(no subject)

[shadowkat]

[ETA: found a new icon of Ayra from Game that I really like.]


Okay, my brain hurts...is it time to go home yet? ;-)

LJ brainless question of the day:

What is your favorite cult film, and why?

At the moment? Buckaroo Bonzai - Adventures Across the 8th Dimension.
Although Tremors comes in close second. Not sure Blade Runner counts as a cult film - if it does, then definitely that - since I actually own it on DVD.

I don't feel like explaining why. Figure it out for yourselves.

Speaking of taste issues? The whole Buffy S5-7 vs. Buffy 1-3 debate arises again.

Easy - if you are obsessed with high school stories and tween romance - you probably loved 1-3, if you are obsessed with stories about 20something angst, depression, abusive relationships, post and current college angst,
job frustration, and are either a frustrated psychology major or philosophy major at heart? You probably loved 5-7 and think S4 is the ultimate season. Although 3's stand-alone and Mayor/Faith arc had its appeal.

Hopeless romantic into Twilight novels? 1-3 only. (1-2 - I doubt they stuck around much after that.)Or casual fan into watching something not too deep. (there are exceptions of course, aren't there always?)

Cynics into Supernatural, BSG, Doctor Who, and tv shows like Game of Thrones and True Blood? 4-7 OR scholarly fan wanting to analyze the thing to death.
(also exceptions...ETA: some of these people love Doctor Who for example, which is far from cnynical.)

Then of course there are the weird people like myself who liked everything but the last 10 issues of the comics. We don't fit in any category and just look in bewilderment at the rest of you. ;-)

[ETA: Also should include people who liked all the tv series seasons but hated all the comics even though they masochistically read them anyway. And then there's the people who ignored the comics completely and loved all the seasons ...ETAA: Alright, I'm bound to have forgotten someone - so create your own little special category.]

And finally the folks who well liked all the seasons including all the comics...

Okay, not finally, there's also the people who think the show was about a cheerleader slaying vampires directed towards tween girls and just don't get the appeal. (Uh, no, that was the movie. But I can understand the confusion.)

In short try figuring out why people like what they like at your own risk.
Personally, I think it's impossible, without pissing everyone off and being proven to be an ass.

back to figuring out this change order request...then home again home again jiggedty jig.

Comments

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

I only watched BtVS (and later AtS, for continuity reasons) and Aliens 4 (though i didn't know of Whedon's involvement at that time - i thought some whacky french scriptwriter made that LOL).

I only ever cared about BtVS considering that sample. Of course we cannot separate the author (and the audience) from the text, the historical, economical and societal context is important. The commodification of culture probably has a greater impact on the end result than possible fetishism of any individual involved in it's production.

Though, if it is true what you say, then Whedon at least tries to wrestle back "his" culture/history from the grips of economy (even if that reveals some less pleasant aspects about himself ;-)).

As any economic undertaking is a collaborative work, the end result is highly influenced not only by (self-aware) individuals, but the process for realization of the product which is a socialized/incorporated process (i mean "Vergesellschaftung", a term which gains a certain blur when translated into the english language) apart from the individuals.

As thus, the "Buffy comics" are necessarily extremely different from the "Buffy TV show". The overall narrative lost a lot in that. (The fetishism you speak of is only glimmering on the TV show, but glaring in the comics.)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

As thus, the "Buffy comics" are necessarily extremely different from the "Buffy TV show". The overall narrative lost a lot in that. (The fetishism you speak of is only glimmering on the TV show, but glaring in the comics.)

This. Agreed. The series, being a work with a completely different set of collaborators as well as a different medium with different editors/producers and constraints - did not quite fall into the same fetishitic examination of the victimized girl trope that the comics glaringly do. Dollhouse also to a degree fell into this trap.

I think it is a danger many male writers fall into when they write the victimized female trope. It's not unlike the white writer writing the poor disenfranchized or magical black trope.
While one should be able to write stories about strong female characters and female characters who overcome brutality and rape, regardless of their gender - one must be careful in how they write such stories. It is easy to fall into fetishness or self-indulgence. An example of the victimized girl trope done well may well be Girl with The Dragon Tattoo - where the writer wants to show us the reality of the abuse, the pain of it, and to condemn the abusers - exposing a power system in place that victimizes women, while at the same time showing the effects of that ...on both men and women, and showing that woman herself is not a victim and chooses not to be one or to be defined by those who have done this to her. On the other hand...the writer may fail in somewhat the same way Whedon does in providing the victimized girl with a kind older male mentor/aid. In Buffy - it is Giles. Then Spike. And to a degree Angel. In Angel - it is Wesely and to a degree Angel for Fred/Illyria. In Dollhouse - it is even more twisted, because the mentor/aid is also the tormentor/torturer (which is an interesting statement). And in
Firefly it is Malcolm Reynolds and Simon Tal. Girl falls into a similar trap - and that is clearly the male writer's fantasy, much like the white writer who has a white leading character save the poor black character. This fantasy...may be unintentional, even unconscious. But once upon the page - it has a disturbing effect on the audience...the person in power redeems themselves for aiding the person who is not, reaffirming, albeit unintentionally, that they are the ones in power and the poor weak victim never quite will be - well not without their aid and help. In Buffy - she was always the weapon, always beneath the male gaze - that's the message he ends with. It reinforces his own fantasy. It's still about him.
So while he is trying to tell us how horribly men treat women, and why they shouldn't do so - he is also getting off on the fact that he, a man, is doing this - he's saving or helping the victimized girl find her power. It's very similar to the whole white liberal guilt thing.

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

I think it is a danger many male writers fall into when they write the victimized female trope. It's not unlike the white writer writing the poor disenfranchized or magical black trope.

When the privileged try to write, without shedding their privilege (at least intellectually), about the less privileged.

It is easy to fall into fetishness or self-indulgence.

What you write reminds me of Arno Schmidt, who once said that he prefers impotent male writers, since they don't fall into the "sublimated sexuality breaking through at inappropriate moments trap" (ie. "He rode down into the densely afforested valley..."): Vagina-Monster, much? Demons pierced by (phallic) trees? Bubblebaths in victorian manors? Buffy/Satsu sex with teddybears(!) on the floor?

It is all well and good to use the image of the "two trains meeting" as an injoke to prudery and sexual explosion - just, when your work is full of said sublimated sexual (male) fantasy... uhm, the funny kinda gets lost in that image.

You formulate these things very well. I mean, i certainly do not claim to know Whedon or his intentions (kinda looking at your last sentence, here ;-)) but the indulgence, fetishism, sublimated male sexual fantasy, .... it is all there in the comics (on the TV show - sometimes. Season 6 has it's "moments", but it actually tries to save itself. Female writer's influence, maybe?).

I mean, i have nothing against sexual fantasies. But please - IF you draw a Vagina-Monster - at least know what the fuck you're doing! (And then do something with that knowledge!) A little (self-)reflection goes a long way...

(Ok, so i ranted. Forgive?)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Ok, so i ranted. Forgive?)

Certainly. At least we are in complete agreement on this - which makes it easier to discuss. Never been a huge fan of debate to be honest. It's hard to do well on the net, without getting flustered. (I really don't want to get into another fight with the segment of the fandom that vehemently disagrees. Been there, done that, we finally had to agree to respectfully disagree. Which is why I tend to avoid discussing this. I respect their view, I just see it very differently. I may have to set up a filter at some point - to discuss Whedon and the comics with those similarly inclined, but I'm reluctant to do that - since it feels disingenuous.)

When the privileged try to write, without shedding their privilege (at least intellectually), about the less privileged.

Yes. This. I think Whedon forgets he's privileged. When he states that Buffy or the underpriveleged, small blond girl is his avatar he is being disingenuous. This is typical of the male nerd - they were made fun of in school, they see themselves as "victim" or the
"underprivileged" without power. But it's not true. Warren Meirs, Jonathan, and Andrew as well as Xander are perfect examples of the poor "woobie" male nerd - also shown in the classic film Revenge of the Nerds. They view themselves as the weak unprivileged, those being made fun of. Victimized. The Doctor Horrible. The short guy who doesn't get the blond cheerleader. We see this over and over in film and television. And to give Whedon a modicum of credit - he does appear to realize - at least he did in Dollhouse and in Buffy, albeit briefly, that the male nerd is not disenfranchised.
He still is higher up on the food chain than both women and persons of color. Whedon was born with privilege - he had opportunities both in film and television few women ever get. And he had an education that even fewer can aspire to - private schools in England and Film school in California.

He has, in truth, little in common with Buffy Summers. To call her his avatar is a bit like Bill Clinton calling the black man his.
It's offensive. And I think on a certain level, he knows that - or he wouldn't have created Warren Miers and Topher in Dollhouse (who in some respects are versions of the same character.)

It's easy to forget, I think, that you have privilege and someone else doesn't. I realized recently that it is easy for me to be color blind. I'm white. I don't have to worry about anyone judging me for the color of my skin. I have the skin color that is preferred by those in power. So, yeah, I can forget it. I have the privilege to forget. This is also true about gender. Men can afford to be gender blind. Women can't. Heterosexual men don't have to worry about being raped or sexually assaulted every time they go out, get drunk, and come home late. Women do. We always have to be alert to it. An example? My brother did not understand why I was so upset that someone had snuck into my apartment while I was asleep and stole my laptop. (Happened a few years back). He'd been robbed. It was just a lap-top. He did not get it. (I was thanking god that I hadn't been raped.) Or my father doesn't understand why I am afraid to live in certain areas of the city alone. They forget, because they can. That's privilege. It's not that they can't imagine it, necessarily, it's that they forget.

I mean, i have nothing against sexual fantasies. But please - IF you draw a Vagina-Monster - at least know what the fuck you're doing!

The Vagina Monster is difficult to ignore. As are the other things. While it's nice to make jokes and have fun, Whedon is a white man with privilege - playing with female hero who like it or not has iconic value to a group of people who do not have his privilege and do not have the wealth of heroes that he does. It is both disingenuous and irresponsible of him to take that story of female empowerment which he himself crafted and twist it to service male fantasy and humor, with an underlying and somewhat condescending message about female power icons. It makes me want to kick him.