Wednesday 18 February 2015

The Glee Problem, Ep. 1: Tone, Humour, and Very Special Episodes.

Like all who’ve watched this bizarre happening from the beginning, I have a few thoughts on Glee. These are going to be completely stream-of-consciousness because I quite like the idea of just putting stuff out there these days, as opposed to overthinking and –editing until I get tired of talking about it. I will, however, review and refine these thoughts later, once I’ve teased out what I think are the most interesting points. So, these are subject to change, please let me know if I’ve said something inaccurate or problematic so I can consider and rectify my mistakes, or if you agree or disagree with these ramblings in general. Thanks! Now, onward!

 So, everybody’s favourite “is that still on?” musical dramedy after-school special show choir series with Jane Lynch in it, Glee, is indeed coming to an end after its sixth season. Long-time followers of the show, including myself, were both ecstatic and slightly sad, as although it remains a steadfast guilty pleasure, after the first or second season (maybe the third, depending on who you ask), the series swiftly lost whatever understated “black humour” charm it once had (did you know Joss Whedon directed an episode of season one?)1

The series’ writers struggled to mix “edgy, nasty humour” vibes with “inspirational underdog story with iTunes bestselling covers” vibes. The racist, ableist, homophobic or just generally ignorant jokes were difficult to swallow when they were coming from characters we were also supposed to find admirable. Despite its cries of self-empowerment and -belief, dismantling social hierarchies and honouring underdogs, the series began a long history of employing the “male saviour” trope, with “heroic” straight white male character swooping in to save their insecure women and gay men, usually through song. Also, there were more annoying jokes about lesbians scissoring than most family shows tend to include.

Characters graduated and moved from William McKinley High to New York City (cue wish fulfilment and random celebrity cameos), they brought in several stock characters to replace the graduates in season four. It was a hot mess. By season six they swept those forgettable characters under the achingly hipster vintage rug in Rachel’s Brooklyn loft and brought in some new new kids, and all of the original graduates decided just to hang around their old high school every day.

And yet, we watched. Or hate-watched. We laughed at the revolving door policy for wildly inconsistent and forgettable characters (Sugar Motta, dreadlock guy, Demi Lovato's character, that guy Matt), complained joyously about the confusing, swirling dirge of storylines which are never resolved, and watched agape as the show became increasingly meta, pointing out its flaws and spiralling into strange, surreal, self-referential madness. At its best, it’s fun and affecting, at its worst, well, it makes you feel a lot better about the weird fan fiction you wrote when you were 14, because at least you were consistent.

(btw, I just found this hilariously titled article on the Glee Wiki that addresses the inconsistencies and weirdness - fans don't miss a beat, aha.)

Anyway, what I wanted to talk about today constitutes one of the major flaws the series presented since quite early on, and that’s its representation of marginalised groups and minorities. Because, as much as it’s fun to make fun of how bad Glee is, this is a pretty troubling issue that the series has not exactly worked on improving.

Glee has always prided itself on its varied cast and themes of inclusion, featuring characters of different races, abilities, and sexualities early on. Arguably the straight white male was still the cast’s heroic leader, in student Finn and teacher Will, but hey, there was a kid in a wheelchair, an effeminate gay guy and a goth Asian girl, soooo yay representation! They were there. They sang. But seriously, many individual episodes focused on the characters’ struggles with difference or feeling unacceptable as they are, from Rachel being ashamed of her “Jewish” nose, Artie wishing he didn’t need his wheelchair, to Santana struggling with her sexuality. The foregrounding of issues of identity in teens and young adults is a core component of the series’ modis operandi, with a particular focus on self-confidence and –belief. Again, whether or not this is done effectively, or with any respect for their audience, is another matter, but the “after school special” intentions of the series are clear.

The series has also always prided itself on its edgy or black humour, and interestingly, many of the show’s jokes, from “villain” characters (Sue, Santana) and “hero” characters (Rachel, Brittany) alike, have been rooted in more or less laughing at minorities. The “running joke” of Brittany mixing up Unique and Mercedes, the series' two black female-presenting characters, is one example. The jokes like these, from characters that we otherwise root for, are ambiguous – it wasn’t exactly “oh Brittany, you’re so clueless you can’t tell two individuals apart,” more “oh yes you’re right, there are two black female-presenting individuals with big singing voices here! Haha just like Aretha Franklin, amirite?!”

It’s said that the role of satire is to punch up and critique the protected, dominant culture, rather than punch down to poke fun at oppressed minorities. Glee has the chance to do this, but never does. Whilst Sue makes fun of Will’s hair a lot, she doesn’t joke about his male saviour complex, or about how he belittles certain students and favours others from his privileged position as teacher, about how he planted weed on a student to blackmail them, or about the fact that he was a Spanish teacher who didn’t speak Spanish (I’m still mad about this last one). There’s plenty to critique about him that would be more hard-hitting, that would really break down their flaws and flaws in our society. But nope, all we can critique about Will is his curly hair.2

Tonally Glee has been way off the mark for a long time. Hell, once a male character admitted that he was sexually abused as a child by an older woman, and when his male friends shockingly whooped in awe ("awesome, every boy’s dream come true," etc), Will told them to be quiet, but didn’t punish them or point out why that is such  a harmful view to express. A female character suffering from an eating disorder passed out from exhaustion during an important glee club performance, and her peers groaned and blamed her for their loss and made fun of her, and at no point was this pointed out as wrong or insensitive.

It’s like the writers of Glee believe that simply featuring a character from a minority group, or mentioning a traumatic or difficult topic, is enough to lend the show weight and hubris and “educational value” for its young audience. They simply mention these differences or experiences, often in deeply problematic ways, and yet never, even in a satirical or humorous way, suggest how we can respectfully or safely navigate these issues in our own lives. Ultimately, Glee comes across as making fun of serious issues, rather than making fun of those who are ignorant or insensitive.

There’s also the “Very Special Episode” issue, which likely requires a whole separate discussion.3 In earlier series of Glee, same-sex kisses or cliffhangers were used to drum up extra viewers, but in 2013, during season 4, an episode centred on a school shooting scare aired, just four months after news of unspeakably tragic real-life school shooting was heard across the world. Critical responses to this ranged from harrowing and emotional to exploitative and manipulative, and whilst the acting in the episode was effective and understated, I unfortunately tend to agree with the latter reaction.4 It just seemed to me as if the show was jumping on to a hot button issue for the sake of it; the trauma of the scare was forgotten almost immediately, and life moved on at William McKinley High without another mention of the event.

Could this lack of depth actually be a good thing? Perhaps our family television doesn’t need to educate or serve justice to every insensitive commenter, and perhaps it is better to leave things up for discussion than setting down any kind of moral imperative. I’m not sure how to feel about this. Whilst the series loves the “individual underdogs come together to lift each other up” trope, it also relies on mean-spirited humour that pokes fun at difference, and often characters express more derision than support towards one another. Problematic statements about race or trauma or ability or personal expression are left hanging without resolution, and often come from the mouths of characters we are supposed to admire and root for. Heavy issues are dropped for shock value, and then forgotten about. In short, the series tries to be all things for all people – we're supposed to watch and be inspired, but also laugh at how awful everyone is. Considering all this, perhaps Glee is better off staying away from content it can’t handle respectfully.

Next I wanna talk about the representation of a couple of particular groups in Glee’s past and present, then about its unique relationship with its audience and fan fiction, and also about metafiction and jokes within the series. I love reading Glee critiques and conversations, so if you have any thoughts, I'd love to hear them!


1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_On_(Glee)

2 Sue is a difficult character because whilst she was initially painted as a two-dimensional, moustache-twiddling villain, she’s stuck around long enough that she can’t sustain that, and the writers have attempted at different times to give her some admirable or sympathetic qualities. She even helps to support the Glee club at times, and they have supported her during times of need, for example at her sister’s funeral. The fact that she has these moments of expressing actual human emotion, and at times acts out of kindness, but then returns to being a cardboard cut-out meanie pants, is dissonant and jarring and weird. But more on that another time.

3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_special_episode

4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_Star_(Glee), I am all over this Wikipedia-as-a-source game today hey.

Monday 2 June 2014

Dungeon Crawl: Links and Loves v.4

Good morning friends! On to the links:


When I first visited New Zealand, I was a teenage Lord of the Rings tragic dying to take in the landscape. Here's a list of the breathtaking filming locations used in Game of Thrones, from Ireland to Iceland. 


19th century Dickens fanfiction! Actually more common than you'd think, he had a huge fan following. We've talked about some other historic fanfiction here!

Stan Lee and Gail Simone on She-Hulk, sexiness and sexism in comics. Yes! Also, the newest run of She-Hulk is super great and you should read it, or at least admire Kevin Wada's awesome cover art here.

My new sailor scout transformation sequence music. My inner 2007 emo weeb is swooning.

The cast of Matilda recreated the Bruce Bogtrotter chocolate cake scene and it is so, so important.

Highly recommend charlieissocoollike's playlist of eloquent, thoughtful videos on YouTube fame and fandom, particularly those by Vicky, neafcy, and Anthony D'Angelo (sociological theory, heyyy). Even if you're not up on teh YT dramaz (no seriously it's horrific and any searches you do into it come with a sexual abuse trigger warning), anyone who is a fan of a ~real life person~ or who is a ~real life person~ with fans should check it out and have a think about perception, image, and difference.

Stay safe!
Elle

Friday 2 May 2014

Women as Plot Devices: The Sexy Lamp

This is the forth and final plot device, click to read the introduction, and parts one, two, and three

In 2012, another rad comics author Kelly Sue DeConnick described her Sexy Lamp test for fictional ladies, saying:

“As an industry, we have to make more female-led books that are actually worth buying. Never mind the Bechdel test, try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft. They have to be protagonists, not devices.”1

Yeah! (For those who are uncertain of what the Bechdel test is, take a gander at the the Bechdel Test Movie List for a definition. It’s worth Googling, too, for a delightful array of links.)

So, Sexy Lamp. Basically what we’re working with here is an attractive female character who… exists, and that’s about it. She shines a little light on our heroic males, and she may provide a little warmth in times of trouble. She provides warm encouragement, is a beautiful symbol of what’s good (and sexy!) in the world, and stands around waiting to reward our male protagonist once he has slayed the dragon or saved the city. However, she doesn’t express autonomy or affect the plot in any active, meaningful way. 

Nostalgia Chick gives a great rundown of the Sexy Lamp in her review of the natural disaster film “The Day After Tomorrow,” where Emmy Rossum’s character Laura takes this trope hilariously literally, using her body warmth to thaw out our protagonist, Jake Gyllenhaal's Sam, so that he may continue to protect a sub-zero New York City. 

let me explain you a thing
Image from Friendly Mic Productions

The Sexy Lamp may overlap with the Damsel in Distress or Woman in Refrigerator at times. Double Female Plot Device Achievement Unlocked!

Some great examples from literary history include Desdemona in Othello (a Sexy Lamp who ultimately becomes a quasi-Woman in Refrigerator, her death at the hands of our male protagonist teaching him An Important Lesson), Daisy Buchanan in The Great Gatsby, even Bella Swan from Twilight until she began throwing herself off cliffs, the first action she took to substantially impact the plot of her own franchise.

Sexy Lamps are generally not main characters, but exist somewhere in the second tier of cast members, popping in to offer some of her sexy, sexy light to our male hero, before disappearing to move out of the way of the plot. 

I also stalked down this conversation on Tumblr positing a sub style of this woman-as-plot-device, the “Sexy Lamp with a Post-It Stuck On,” wherein the Sexy Lamp also holds and helpfully relays useful information to our male protagonist; “shedding light” on a situation for our hero to then act upon (I hold no responsibility for that shedding light line, that’s from the fiendishly clever folks at Tumblr).2

So a piece of fiction may spectacularly flunk the Bechdel test, but pass the Sexy Lamp test – the women in The Avengers never talk to each other, but they do actively impact the plot of the film – or vice versa. Whilst the Bechdel test’s focus is on having more than one female character, and fostering relationships between those women that aren’t hinged upon men, the Sexy Lamp looks at the actions and roles of each individual female character. These tests are simply a guideline that aim to draw attention to the representation and use of female characters. 

Go read Forrest Helvie’s Sequart article on the Bechdel and Sexy Lamp Tests. It includes more discussion with DeConnick and some helpful examples 


If you need a visual, this lovely cosplayer’s got your back. She’ll pat it whilst encouraging you. Then she’ll cheer for you from a safe distance whilst you save the world.

This is the last installment of the Field Guide to Women as Plot Devices, for now~!

The trend of relegating both primary and secondary female characters to plot devices is firstly a terrible wasted opportunity. It is incredibly important that pop culture narratives include strong, layered, and autonomous characters of all genders. However, these stock tropes also provide intriguing insight into popular perceptions of gender roles, expectations and requirements, and the ways that women are perceived to affect or be affected by male stories. If women in our mainstream narratives are continually othered and made into objects of convenience and symbolism, it will surely continue to be an acceptable way to treat women in contemporary life.


1 Laura Hudson, “Kelly Sue Deconnick on the Evolution of Carol Danvers to Captain Marvel [Interview],” Comics Alliance, Mar 19 2012, http://comicsalliance.com/kelly-sue-deconnick-captain-marvel.

She also spoke about it in this interview: Joshua Yehl, “Kelly Sue DeConnick Talks Captain Marvel, Pretty Deadly, and the Sexy Lamp Test,” IGN, June 20 2013, http://au.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/kelly-sue-deconnick-talks-captain-marvel-pretty-deadly-and-the-sexy-lamp-test.

2 sweaterkittensahoy, trailofdesire, shitifindon, inky-petrel, “Bechdel vs. the sexy lamp,” Tumblr thread, 2013, http://inky-petrel.tumblr.com/post/58417840839/bechdel-vs-the-sexy-lamp.

Thursday 1 May 2014

Women as Plot Devices: Manic Pixie Dream Girl

This is the third entry, click to read the introduction, part one, and part two

Nobody gets hurt here! Again, this is such a famous woman-as-plot-device cliché that it barely needs explanation. Let’s try anyway.

The Manic Pixie Dream Girl has become increasingly common as contemporary fictional texts focus on individual feeling and suffering. The whimsical, chance meet-cute where two lonely strangers are cosmically brought together is a recurring cinematic and literary premise that relies on Miss MPDG.

We meet a male protagonist who feels isolated, burnt out, or nihilistic, like ‘something’s missing.’ Then he meets the perfectly-imperfect Manic Pixie Dream Girl. She’s quirky and funny, but mysterious and aloof. She’s amazing and perfect for our male protagonist. We know this because he tells us so, as he gleefully projects all his desires onto this new blank female canvas. In reality, we, the audience, and he, the protagonist, know very little about who this woman really is. She may hint at a troubled past, or current worries, but these are only abstractions. The text may tell us she is ‘creative,’ or ‘intellectual,’ but we see none of her own goals or achievements; we only see the way that she impacts our male hero. She is perfect and exists only to give care.

We see him blossom, become more relaxed and open-minded. They might ride on a carousel together, or take photobooth photos. Whatever. He’s become a better person. Now it’s time for the MPDG to leave, assumedly resuming her fanciful life travelling from town to town meeting disaffected Nice Guys, as her work here is done.  

The (awesome) term was coined by film critic Nathan Rabin in 2007, after seeing the so-bad-it’s-amazing Elizabethtown. In Rabin’s words, the MPDG: 

“exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.”1
 
In this discussion, he also mentions Natalie Portman’s Sam in Garden State. Other prime examples include Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany’s, Sugar in Some Like It Hot, and Penny Lane in Almost Famous.

QUIRKY!
Image from Welcome to Ladyville
 
The Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a reductive gendered plot device as she exists solely to impact upon the male protagonist’s life or worldview. She is a series of quirky abstractions rather than a fleshed-out character; she is a culmination of the desires of our male hero. She is an almost-anonymous muse, lovingly helping the male lead on a journey and inspiring him to improve his own life, at which point she is no longer required. Elizabethtown's resident MPDG Claire, played by Kirsten Dunst, sums it up: “I'm impossible to forget, but I'm hard to remember.”2

Some texts have, deliberately or not, highlighted the problematic elements of this plot device: 500 Days of Summer and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind jump to mind. Kate Winslet’s character Clementine in the latter film is markedly self-aware of her MPDG potential to Jim Carrey’s Joel:

“Too many guys think I'm a concept, or I complete them, or I'm gonna make them alive. But I'm just a fucked-up girl who's looking for my own peace of mind; don't assign me yours.”3

Once again, this trope is lazy and patronising as the MPDG is not a whole character, just a projection of an Ideal Woman ready to care for and teach our male protagonist, and an audience that assumedly identifies with him, Valuable Life Lessons. Whilst the male version may exist, this stock character is overwhelmingly female, perhaps due to the overwhelming number of straight male film protagonists.

The AV Club lists some more examples; have fun scrolling through the 1000+ comment discussion. 

The TV Tropes page for the MPDG is also fun. 

And this comic is the cutest and realest, go read it.

Next up for discussion, the Sexy Lamp plot device.


1 Nathan Rabin, “The Bataan Death March of Whimsy Case File #1: Elizabethtown,” The AV Club, Jan 25 2007, http://www.avclub.com/article/the-bataan-death-march-of-whimsy-case-file-1-emeli-1557.

2 Elizabethtown. Dir. Cameron Crowe. Paramount Pictures, 2005. Film.

3 Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Dir. Michel Gondry. Focus Features, 2004. Film.

Wednesday 30 April 2014

Dungeon Crawl: Links and Loves v.3

Some ideas, links, news, and fripperies to make your ears twitch, your tail thump, and your nose wiggle:

The Pocket Guide to Bullshit Prevention summarises everything you need to know about navigating the media, literature, politics, and probably the universe, into four steps.

Some good'uns from Comics Alliance recently: Is a Recoloured Comic Still The Same Comic?, and a discussion of the first issue relaunch.

On mentioning slash. The idea of the fannish forth wall says some interesting things about the fan/producer hierarchy, and about the fan/actor relationship. Also, shameless self-plug, have you my defence of slash fan fiction?


Thug Notes (the raddest YouTube channel for when you want to read a classic and critically analysis its themes in five minutes or less or your money back) uploaded a new show, and its adorable - 8-bit Philosophy kicks off with an episode on the Allegory of the Cave, depicted the way Plato would have wanted it: in fabulous retro game animation 8-bit.


This reminded me of another great philosophy channel, Philosophy Tube. I recommend alllll of the videos, but try starting with the discussion of Albert Camus's absurdism and Welcome to Night Vale. (I also super recommend the talk on Brave New World for scifi fanboys and girls).


I’m rereading Ai Yazawa’s Nana and Paradise Kiss, and they are still totally heartbreaking (Nana especially; that series is a special kind of masochism. Hachiko~!). Each one has an anime adaptation and the ParaKiss theme song worms its way into my head every time I pick up the book:


Stay safe!
Elle

Women as Plot Devices: Women in Refrigerators

This is part two~! Read the introduction and part one

The Women in Refrigerators name originates with comics author Gail Simone in 1999, when she and some fellow superhero fans began a website dedicated to discussing another strangely violent trope for women characters (isn’t that a cool origin story? I love when fan-made terms become part of the common lexicon). It’s another rather infamous plot device nowadays, but to summarise the origin of its name: it all began in 1994 [dream sequence music], when Kyle Rayner, the titular hero of Green Lantern #54, arrived home to discover that his girlfriend had been killed and stuffed into his refrigerator by the series’s villain. The website collated a list of fictional women in comics who had met similar fates in the name of plot, saying:

“Not every woman in comics has been killed, raped, depowered, crippled, turned evil, maimed, tortured, contracted a disease or had other life-derailing tragedies befall her, but given the following list… it's hard to think up exceptions.”1

Surprise! 
Image from Newsarama

The Woman in Refrigerator is commonly an innocent female character who is important to the male protagonist in some capacity, and who is maimed, abused, brainwashed, or killed for the sole purpose of affecting the protagonist. For variety, this is also sometimes a child, or even an anonymous ‘good’ or ‘innocent’ woman. She is easily disposable; indeed, her brutal disposal is required as a plot device to spur a male protagonist to action, and to provide motivation and direction.

The previous Damsel in Distress trope is troubling in its reliance on a helpless, passive, threatened woman, and its assumption that men need to save women. The Woman in Refrigerator is an unfortunate extension of this plot device, devaluing a woman’s life and employing brutal violence against a woman as cloyingly self-righteous motivation for a male character to “avenge” her in some way.

Some links:


This article lists 10 of the mostbrutal, clear cases of Women in Refrigerators (ie, as the title suggests, “violence against women”) in comics. 

The Woman in Refrigerator woman-as-plot-device is lazy, silly, sexist, disturbing violent, and boring. Next!

The dreaded Manic Pixie Dream Girl.


1 “Character List,” Women in Refrigerators, 2000, http://www.lby3.com/wir/women.html.

Monday 28 April 2014

Women as Plot Devices: The Damsel in Distress

Don't forget to read the introduction~!

An oldie but a goodie, this lovely lady spans centuries in literary history. She was also there at the dawn of cinema, the Golden Age of comics, and in many of the earliest character-driven video games. For details on the history of the Damsel in Distress, refer to the sacred storehouse of all factual knowledge and wisdom, Wikipedia

I won’t even bother to expand upon this trope myself, as I’m sure you’re more than familiar with it. In the notes for the video series “Tropes vs Women in Video Games,” Feminist Frequency provides a succinct definition of the character type: “As a trope the Damsel in Distress is a plot device in which a female character is placed in a perilous situation from which she cannot escape on her own and must then be rescued by a male character, usually providing a core incentive or motivation for the protagonist’s quest.”1

The Damsel in Distress is the woman-as-plot-device at its most fundamental state. “Male hero needs to save the helpless lady” constitutes the sole plot of several thousand works of fiction, an often bland or even anonymous woman in threat providing purpose and motivation for well-rounded, nuanced, backstory-ed male characters. Disturbingly, the Damsel is inextricably defined by the violence posed to her wellbeing, be it anything from physical or sexual torture, to good, old fashioned being-tied-to-the-railway-tracks.

Mary Jane needs to just stay inside, all of the time. 
Image from UGO
(btw I can't tell whether they're being serious in this article or not help??)

The Damsel in Distress trope has become so ubiquitous that some writers knowingly play with audience expectations surrounding it, such as the first scene of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer television series, where the foreboding high-school-horror-movie atmosphere is subverted when the beautiful, innocent, submissive damsel reveals her fangs.

Take a look at Feminist Frequency’s aforementioned discussion of the Damsel in Distress in video games: Part One and Part Two, which also discusses the Woman in Refrigerator (and comes with a trigger warning for video game violence and violence against women).

This article on Pop Culture is Not Art also gives an overview of the character type. 

And here’s a couple of lists of Damsels: a fan-chosen selection of “beautifuldamsels and distress,” and a listof the “hottest damsels in distress in movies.” The conflation of submission and sexual appeal or physical beauty is interesting, but not surprising. 

And the TV Tropes page, in case you’ve got several dozen hours to kill.

Next plot device up: Women in Refrigerators.


1 “Damsels in Distress (Part Two) Tropes Vs Women,” Feminist Frequency, May 28 2013, http://www.feministfrequency.com/2013/05/damsel-in-distress-part-2-tropes-vs-women/
Powered By Blogger · Designed By Seo Blogger TemplatesPublished.. Blogger Templates