Victimized Girl Trope in Three Part Harmony...

[shadowkat]

I finished reading and watching two narratives that featured the victimized girl trope in two different ways. And of course there's the third one, that haunts me, the works of Joss Whedon - who of all writers appears to be the most obsessed with the trope.

[WARNING: This post is highly critical of Joss Whedon's writings, if that offends or bothers you in any way, please skip this entry. I understand why it would, I used to be the same way. It's tough to be a fan. I have hidden the criticism behind lj cut tags to aid you in avoidance.]

Just finished watching the tv series Nikita's two part season finale tonight - which in some respects is the originator of the trope in my experience. Although I'm certain people did it prior to Luc Besson, the French auteur who did both the original film Nikita and The Professional - a 12 year old Natalie Portman is taken in by a male hitman and trained to hurt those who victimized her and killed her parents. Besson did quite a few of these films. The Fifth Element is also Luc Besson. In the tv series - for those who don't know it - Nikita's family is killed, becomes a felon herself, and is taken in by Division (a counter-intelligence agency) and turned into an assassin. After Division kills her lover, Daniel, she goes Rogue, with the sole purpose of taking down Division and evening the scales - redeeming herself for the people she killed or the families she destroyed. One of those people she fights to even the scales for is Alex, who she rescues and trains to become an operative like herself and places in the heart of Division. The Television version of Nikita varies from all the other's including Joss Whedon's Dollhouse and most notably the original film and the Canadian television series starring Peta Wilson, as well as Alias another off-shoot - in this way: the trainer and rescuer of the victimized girl is female. The women take center stage in this drama, turning the tables on the men.



I was rather surprised by the season finale, where the series is completely flipped over and remade into something else entirely. It may be the first time that women are featured as the controlling force or the force to be reckoned with in the Nikita franchise. The male mentor...isn't really in force here. And the catering towards male fantasy that is promised in the opening episodes - with scanty clothes is rapidly dropped by the third or forth episode and never comes up again. Alias it's not. Nor is it Dollhouse. Here the scales are far more balanced in all ways. Having watched all the versions of this particular franchise - I was rather impressed with this unexpected turn of events.

In the two part finale, Alex learns that Nikita killed her family and then took her in to train her. Nikita takes on the Michael/Luc Besson (Hitman) role in this drama - she is both the victimizer (albeit via another's orders - a man's) and the redeemer or teacher/mentor. She saves the girl - she traumatized. But the girl can't quite forgive her for being the one who pulled the trigger.

Amanda instead of Percy, becomes the master manipulator - who pushes Percy out of the way and takes over Division - letting Alex go and bringing Alex under her wing. Amanda is the one who molds the girls and agents not Percy. And Oversight ruled by men and women - seems to be both Harris Yulin and the great Alberta Watson (who played Madeline (the Amanda role) in the original tv version).

Michael instead of leading the charge to get Nikita out, joins her, bringing her the black box. He doesn't save her - she saves herself. They are equals in this version more so than in all the others.

Up until the final twenty minutes I feared a return to the status quo, which I'd seen in the trope to date - Michael saves Nikita, Percy controls Alex...etc. But Amanda surprised me and took center stage. And they flipped it - making Michael and Nikita the two agents on the run, and Amanda and Alex the two chasing them. Alex - Nikita's creation, as opposed to Nikita being Michael's or even Percy's. The gender biasis seems to be lifted finally.



Girl with the Dragon Tattoo by Steig Larrson (hereinafter: "Girl" or GWTDT)

Before going too in depth on this novel - I should provide a bit of background on Larrson. Larrson prior to being a journalist was a sci-fi fan, who wrote for and edited science fiction fanzines.

Here's a quick blurb from wiki:

Larsson was initially a political activist for the Kommunistiska Arbetareförbundet (Communist Workers League), a photographer, and one of Sweden's leading science fiction fans.In politics he was the editor of the Swedish Trotskyist journal Fjärde internationalen, journal of the Swedish section of the Fourth International. He also wrote regularly for the weekly Internationalen.

Larsson spent part of 1977 in Eritrea, training a squad of female Eritrean People's Liberation Front guerrillas in the use of grenade launchers. He was forced to abandon that work due to having contracted a kidney disease. Upon his return to Sweden, he worked as a graphic designer at the largest Swedish news agency, Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå (TT) between 1977 and 1999.

Larsson's political convictions, as well as his journalistic experiences, led him to found the Swedish Expo Foundation, similar to the British Searchlight Foundation, established to "counteract the growth of the extreme right and the white power-culture in schools and among young people."He also became the editor of the foundation's magazine, Expo, in 1995.

When he was not at his day job, he worked on independent research of right-wing extremism in Sweden. In 1991, his research resulted in his first book Extremhögern (Right-wing extremism). Larsson quickly became instrumental in documenting and exposing Swedish extreme right and racist organizations; he was an influential debater and lecturer on the subject, reportedly living for years under death threats from his political enemies. The political party Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna) was a major subject of his research.

"Girl" or GWTDT - feels a times like reading a journalistic piece in The Financial Times or
The Economist or maybe The Wall Street Journal. It has that same weird emotional distance. You can tell the writer was a journalist. Also the translator, Reege Keeland, is definitely British or UK - since the English translation has UK spellings and UK words - examples include arse (not ass) and gaol, not jail - although he uses both. Also "boot" not "trunk". These are minor but pop out. In some respects it is more realistic since someone from Sweden is far more likely to learn British English than American English. I hope Fincher is aware of this while doing an American version of the film. Possibly since he cast two Brits in the male lead roles.

The first 250 pages of Girl read like a financial journalistic piece in well The Financial Times business section. I felt like I was reading a business journal. After page 250 - when we meet Lisbeth Salander - the girl in question, or the girl with the dragon tattoo - the novel starts to take off. She's far more interesting than Blomkvist - the financial journalist who has gotten in over his head on not one but three matters. He's the damsel in this tale and the kind caretaker. Larrson unlike many of his mystery/thriller contemporaries, flips the two roles. Larrson also explores in precise and often graphic detail the victimized female trope and it is not pretty.



Unlike Nikita, or even Buffy, River, Echo, et al - Lisbeth Salander is not a pretty girl or a girl who has popped out of a magazine. She has body piercings all over her body, tattoos everywhere, and is aneorexic with no breasts or bust to speak of. She is four foot ten, if that. Tiny. Black hair. And anti-social. She looks like a victim, but it quickly becomes clear that she is anything but and has little patience for victims and refuses to be saved. It's clear from the outset that she has been victimized by a male dominated and male run social welfare system, and a patriachial society.

While it is tempting to call Girl male fantasy - it's not. Unlike Joss Whedon's Dollhouse or even Alias or for that matter Nikita - there's nothing erotic about Lisbeth or her tale. The rape that occurs in the book is told factually - like you were reading a forensic report. Dry and clear. Hard. And painful. We are told in detail that after it - Lisbeth can barely walk. That she had to call in sick and lay in bed for a week. That she couldn't sit down. That her abdomen hurt. The author does not allow the reader the privilege to look away or to get off on it, and if we do - we are shown how painful it was to Lisbeth - then she gets revenge. And she gets it - well I'll let you read the book. Lisbeth becomes a sort of avenging angel for women who have been raped, beaten or abused by men. Anyone actually who has.

And it comes as no surprise that the Swedish title was originally - "Men Who Hate Women". It's a story about a missing woman, that's the central mystery, then it rapidly becomes a tale about a serial rapist/murderer/kidnapper who along with his father before him, kidnapped, raped, and killed women. Picking those who were immigrants or had no one, people like Lisbeth. Larrson dissects the misogyny and male fantasy surrounding it with a deftness that is almost cringe inducing. The serial killer in the novel turns his killings into parodies of bibilical passages from Leviticus. And rapes his own sister repeatedly.

Blomkvist doesn't save or guide Salander in this novel, although I'm told he does do this in the next two - falling into the trap of the trope, unfortunately. But here, Salander is the rescuer. And Salander takes on the traditional role of the hard-bitten male hero. Unfortunately the comparison stops there - in the tales of the hard-bitten male hero often portrayed by Clint Eastwood back in the day...the hero mistrusts women, mistrusts men and may have been abused as child or just has Mommy or Daddy issues. He was not raped, beaten, and repeatedly by the system or his father. His not someone who has been victimized. David Baldacci's hardbitten hero is cynical but from war or the system or unlucky in love, not well like this. We don't really see the male version of this trope because it does not exist. Men aren't victimized in quite this way or if they are it is rare. Women on the other hand - are. Unfortunately in rather brutal numbers. The statistics on rape, domestic abuse, and slayings aren't pretty. We all know this of course. And since we can't really do much about it, except protect ourselves and our loved one's as best we can - we try not to think about it. Larson shines a light on it in his books.

Without going into too much detail - Blomkvist owes Salander a debt of gratitude at the end, but we and Salander are made acutely aware of the unlevel playing field they both occupy. He is free to do as he pleases, she is not. He has privilege, she does not. She continues to be victimized by the very system that he to a degree lives within, even though as a journalist he attempts to expose the underlying corruption - but since, like it or not, he is privileged and as such holds power over her - she runs from him. She knows he holds all the power here. He forgets it. Just as his gal friend and co-editor, Erika Berger, a powerful woman in her own right - and his equal or at least it seems, is also to a degree beholden to him. He holds the power there as well. The power dynamics remain uneven. The story is never really Lisbeth's so much as it is Blomkvist's. She remains the girl he wants to save or rather the author wants to save.

Which is the problem with this trope. That's not to say that the writer is not a feminist and does not do an exemplary job in exposing the brutalities committed against women in our society - he does. And Lisbeth and Erika both, to give him credit - are powerful women, women who are not established as male fantasy figures - which is what separates Girl from both Nikita (above - although Nikita stopped being a male fantasy show rather quickly) and Buffy/Dollhouse/Firefly. In some respects this is due to the genre and the fact that it is a novel not a film - although I'm told the film is similar in this respect. The failings if any in Larrson's tale, besides the sometimes dry and often humorless journalistic style (although there is a dry wit that emerges at times), is that Blomkvist does eventually save and help Lisbeth or mentor her, or try to. But this is also, realistic. As for Blomkvist being a ladies man - extremely kind to women and an attentive lover, a marked contrast to almost all the other men in the novel - I think this is the writer's way of underlining the differences between the male testrone fantasy of the macho guy who treats woman like possessions or candy and the guy who treats them like equals, human beings not a separate species to dispose of how he see's fit. He is attempting to show how women should be treated - with respect. And while it may feel a bit too good to be true - I think it is a necessary contrast.

It's hard for me not to relate Girl back to Buffy and Whedon, a horror writer who appears to be obsessed with this particular trope because he states, somewhat disingenuously, I think, that he identifies with it. I don't believe it is possible for a man to fully identify with the victimized female, any more than I believe it is possible for a white person to fully identify with a person of color. We can feel empathy, we can imagine. It has taken me years to fully realize this - even though more than one person has pointed it out to me. Larrson - I will state - does not appear to take the same condescending and at times patronizing view towards his subject matter as the television and Hollywood writers do, nor does he appear to believe that he can begin to identify with Lisbeth. Instead he just tells her story. Takes us inside her head. And inside Blomkvist. Not really judging her one way or the other. This may be due to different backgrounds - Larrson has clearly seen things that many of us cannot imagine, and been in danger for his life. He is not a Hollywood writer sitting in a mansion in California. And he died long before his Millenium series was even published. It never achieved the seven issues he envisioned. Only three were finished before he died.

While it is true that Larrson's novel is a mystery not a horror tale per se, it feels like one.
Especially if you are female. I thought after reading it - that I don't want to visit Sweden any time soon and especially not as a single woman traveling alone. Granted NYC isn't necessarily much safer. I'm careful here. There's a realism and to a degree an optimism in Larsson's writing. Lisbeth rises above her circumstances. Men don't save her. They attempt to keep her down. But she fights back. They don't win. She's not their victim, their weapon, or their tool or sex object. She has sex if she wants it. And she chooses her own path.

Whedon's tales try to go in a similar direction, but he undercuts them. The girl is reigned back in, placed under the male supervision or his guidance in some way. We are reminded that he is her God. Her creator. Her power-source. Her mentor. Sure River flies the Firefly, but only at Mal's allowance. Mal is there. And sure Buffy is out killing vampires - but she's crashing on Xander's couch. And sure Echo is off to seek her fortune, but Ballard sits inside her brain, and it's clear Boyd created her. Nikita may get to ride off into the stormy skies, but Michael drives the car and Alex may get to choose her own life, but the Oversite committee has more men than women on it. Lisbeth takes off and Blomkvist tries to help - but she ignores him. You have no power over me. The scream is a silent one, but heard all the same. We'll see if it continues throughout the series. I'm working my way through The Girl Who Played With Fire as I write this.

Comments

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

Interesting take on the girl with the dragon tattoo. I think my main criticism was that Blomkvist is such a Mary Sue, but in the end I think authors are allowed weaknesses. They write about what they know and that is fine.

I think a very interesting point you made is that Larsson being a feminist but not trying to patronize women into how to be feminist. I'm not entirely sure, he never does that and I've heard complaints that Lisbet is a highly unrealistic character. But then there was a case where an abused girl upon reading the books caught her abuser in the act with a video camera and brought him to justice.

Mainly though, I agree with you, he focuses on writing a male role model. Blomkvist has an annoying ton of virtues but he has them not by stomping over women. Makes it a series that is definitely important an important read for men.

By the way, if I'd pick my country by how women are treated I'd move to Skadinavia in an instant.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

By the way, if I'd pick my country by how women are treated I'd move to Skadinavia in an instant.

Really? I'd stay in NYC. But what I know is obviously limited.

No time to respond to the rest of your comment right now. Be back later.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

My experiences with Swedish men have probably been unusually good (there are bound to be swedish jerks somewhere) but legislation and mentality wise Sweden is pretty hard to beat as women's rights go. Rape is actually persecuted much more severely than in most western countries. Prostitution is illegal from the buyer's side instead of the selling side. Reproductive rights are not in question. Over 50% of men take paternity leave...

Yeah, Larson invents a fictional Swedish serial killer, but as reality goes there are not many to chose from, and I could find non that specifically targeted women.
But I guess crime stories are bound to give a distorted picture of reality. If I'd go by the crime shows on tv, I'd not dare to take a walk in NYC for fear of being shot.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

But I guess crime stories are bound to give a distorted picture of reality. If I'd go by the crime shows on tv, I'd not dare to take a walk in NYC for fear of being shot.

True. But the US media has proven itself to be highly unreliable and adept at lying. There are multiple sites on the internet - The Smoking Gun and FactChecker that bring that to light.

Also - no gunshots. It's actually the safest city I've been to (and that includes London, Paris, Kansas City, East and West Berlin, Sydney Australia, Melbourne, Philadelphia, Istanbul, San Franscisco, Colorado Springs, Houston, Denver, El Paso, San Antonio, Santa Fe, Miami (oh god), Savannah, Charleston, Indianapolis, Halifax, Nova Scotia...

Larrson's books feel like journalistic accounts, although it is disingenuous of me to say that I believe them, of course I don't - they are fiction after all. Not non-fiction. The Vanger family only exists in a dead man's imagination.

However - he does shine a light on the misogyny and treatment of women in the state welfare system...which is not a problem limited to Sweden by any stretch of the imagination. I can cite similar problems within the US system - already have done so. As I'm certain everyone else on my flist can within their own countries.
The newspapers are certainly filled with it as are net blogs. (Have you read gabrielle's Sunday blog with all it's links?) So yes, it exists in all countries, unfortunately. And it does appear to be common trope in Swedish mysteries - from The Killing to well Wallander. But it is also a common trope in US mysteries and British mysteries and Turkish mysteries...so...

My own experience? Most of the men I've met are rather like Blomkvist. The men in my family certainly are - in that they treat women as equals, human beings, with kindness. But I've admittedly been lucky.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Oh and I should clarify? I'd stay in NYC for the same reason I've no plans to move to Alaska or Iceland. It's not as cold, the winters are fairly mild in comparison (not a fan of freezing temperatures - Kansas City was bad enough, thank you) and it isn't dark during the winter all day long. OR light during the summer all night. I couldn't handle that. Would drive me bonkers. But YMMV.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

Of course there still is misogyny in Sweden, but all in all statistics, law and mentality wise it's one of the countries that are dedicated to feminism.

(Which is certainly something I'd never say about Austria)

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

And it does appear to be common trope in Swedish mysteries - from The Killing to well Wallander.

I would say one reason why Scandinavian (The Killing is Danish) crime fiction tends to focus on misogyny is exactly because awareness of it is pretty high over here; in a society where we like to think we take for granted that men and women should be equal, where most politicians must at least pay lip service to feminism, the simplest way to make the audience hate a villain is to make him a misogynist (much the same way schlocky US fiction tends to make villains racists). Not saying we're a perfect part of the world, but both the laws and the public discourse have come pretty far, even if reality doesn't always reflect it.

Another reason would be that the trope maker for all Scandinavian crime fiction is Sjöwall & Wahlöö's Martin Beck series, which was explicitly designed to be a Marxist deconstruction of society's power structures - and Swedish lefties were always at least nominally feminist. The political angle is built into the formula. Problem is, most of it is just so incredibly predictable... but that's another rant.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I think my main criticism was that Blomkvist is such a Mary Sue, but in the end I think authors are allowed weaknesses. They write about what they know and that is fine.

Why? Because two women in the novel seduce him? Or he seems appealing to three? Or that he has a lot of similar characteristics to Stieg Larrson? I'm not sure that really makes him a Mary Sue character - if it did, Xander Harris would be a Mary Sue as would quite a few others I can think of.

I can see how you may see him as one, but I don't think it fits.
Those outside fandom - certainly don't see it. My mother doesn't at all. (I've been discussing it a lot with her - because she talked me into reading it.)

I think a very interesting point you made is that Larsson being a feminist but not trying to patronize women into how to be feminist. I'm not entirely sure, he never does that and I've heard complaints that Lisbet is a highly unrealistic character. But then there was a case where an abused girl upon reading the books caught her abuser in the act with a video camera and brought him to justice.

I've unfortunately met quite a few Lisbeth's - so the character rings very true to me. More true actually than the character usually does in this trope. Often she is sexualized or turned into an appealing sex symbol for the male - examples include Buffy, Echo, Faith, River, Nikita (all versions), Jennifer Garner's Alias character - as well as Natalie Portman in the film The Professional. She's pretty and attractive and turns him on. Here - Lisbeth is described as unattractive and quite the opposite, which I found interesting - because it is the exact opposite of how the trope is usually conveyed. The only thing she has in common with the Buffy's, Faith's, and Echo's is that she is tiny. But the reason she's tiny - is because she has to look like a victim. An important ingredient.

Another difference - I've discovered in the trope - is that usually the male protagonist teaches the girl how to fight or is her sensei or watcher, here - Blomkvist is obviously NOT a fighter. The man is pathetic as a fighter. He takes on the traditional female role in the narrative. Most novels in this specific genre (serial killer thriller) have "macho" male heroes, who need to be comforted and learn how to trust. Or in the victimized female trope - they teach the girl how to fight and toughen up. Here - Blomkvist takes on a nurturing role often reserved for the female character. He teaches her how to trust, to care for others, to love. To not fight. Her fighting scares him. He's a pacifist, non-violent. Part of the reason both Cecilia and Lisbeth fall for him is that he is the first men they've met who didn't "demand" anything, force them, and treated them as a human being, an equal.

I think Daniel Craig may be miscast in the American version of the film - since Blomkvist is not an action hero and Craig is.
Lisbeth is the action hero, Blomkvist is not. That's a big difference. Because if you look at Whedon's take on the trope - without exception - the older male mentor - teaches the girl how to fight, to become weapon. It's true with Nikita as well. Larrson is the first to go in the opposite direction.

It's an important distinction.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

Take look at the Swedish movies maybe, they are pretty neat. Although Lisbeth is not as she is described in the books (taller but even less sexualized).

Blomkvist has sex with every single somewhat important female character in the books. That's one part that makes him seem sueish, the other part is that he is very similar to the author but of course idealized. But like I said above, an author is allowed such weaknesses and in this case it might be even good. Blomkvist might be highly idealized, but at least it's an alternative concept of masculinity that gets him into bed with all the girls.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Also it's not really that many girls. It's only three, after all.
That's not that many. He doesn't sleep with Harriet - at least not in the book I just read.

Also, it makes sense that both Cecilia and Lisbeth sleep with him. Cecilia - is lonely and he's the first kind man she's met (her family is sick). And Lisbeth well, sleeps with a lot of people. Erika? They have an on again/off again relationship going back years. If it was more contrived - I'd agree with you, *cough*Captain Kirk*cough*, but I think it actually works. Keep in mind there are important women in the story - Harriet is actually more important than Cecilia, as is, for that matter Anita. We see more of Cecilia because we're in Blomkvist's pov.

Blomkvist might be highly idealized, but at least it's an alternative concept of masculinity that gets him into bed with all the girls.

Agreed.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

He doesn't sleep with Harriet - at least not in the book I just read.

I hope it's ok if I spoiler you in that respect...

S

P

O

I

L


E


R

He sleeps with her in the later books (and it's completely pointless too because her story is closed after the first book).

Like I said Blomkvist is a total Sue for me, but I think that does not always have to be a bad thing. It's a bit annoying at times but an unrestricted narcissistic fantasy is what we need sometimes.

[elisi]

Darcy and I watched the (Swedish) movie a few months ago, and although it's structurally a bit different (Lisbeth is introduced right from the start and hers and Blomkvist's stories told in parallel until they meet), it's clear they stayed true to the feel of the books.

And I too was impressed with how Lisbeth is victimised (repeatedly) but refuses to embrace that label - as well as how the finger is unerringly pointed at the perpetrators. How those in power abuse their privilege.

And sure Buffy is out killing vampires - but she's crashing on Xander's couch.
The comics aren't canon. Buffy is (or at least was) in Rome, dating The Immortal. Living her life, having her own flat that she shared with her sister (with Andrew crashing on her couch, when he ruined his own place).

Anyway, I never knew about Larsson's past, thank you.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

The comics aren't canon. Buffy is (or at least was) in Rome, dating The Immortal. Living her life, having her own flat that she shared with her sister (with Andrew crashing on her couch, when he ruined his own place).

Hee. You subscribe to Greenwalt's view.

To clarify: Not arguing about interpretations of canon here. Was discussing Whedon specifically. If memory serves, Girl in Question was written and directed by David Greenwalt not Joss Whedon.

Whedon wrote the comics - I was commenting on "Whedon's" interpretation. So they are canonical to "Whedon".

And I too was impressed with how Lisbeth is victimised (repeatedly) but refuses to embrace that label - as well as how the finger is unerringly pointed at the perpetrators. How those in power abuse their privilege.

Girl dances a thin line here. But I think that bit comes through quite clearly.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I believe TGIQ was written by Stephen DeKnight and Drew Goddard and directed by Greenwalt (who I always felt was somewhat undervalued by the fandom).

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

Empathy and solidarity are good and welcome - but i always found that it is more fruitful to look at one's own privilege and work with that, analyzing, dissecting, deconstructing that which drives "the dark matter", so to speak. (And i don't mean the liberal guilt trip, here.)

1. One of the most influencial books of my life is "Male Fantasies" ( http://www.upress.umn.edu/Books/T/theweleit_male.html ) by Klaus Theweleit ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Theweleit ), in which the author dissects the proto fascist male psyche by analyzing fascist german literature from the 20s of the last century. Of course, misogyny plays a large part in the analysis - but by looking at the aroused abuser. This means that Theweleit confronts himself with his own dark matter, instead of trying to walk in someone else's shoes. It is still a work of solidarity, asking the (male) reader to confront and overcome the internalized mechanisms of bourgeois patriarchy and hatred towards women.

For anyone interested in pop culture this book is a wealth of information since the author reflects and uses pop culture (comic strips, art, advertisment) of the sixties and seventies heavily.

I haven't read th english translation but since psychoanalysis science is rather strong in the anglosaxon university community i suspect it is a very good translation.

2. For the reasons you state "Anne" is probably the best episode of BtVS in regard to the victimized girl trope (and the general political scope): Non-sexualized female victims gain back their own agency by destroying their oppressors, while incorporating a much broader scope than the "attempt to confine them within 'purely female', feminist organisations"/narratives (A. Kollontai). In "Anne", the writers overcome their own dark matter in a way i have never seen before or again in BtVS.

3. In august, i have 4 weeks of vacation ahead of me. Yay! Larrson is high on my "must-read" list for that time (even though he was a Trotzkyist... ;-)).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

In august, i have 4 weeks of vacation ahead of me.

Ugh, rub it in. I only have two weeks all year long and three personal days. I don't get three weeks until 2013, and won't get four until sometime in 2020. So unfair! Really hate the US's view of vacation..;-)

For the reasons you state "Anne" is probably the best episode of BtVS in regard to the victimized girl trope (and the general political scope)...

This may well be true. Never really occurred to me. But in Anne, Buffy confronts both the devil boyfriend/father who haunts her dreams, and the devil guidance counselor/mentor who yanks her into hell. Unfortunately...it doesn't end there - since it becomes a recurring theme in S3 and often not examined quite as well.

One of the most influencial books of my life is "Male Fantasies" ( http://www.upress.umn.edu/Books/T/theweleit_male.html ) by Klaus Theweleit ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Theweleit ), in which the author dissects the proto fascist male psyche by analyzing fascist german literature from the 20s of the last century.

Interesting. Your comment reminds me a little of a film I saw a while back entitled The Perverts Guide to Cinema - which basically took Hitchock films and many foreign thrillers and broke them down along Fruedian and Jungian terms - or as male fantasies. The woman was deemed other or a key part of the male psyche only (ie. his anima) that he was struggling to deal with and not a person in her own right. I wrote a review about it several years ago.

I sense that happening a great deal in Whedon's writing - the female avatar or victimized girl often feels like the personification of Whedon's own psyche or anima. Not a real person. She's often highly sexualized (although this may be more Hollywood's influence than actually Whedon's - we have to give Hollywood a little credit after all) and there's often a male, usually older, controlling or keeping her in line. She's tiny.
This authoritative male is often very tall, with few exceptions.
And Hollywood does play a role here - since it is controlled by men and tends to go after a male audience. While Whedon's shows were marketed towards tween girls ("tween" - meaning between the ages of 10-18), they were equally aimed at the post and pre adolescent young male market. Dollhouse was directly aimed at the young male market. As was Firefly. In fact Buffy was the only series aimed at the female one, which explains a great deal if you've seen all of them.

Whedon unlike Larsson may not have had the ability to jump outside the box. He is after all a product of the Hollywood machine and it is a male dominated unit. Not so sure you can call it fascist. But Americans don't tend to be as obsessed or fearful of fascism as Europeans - because we've never experienced it directly. While we fought in WWII, we were safely over here and the enemy that scared us the most was in Japan, the one that attacked us directly. I'm not sure most Americans (those who weren't Jewish or of German descent, or didn't serve over there) understood what Nazism was - except through media.

Of course, misogyny plays a large part in the analysis - but by looking at the aroused abuser. This means that Theweleit confronts himself with his own dark matter, instead of trying to walk in someone else's shoes. It is still a work of solidarity, asking the (male) reader to confront and overcome the internalized mechanisms of bourgeois patriarchy and hatred towards women.

Larsson doesn't quite accomplish that. If anything I think he distances the reader. But that may just be my impression. It's hard to ask the male reader to confront it without falling into the trap of turning him on. I say this - because I think Whedon attempted to do just that in Dollhouse and instead turned on the segment of the audience he wished to address, while alienating the segment that felt victimized or he was attempting to support and aid. I definitely think what you state above regarding Theweleit confronting his own dark matter - is what Whedon attempted to do in Dollhouse and failed miserably. But he tried to do it on Fox and in Hollywood - which I think may have been the problem. Hollywood doesn't like to confront its own darkness.

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your elaborate answer. I have some thoughts - but unfortunately no time. I hope i can get back to you in the next days. :)

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

I wasn't very fond of Dragon Tattoo, oddly enough because to me it did feel like a male fantasy. Lisbeth seemed very much like River, the damaged waif, just with a Suicide Girls edge. And then we had Blomkvist, who gets with every notable female character under a certain age, presented the only one who she can love and trust? It seemed too Mary Sue for me, especially the ending which as I recall had Lisbeth being heartbroken after seeing Blomkvist with his other girlfriend. I haven't read on in the series so I'll just say for the first book, I appreciate what Larsson was trying to do but the execution was off. Like Joss, I think he could have benefitted from a strong analysis of the text.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I had similar issues while reading it - but in comparison to prior versions of the trope - and in how the story is written, I give Larrson a bit of credit for what he was attempting to do - which was depict to the male reader the wrong behavior and the right behavior. Example Harald Vanger/Martin Vanger =wrong. Henrik Vanger =right. He does it throughout.

But you are correct - the fact that Lisbeth falls for him, yet he remains loftily removed - means he like Mal in Serenity, clearly remains in the male fantasy position - it feels a bit too much like heterosexual male guilt (or "white liberal guilt"). But, that unfortunately seems to be a constant in this trope. The tv series Nikita - currently airing is the only thing that appears to jump a little outside of that.

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

Maybe it really is all about power - no matter how good the intentions how often do we see the male protagonist giving up the hero position? I haven't read the rest of the Larsson books but I understand they are more Lisbeth-centred, but as you say Mal gets saved by River and lets her fly the ship but he's still definitely the captain, I don't think he's about to turn Serenity into a democracy. In the Buffyverse, Buffy's journey is to share power (with mixed non-canon results), Angel never gives up his authority.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Well, the best we can hope for in a male ruled world is equal partnership - which is really all I want. I want equality. That's feminism. It grates that we don't already have it.

What hit me about Larrson's novels and why I think his take on the trope, while imperfect, is far better than Whedon's and Besson's - is that for the first time the male mentor is not teaching the girl heroine to become the fighter. Blomkvist if you think about it is not portrayed in the traditional male role in this genre. He's not a fighter. Can't fight at all. Rather pathetic actually. And clearly in over his head. Instead he takes the traditional female role of nuturer, he supports her, and is empathetic. Yes, the criticism remains that he seems to have to aid her in some way - that she can't be made whole without him and of course she falls for him. BUT...it makes sense why Lisbeth does fall for him - he's the first person who treats her as an equal, as human, with kindness. Not as a victim and not as a thing. It's a realistic response.

Compare to Whedon and even Luc Besson - in which both writers create victimized female characters who are a)hot pretty girls,
and b)with older male mentors who teach them how to become weapons.

Larsson doesn't fall into that particular trap - Blomkvist doesn't train Lisbeth to become the fighter. She knows more than he does. She trains herself. There is no male sensei or trainer.
No Giles. No Michael. No Spike. No Angel. Only Xander and this version is more feminine than Xander is. He doesn't look at her strangely for being more physically powerful than him. He takes on the female role in the trope and she takes on the male.
Yet, she's been victimized by the male run system. He's in some respects Larsson's counterpoint to that system. How one should treat women.

What hits me as different is that shift. For the first time - the girl is not trained to become the fighter - the powerful tool by a man, she becomes that way to cop, the man comes in to aid her in rediscovering her humanity, her ability to connect to others without fear, and distrust. A role traditionally reserved to female characters - in Whedon's world this role was reserved to Joyce, Willow, Tara...if at all.

It's why, while imperfect, I think, Larsson's take on the trope is a bit better than those who have come before him.

[fidhle.livejournal.com]

Reg Keeland is a pseudonym for an American translator, who currently lives in New Mexico. He may have used British english as the books were published in England before they were published in this country.

Noomi Rapace, who was a fan of the books long before she ever thought of auditioning for the role of Lisbeth, thinks that, while Blomqvist may be what Larsson wanted to be, he actually identified more with Lisbeth.

I understand that Larsson, when he was about 15, witnessed a girl he knew being gang raped by some guys that he knew. He didn't know what to do, and wound up doing nothing to stop the guys. Later he went to apologize to the girl for not jumping in to stop the rape, which apology was not accepted. Coincidentally or not, the girl was named Lisbeth.

Lisbeth Salander, throughout all three books and movies, is her own agent. She does basically what she wants to do, and she hooks up with others, including Blomkvist, on her own terms. The second two books provide great detail on her background which helps explain why she is the way she is, but the one thing she is not is simply a victim. She never stops fighting for herself and those she cares about. The second two books are actually one story, with the third book beginning immediately after the second book ends. Dragon Tattoo is more of a stand-alone book.

I really do recommend the movies as the portrayal of Lisbeth by Noomi Rapace is terrific. Noomi gave a lot of thought to Lisbeth's character, and at one point threatened to leave the film if the director required her to do some things she felt Lisbeth simply would not do. Noomi prevailed on that one and it made for a much better movie.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Thanks. Interesting that Reg used English as opposed to American - maybe it was because of when each version was published.

The bit on Noomi Rapace is fascinating. They wanted her to appear in the US version of the films - but she turned them down. She couldn't play the character again. I can't say I blame her.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Oh, should add, your comments fit my mother's on the books or reflect her's. She said the same thing. It's interesting how differently people react to the novels.

[fidhle.livejournal.com]

The Swedish movies were all filmed in sequence, rather like the Lord if the Rings cycle, so Noomi lived with the characterbfor about 18 to 24 months straight. At the party after the last day of filming, she started throwing up. She said that she thinks that was her letting Lisbeth go. She apparently had a very emotional response to playing Lisbeth.

On the other hand, it made her into an international star, and she will be the female lead in the next Sherlock Holmes movie to be released in the fall.