not always a self-insert-by-proxie Mary Sue. But they often are. Often they are just that. (Enter the Mary Sue we know as Rey.)
I believe there are two elements to why this sort of impulse to inclusion goes so badly so often.
First, the concept that one character is Representation for a race, identity, or condition, assumes group or collective identity.
Second, the representation of invisible characteristics is ignored or even deliberately devalued.
I never identified with Nancy Drew, and I even look like her. I liked the Hardy Boys better because they were more like me on the *inside*.