(no subject)
Aug. 18th, 2019 06:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Three things I am not allowed to discuss at length: semantics, religion, and politics.
I tell this to my mother and of course we enter into a discussion of religion.
Which goes well up to a point, where it veers off course is my insistence that Jesus wasn't the only one sent down, and the point wasn't to worship him as God, but the message -- to care for others and the world around you, and this should be more important than furthering your own self-interest. It's clear in all the messages of all the prophets and religious figures.
My mother changed the subject.
Me: See? This is why I don't discuss religion with people.
And semantics? I can't discuss it without it derailing. I'd explain why, but that would be discussing it.
Politics? I don't think I need to explain that one.
2. Apparently Archive of Our Own won a Hugo...along with a few other interesting entries
As always, I agree and disagree with a lot of these...
Children of Blood and Bone -- I found disappointing and not that interesting. However, my brother and fifteen year old niece adored it. So what do I know?
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, screenplay by Phil Lord and Rodney Rothman, directed by Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey and Rodney Rothman (Sony) - Would agree this was by far the best of the screenplays listed. And most innovative.
Weirdly I have not read most of the graphic novels, and Monstress, which won, doesn't interest me at all. I have read many of the Saga graphic novels -- but I'm on the fence about a Hugo for it. Awards, however, I find odd. It's so subjective.
But it does give you insight on how others view the world and what direction culture is leaning.
Will admit that Mary Robinette Kowal's Calculating Stars looks interesting. I think I read her when she was merely Mary Robinette, because the name looks familiar. I can't remember half the authors I've read. This is why I write reviews on Good Reads of books I've read -- so I can keep track.
Now, the 1944 Hugo retrospective was interesting. I didn't realize I'd read that many of them. Or the one's I enjoyed won Hugos.
1944 RETROSPECTIVE HUGO AWARD FINALISTS
Best Novel
Conjure Wife, by Fritz Leiber, Jr. (Unknown Worlds, April 1943) -- this is insanely good and very scary. Also fascinating in regards to gender politics.
Earth’s Last Citadel, by C.L. Moore and Henry Kuttner (Argosy, April 1943)
Gather, Darkness! by Fritz Leiber, Jr. (Astounding Science-Fiction, May-July 1943)
Das Glasperlenspiel [The Glass Bead Game], by Hermann Hesse (Fretz & Wasmuth)
Perelandra, by C.S. Lewis (John Lane, The Bodley Head)
The Weapon Makers, by A.E. van Vogt (Astounding Science-Fiction, February-April 1943)
Best Novella
The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (Reynal & Hitchcock) -- also insanely good.
“Attitude,” by Hal Clement (Astounding Science-Fiction, September 1943)
“Clash by Night,” by Lawrence O’Donnell (Henry Kuttner & C.L. Moore) (Astounding Science-Fiction, March 1943)
“The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath,” by H.P. Lovecraft, (Beyond the Wall of Sleep, Arkham House)
The Magic Bed-Knob; or, How to Become a Witch in Ten Easy Lessons, by Mary Norton (Hyperion Press)
“We Print the Truth,” by Anthony Boucher (Astounding Science-Fiction, December 1943)
Best Graphic Story
Wonder Woman #5: Battle for Womanhood, written by William Moulton Marsden, art by Harry G. Peter (DC Comics)
Buck Rogers: Martians Invade Jupiter, by Philip Nowlan and Dick Calkins (National Newspaper Service)
Flash Gordon: Fiery Desert of Mongo, by Alex Raymond (King Features Syndicate)
Garth, by Steve Dowling (Daily Mirror)
Plastic Man #1: The Game of Death, by Jack Cole (Vital Publications)
Le Secret de la Licorne [The Secret of the Unicorn], by Hergé (Le Soir)
Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form
Heaven Can Wait, written by Samson Raphaelson, directed by Ernst Lubitsch (20th Century Fox) -- hmmm..
Batman, written by Victor McLeod, Leslie Swabacker and Harry L. Fraser, directed by Lambert Hillyer (Columbia Pictures)
Cabin in the Sky, written by Joseph Schrank, directed by Vincente Minnelli and Busby Berkeley (uncredited) (MGM)
A Guy Named Joe, written by Frederick Hazlitt Brennan and Dalton Trumbo, directed by Victor Fleming (MGM)
Münchhausen, written by Erich Kästner and Rudolph Erich Raspe, directed by Josef von Báky (UFA)
Phantom of the Opera, written by Eric Taylor, Samuel Hoffenstein and Hans Jacoby, directed by Arthur Lubin (Universal Pictures)
3. Hmmm... Marge Simpson Anime and the Liberation of Women
Really? I don't know. There are others. Wonder Woman. Blondie. The Simpsons didn't start until the 1989. They are about thirty years old, which granted may seem old to someone who is in their thirties or under thirty. But to anyone over that age -- not so much. Also there are pre-existing characters. Such as Wilma Flintstone, Judy Jetson, and the Honeymooners -- which in a lot of ways the Simpsons were based. They are meant to represent the quintessential middle class midwestern family -- from the mind of the cartoonist Matt Groenig.
I don't know if taking a fictionalized character who is written as heretrosexual and making the character homosexual or queer is necessarily liberation. Aren't you projecting and enforcing your own sexual preferences and desires onto someone else's creation? Wouldn't it make more sense to create your own characters? I've always struggled with this -- in part because a lot of the writers who do it aren't homosexual or queer or LGBTQA, but actually heterosexual and just happen to be turned on by it. Not that there is anything wrong with that and I'm not judging, honestly I get it. But to say that it liberates the character who has been written as heterosexual from some sort of compulsory heterosexuality, when in reality it just happens to turn you on, seems a tad disingenuous to me. That's not saying of course that this writer is like that, just that I'm skeptical of the writer's motives.
IT does make me wonder what fictional characters I'd liberate if I could from their storylines?
I'll have to ponder that one.
4. It wants to rain. I wish it would. Cool things off. Dispell some of the heaviness in the air...and help with barometric pressure. Although my headache has dissipated, so yay.
I tell this to my mother and of course we enter into a discussion of religion.
Which goes well up to a point, where it veers off course is my insistence that Jesus wasn't the only one sent down, and the point wasn't to worship him as God, but the message -- to care for others and the world around you, and this should be more important than furthering your own self-interest. It's clear in all the messages of all the prophets and religious figures.
My mother changed the subject.
Me: See? This is why I don't discuss religion with people.
And semantics? I can't discuss it without it derailing. I'd explain why, but that would be discussing it.
Politics? I don't think I need to explain that one.
2. Apparently Archive of Our Own won a Hugo...along with a few other interesting entries
As always, I agree and disagree with a lot of these...
Children of Blood and Bone -- I found disappointing and not that interesting. However, my brother and fifteen year old niece adored it. So what do I know?
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, screenplay by Phil Lord and Rodney Rothman, directed by Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey and Rodney Rothman (Sony) - Would agree this was by far the best of the screenplays listed. And most innovative.
Weirdly I have not read most of the graphic novels, and Monstress, which won, doesn't interest me at all. I have read many of the Saga graphic novels -- but I'm on the fence about a Hugo for it. Awards, however, I find odd. It's so subjective.
But it does give you insight on how others view the world and what direction culture is leaning.
Will admit that Mary Robinette Kowal's Calculating Stars looks interesting. I think I read her when she was merely Mary Robinette, because the name looks familiar. I can't remember half the authors I've read. This is why I write reviews on Good Reads of books I've read -- so I can keep track.
Now, the 1944 Hugo retrospective was interesting. I didn't realize I'd read that many of them. Or the one's I enjoyed won Hugos.
1944 RETROSPECTIVE HUGO AWARD FINALISTS
Best Novel
Conjure Wife, by Fritz Leiber, Jr. (Unknown Worlds, April 1943) -- this is insanely good and very scary. Also fascinating in regards to gender politics.
Earth’s Last Citadel, by C.L. Moore and Henry Kuttner (Argosy, April 1943)
Gather, Darkness! by Fritz Leiber, Jr. (Astounding Science-Fiction, May-July 1943)
Das Glasperlenspiel [The Glass Bead Game], by Hermann Hesse (Fretz & Wasmuth)
Perelandra, by C.S. Lewis (John Lane, The Bodley Head)
The Weapon Makers, by A.E. van Vogt (Astounding Science-Fiction, February-April 1943)
Best Novella
The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (Reynal & Hitchcock) -- also insanely good.
“Attitude,” by Hal Clement (Astounding Science-Fiction, September 1943)
“Clash by Night,” by Lawrence O’Donnell (Henry Kuttner & C.L. Moore) (Astounding Science-Fiction, March 1943)
“The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadath,” by H.P. Lovecraft, (Beyond the Wall of Sleep, Arkham House)
The Magic Bed-Knob; or, How to Become a Witch in Ten Easy Lessons, by Mary Norton (Hyperion Press)
“We Print the Truth,” by Anthony Boucher (Astounding Science-Fiction, December 1943)
Best Graphic Story
Wonder Woman #5: Battle for Womanhood, written by William Moulton Marsden, art by Harry G. Peter (DC Comics)
Buck Rogers: Martians Invade Jupiter, by Philip Nowlan and Dick Calkins (National Newspaper Service)
Flash Gordon: Fiery Desert of Mongo, by Alex Raymond (King Features Syndicate)
Garth, by Steve Dowling (Daily Mirror)
Plastic Man #1: The Game of Death, by Jack Cole (Vital Publications)
Le Secret de la Licorne [The Secret of the Unicorn], by Hergé (Le Soir)
Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form
Heaven Can Wait, written by Samson Raphaelson, directed by Ernst Lubitsch (20th Century Fox) -- hmmm..
Batman, written by Victor McLeod, Leslie Swabacker and Harry L. Fraser, directed by Lambert Hillyer (Columbia Pictures)
Cabin in the Sky, written by Joseph Schrank, directed by Vincente Minnelli and Busby Berkeley (uncredited) (MGM)
A Guy Named Joe, written by Frederick Hazlitt Brennan and Dalton Trumbo, directed by Victor Fleming (MGM)
Münchhausen, written by Erich Kästner and Rudolph Erich Raspe, directed by Josef von Báky (UFA)
Phantom of the Opera, written by Eric Taylor, Samuel Hoffenstein and Hans Jacoby, directed by Arthur Lubin (Universal Pictures)
3. Hmmm... Marge Simpson Anime and the Liberation of Women
The tile of your zine is Marge Simpson anime but the subtitle is ‘The Liberation of Marjorie Bouvier’. Why did you choose to use her maiden name?
I wanted to distance Homer Simpson as far away as possible from Marge. I wanted her to be Marjorie Bouvier – I wanted it to be a story about her coming home to herself. It’s called the Marge Simpson anime because it’s a play on what anime means to our current culture, and who consumes anime the most in Western culture. The title refers to Marge Simpson because of how we identify with her, but the subtitle is ‘The Liberation of Marjorie Bouvier’ because that’s the end goal.
Why did you choose to speak on liberation?
I chose it because characters like Marge are in need of liberation. Women in our lives who have similar roles to Marge need liberation. When I watched the show, I always longed for her narratives to continue developing and not get re-set into the status quo, but the tragedy was that that her plot was so stagnant. There was never anything meaningful in her life. We were all supposed to be okay with Homer’s character. We are all supposed to accept that he was who she had to settle for at the end of the day. I just wanted her to be liberated from that.
bouvier uprising part 1 edited
There are a lot of characters that need liberation. Why did you pick Marge?
She’s so iconic and so deeply embedded in our public psyche. The Simpsons is probably the most widely consumed and most easily recognisable piece of pop culture that the West has given to us. It’s also been well-consumed across other cultures. Even our parents, with their own unique cultural backgrounds would be able to recognise The Simpsons. It’s disrespectful not to go where it all started from.
Really? I don't know. There are others. Wonder Woman. Blondie. The Simpsons didn't start until the 1989. They are about thirty years old, which granted may seem old to someone who is in their thirties or under thirty. But to anyone over that age -- not so much. Also there are pre-existing characters. Such as Wilma Flintstone, Judy Jetson, and the Honeymooners -- which in a lot of ways the Simpsons were based. They are meant to represent the quintessential middle class midwestern family -- from the mind of the cartoonist Matt Groenig.
This piece explores how a heteronormative society enforces isolation in women trapped in marriage. Why did you explore this theme in relation to Marge’s sexuality?
It’s not just heteronormativity – it’s also a culture of compulsory heterosexuality. There is an ongoing historical tragedy of non-straight women who, due to their circumstances, are forced to resign themselves to the status quo. Maybe by the show’s standards, Marge is a straight woman but in the narrative of Marge Simpson anime, and in regards to what it means to be truly liberated, I feel like for Marge had to not be straight. I find it very difficult to believe that if we lived in an alternate reality where compulsory heterosexuality wasn’t a concept that it would somehow be acceptable that Marge would settle for a man like Homer.
I don't know if taking a fictionalized character who is written as heretrosexual and making the character homosexual or queer is necessarily liberation. Aren't you projecting and enforcing your own sexual preferences and desires onto someone else's creation? Wouldn't it make more sense to create your own characters? I've always struggled with this -- in part because a lot of the writers who do it aren't homosexual or queer or LGBTQA, but actually heterosexual and just happen to be turned on by it. Not that there is anything wrong with that and I'm not judging, honestly I get it. But to say that it liberates the character who has been written as heterosexual from some sort of compulsory heterosexuality, when in reality it just happens to turn you on, seems a tad disingenuous to me. That's not saying of course that this writer is like that, just that I'm skeptical of the writer's motives.
IT does make me wonder what fictional characters I'd liberate if I could from their storylines?
I'll have to ponder that one.
4. It wants to rain. I wish it would. Cool things off. Dispell some of the heaviness in the air...and help with barometric pressure. Although my headache has dissipated, so yay.
no subject
Date: 2019-08-19 12:53 am (UTC)I could never buy into it. I'm only attracted to men, sexually. Even when I was suffering from severe trauma and terrified of men, I was only attracted to men. SO.... I think that it's not the answer.
But that's for me. It's not true for everyone.
no subject
Date: 2019-08-19 01:56 am (UTC)My difficulty with the dictate that "the only way we can be truly liberated is if all women and men become LGBTQA" is that's no different than stating "the only way is for everyone to be converted to heterosexuality". In both cases it is a selfish power trip. Being LGBTQA is no better or worse than being Heterosexual. There should be no value judgement on either. I don't have any issue liberating someone who is gay from an imposed heterosexual relationship. But to force someone who is not gay from all heterosexual relationships, just because the person is abusing them -- is not the answer. (Also I've seen domestic violence and rape occur in same-sex relationships -- they aren't specific to heterosexual relationships.)
It's biological. We don't choose our sexuality. It's also a spectrum not binary, some people prefer only the opposite sex, some prefer both, some prefer same sex, some prefer neither...to insist that everyone be "your" (in the general sense) sexuality is just...insanely self-centered. It's not liberating anyone -- it's an individual or specific sexual orientation power trip.
no subject
Date: 2019-08-19 10:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-08-19 05:27 pm (UTC)