![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
itsallovernowI think the PowerPoint presentation is going to be very doable. The woman I'm working for is doing some really amazing research, but she really just needs some basic illustration to accompany a very short lecture. Her presentation is on Human Rights Abuses and when I asked her how she got into the work, she said she'd always done it, always thought it was what she'd do.
I'm in awe of that, having derailed myself from my plan, and from my principles, and it stirs something in me, to look at backtracking, moving away from the life of a writer, or the goal of living that life back towards the life of an activist and advocate, someone with place and purpose that extends beyond ones self. It's so very tempting, and I've no idea how to get started. I have the right background, I just have no sense of the path to take.
And I practiced, put on the limesicle costume, sighed, so unreasonably angry with how my body looks, so angry at myself for the physical state and the absurd identification with body=self. Warring states - feminist consciousness and the girl who lives in this city and lusts after shoes and overpriced jeans and still thinks that beauty is the body, knowing better. Argh.
I liked the question meme. I may harrass someone in order to do it again:)
Oh, and surely someone (I suppose she could do it herself, but I'd prefer an outside interpretation) could make![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
crankygrrl an icon that says "You're Entering a Tact-free Zone" :)
And finally, we watched Angel.
I enjoyed the episode thoroughly, the slayer memories and the fiestiness between Angel and Spike and the gorgeous last scene between them. However, for me, I got a little freaked in the middle when Dana saw Spike as her victimizer. Even knowing that it was likely a misrepresentation, a ploy, my sympathy for the character disappeared.
I've always liked Spike, his badass mouthiness and his silliness, his Billy Idol in cheap levis attitude and just the whole persona. And I loved the way they summed up the two vampires at the end - Spike was about the rush, Angel was in it for the art. It was perfect and chilling, because they're two differnt kinds of evil. But the real evil perpetrated on that girl made me freeze, and the momentary thought that they were portraying Spike as being capable of that snapped me out of the conceit of the show and my sympathy for him, and for Angel evaporated.
Because they did things that were equally horrific, and we know this, but as viewers, we see it as filmed violence, we see it as past and prologue and not true horror. And this kind of switched that around for me, bringing me back to my original thought on both vampires that redemption is impossible. They are doing a sort of penance, but are undeserving of happy endings, and then I have to back up and reassess that thought, mixing the mythology with my own visceral reaction to violence, because I do believe in change and redemption, and I don't believe in Capital Punishment, and I do believe we turn innocents into monsters. So it leaves me stuck and unsettled.
I had the same kind of reaction watching X-Files. The Donnie Pfaster eps and Unruhe both unsettled me so completely that I couldn't sleep. Probably Paper Hearts did the same thing, but I don't remember it being as inherent a fear. They scared me deeply, and made me uncomfortable, and while I know a huge part of the reason for those episodes was to show that real evil can be purely human, and I liked that the writers were aware of that, they still throw me when I watch them, taking me out of the universe the shows have created and bringing the terror of real violence to life.
I also simulataneously like and an amused by their take on the semi-psycho teenage girl. Because really, what could be more terrifying and surreal to a male dominated society than a teenage girl, awash with hormones and uncertainty and will, pulsing with violence and the ability to use that violence effectively. Because teenage girls are such a mystery anyway, thoughtful and thoughtless and biting and yearning and caught between sexuality and childhood and a glimmering understanding of the world, pushing the boundaries of all of those things, and then suddenly, being able to physically lash out at the world that presses down on them. Sometimes the writers nail it on the head, sometimes they make the girls a stereotype, and sometimes they capture the mythology. I think adding the psychosis, the Joan of Arc aspect makes it all the more frightening, all that power and rage and oddness mixed with these whispering voices, and while I think they overuse it, I also find it fascinating and appealing.
I'm in awe of that, having derailed myself from my plan, and from my principles, and it stirs something in me, to look at backtracking, moving away from the life of a writer, or the goal of living that life back towards the life of an activist and advocate, someone with place and purpose that extends beyond ones self. It's so very tempting, and I've no idea how to get started. I have the right background, I just have no sense of the path to take.
And I practiced, put on the limesicle costume, sighed, so unreasonably angry with how my body looks, so angry at myself for the physical state and the absurd identification with body=self. Warring states - feminist consciousness and the girl who lives in this city and lusts after shoes and overpriced jeans and still thinks that beauty is the body, knowing better. Argh.
I liked the question meme. I may harrass someone in order to do it again:)
Oh, and surely someone (I suppose she could do it herself, but I'd prefer an outside interpretation) could make
crankygrrl an icon that says "You're Entering a Tact-free Zone" :)And finally, we watched Angel.
I enjoyed the episode thoroughly, the slayer memories and the fiestiness between Angel and Spike and the gorgeous last scene between them. However, for me, I got a little freaked in the middle when Dana saw Spike as her victimizer. Even knowing that it was likely a misrepresentation, a ploy, my sympathy for the character disappeared.
I've always liked Spike, his badass mouthiness and his silliness, his Billy Idol in cheap levis attitude and just the whole persona. And I loved the way they summed up the two vampires at the end - Spike was about the rush, Angel was in it for the art. It was perfect and chilling, because they're two differnt kinds of evil. But the real evil perpetrated on that girl made me freeze, and the momentary thought that they were portraying Spike as being capable of that snapped me out of the conceit of the show and my sympathy for him, and for Angel evaporated.
Because they did things that were equally horrific, and we know this, but as viewers, we see it as filmed violence, we see it as past and prologue and not true horror. And this kind of switched that around for me, bringing me back to my original thought on both vampires that redemption is impossible. They are doing a sort of penance, but are undeserving of happy endings, and then I have to back up and reassess that thought, mixing the mythology with my own visceral reaction to violence, because I do believe in change and redemption, and I don't believe in Capital Punishment, and I do believe we turn innocents into monsters. So it leaves me stuck and unsettled.
I had the same kind of reaction watching X-Files. The Donnie Pfaster eps and Unruhe both unsettled me so completely that I couldn't sleep. Probably Paper Hearts did the same thing, but I don't remember it being as inherent a fear. They scared me deeply, and made me uncomfortable, and while I know a huge part of the reason for those episodes was to show that real evil can be purely human, and I liked that the writers were aware of that, they still throw me when I watch them, taking me out of the universe the shows have created and bringing the terror of real violence to life.
I also simulataneously like and an amused by their take on the semi-psycho teenage girl. Because really, what could be more terrifying and surreal to a male dominated society than a teenage girl, awash with hormones and uncertainty and will, pulsing with violence and the ability to use that violence effectively. Because teenage girls are such a mystery anyway, thoughtful and thoughtless and biting and yearning and caught between sexuality and childhood and a glimmering understanding of the world, pushing the boundaries of all of those things, and then suddenly, being able to physically lash out at the world that presses down on them. Sometimes the writers nail it on the head, sometimes they make the girls a stereotype, and sometimes they capture the mythology. I think adding the psychosis, the Joan of Arc aspect makes it all the more frightening, all that power and rage and oddness mixed with these whispering voices, and while I think they overuse it, I also find it fascinating and appealing.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 08:54 pm (UTC)Angel: I think that the audience of both Angel and Buffy have always been to easily lulled into forgetting the true nature of Angel and Spike. They are vampires. They are dead. They are not alive. Now they both have souls and they can use these souls to choose to do evil, to struggle against the demon that resides in their bodies. But they are not men. They are dead, and cold and even with souls they have done evil. It's one of the reasons I always loved Zander. He never forgot exactly what he was dealing with. Buffy's statement that she believes Spike can be a good man is I think the last vestage of a childhood fantasy. He can't be a good man. He is a monster.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 10:13 pm (UTC)Try to have fun with the dance. It's rather hard to separate consciousness from the body. That is who you are, because how can you exist without the body? You value the mind and soul, but no one can ever see them except through the agency of the body.
Angel last night was pretty good. I rather liked Spike being mistaken for the girl's tormentor; the fact that it could easily have been him or Angel or any vampire/demon made the horror that much more intense when it's revealed that an ordinary human was the abuser. The intrusion of real violence into a fantasy program brought it home that despite the antics of people like Andrew and souled vampires, that evil exists.
Also, it's being pounded home rather heavily that maybe Angel and the gang aren't really fighting evil anymore, they're organizing and ameliorating its effects instead.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 10:22 pm (UTC)The intrusion of real violence into a fantasy program brought it home that despite the antics of people like Andrew and souled vampires, that evil exists. This is going to sound ridiculous, and it's not my sum total of thought on the subject, but the suggestion that Spike could have been the tormentor- and I did get all the metatext on that - just removed me from the situation. I felt sick having ever squeeled in joy at anything he or Angel has done. I don't think that was the intended, or exactly the intended reaction. I think it was supposed to be a reminder that they were/are monsters, but it took me somewhere else. Maybe disgust with myself for the sympathy. And yeah, they need to dial down the corralling evil/ not fighting it thing. Cause, really, I get it.
And thank you so much for the support. I really am looking forward to dancing tonight, I'm just terribly nervous. I've never been a soloist like this, on a stage, all alone, in this venue. I've danced plenty of places by myself, but this is very, stripping, I guess. No happy drunk people, no diners, no dollars waving around, no people sitting on low stools seeing me as an added perk to their really expensive dinner or as a surprise for a party. It's a performance, and while we do many of these as a troupe, I don't do this by myself. It scares me too much. So regardless of how it goes, I'm proud to be doing it:)
Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 10:51 pm (UTC)*hugs Thea and pats her on the back*
Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 11:16 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 11:19 pm (UTC)Wow. I'm proud of you, too. This is not something I could ever do... I wish I could be there to see it! :)
Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 11:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 10:39 pm (UTC)They are doing a sort of penance, but are undeserving of happy endings, and then I have to back up and reassess that thought, mixing the mythology with my own visceral reaction to violence, because I do believe in change and redemption, and I don't believe in Capital Punishment, and I do believe we turn innocents into monsters. So it leaves me stuck and unsettled.
I don't remember if I ever mentioned it here, but I remember a really interesting discussion with my Mom after I showed her The Way We Weren't about whether or not Aeryn was worthy of redemption.
My Mom has lived in the Soviet Union back in the days when people were still exiled or sent to concentration camps for expressing unpopular opinions. She knows people whose lives have been ruined by people informing on them in the way Aeryn informed on Velorek. She has met people who had informed on other people, either from being young and misguided or from self-interest and who later regretted it when the regime changed. And she doesn't think that just the fact that they've repented their misdeeds means that they are automatically redeemed.
What does it matter if they feel guilty? What does it matter if they are having doubts now, after everything is over and it's relatively easy to change and admit your mistakes? Those people's lives are still just as ruined. Saying "I'm sorry" is not going to give them back the life they've lost.
Aeryn is such a compelling character and by the time TWWW airs, we are all so in love with her that it's easy to forget what a truly terrible thing she did to Velorek. She knew what they were going to do with Velorek, and she still turned him in. She knew it was wrong to report him. And she still reported him, just so that she could get her prowler assignment back. Does it really matter if she regretted it later? Velorek is still dead, isn't he? Nothing she can do now can bring him back.
I may have been born in Russia, but I was really young when Gorbachev came to power. I never had to grow up in that age of paranoia when you could be arrested at any moment just for reading the wrong book. So it was really interesting for me to hear my mother's point of view. Having that moment of doubt about whether or not Aeryn can ever truly be redeemed helped me get a better understanding of what Aeyn was dealing with in that episode. Why the burden on her was so great.
I've seen several fanfics where Velorek comes back and immediately forgives Aeryn for what she's done, just because she's Aeryn and therefore she's Special and can do no wrong. (And then he goes on to fix her up with John because... well, because, I guess.) And that's always felt wrong to me. I've always wanted to see a fic where Velorek comes back and *doesn't* forgive her. Not where he suddenly turns evil and tries to take revenge on her or anything like that, but where he just... can't forgive her. Because he's not a saint or anything like that, but just a good man whose life she ruined. And Aeryn will have to live with that, and *remember* that, so that it can never happen again.
Um, sorry. This really has nothing to do with Angel. What you said about Spike and Angel just reminded me of that. :)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 11:30 pm (UTC)My Mom has lived in the Soviet Union back in the days when people were still exiled or sent to concentration camps for expressing unpopular opinions. She knows people whose lives have been ruined by people informing on them in the way Aeryn informed on Velorek. She has met people who had informed on other people, either from being young and misguided or from self-interest and who later regretted it when the regime changed. And she doesn't think that just the fact that they've repented their misdeeds means that they are automatically redeemed.
Snort. You know I'd always rather talk about Aeryn:) And it's interesting to me how my reaction to her is different, in part because the character has always been played as someone aware of her past misdeeds and constantly, but quietly, working to change herself into someone who finds them repellent. Aeryn doesn't suddenly get hit on the head with self-awareness, she learns it, and through that, becomes accountable, and I think, struggles to figure out if she is worthy of redemption, and often, doesn't arrive at the conclusion that she is. Not in a self-punishing way, more in a, you keep going, you keep making choices and changes because you can't erase the past, you have to move forward and hold yourself accountable.
It's one of the many, many things that I love about the character, and I think your mom's reaction is completely understandable. The ambiguity onscreen is something I love to see. And Aeryn's violence is something that's not particularly glamorized. John's reactions to it are definitely negative until she learns that it has consequences. But she's also used as a tool of violence, and is aware of that. When she puts the gun away in The Choice, using the knife as a way to protect herself, something more personal and visceral, that's a huge change in her, and I think really signals her conflict with her past, present and potential future.
In reference to Spike and Angel, I wish the right of redemption was questioned outside of them more.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 05:53 am (UTC)Hee! No, really? I never noticed. ;)
[Aeryn] has always been played as someone aware of her past misdeeds and constantly, but quietly, working to change herself into someone who finds them repellent.
Oh, wow, yes. That's it exactly. I think the real difference, and the real reason that we find Aeryn to be a more sympathetic character even though she also did some unforgivable things is that unlike Angel and, to a lesser extent, Spike, Aeryn has never really looked for redemption. Or, at the very least, not redemption the way Catholic Angel defines it -- as a clean slate, everyone's forgiveness, and the atonement of all her sins.
Angel (and, to a lesser extent, Spike) sees redemption as something external. It is important to him to be *perceived by others* to be the Good Guy, the Hero who always saves the day. I don't doubt that his guilt about his past and his compassion for some of the victims he saves is sincere, but somehow, they feel overblown, like he's always playing to an audience, always looking to other people for approval. It's like he's always saying "look at how much I've changed -- I'm feeling guilty over this," or "look at what a great job I'm doing -- I saved this guy." "Don't I deserve redemption now?"
Aeryn, on the other hand, doesn't really care what others think of her. Or rather, she cares about what others think, but that's not really her main motivation for changing. Yes, it hurts her when Zhaan, Rygel and D'Argo turn against her after seeing the video of her killing the old Pilot. Yes, she wants Pilot to forgive her, and if she had met Velorek again at some point, she would have wanted him to forgive her, too. But you get the sense that even if the others had really kicked her out and refused to have anything more to do with her, even if she were told that redemption of her sins was completely impossible, she would still want to keep changing. (Unlike, say, Angel or Spike, who would probably go sulk for the next millenium or so if the others (or, in Spike's case, Buffy) rejected them like that.)
Aeryn doesn't want to change just to improve others' opinions of her or to prove them wrong about her, or even to "get redemption" (which is something that I'm not sure she would even understand). She wants to change *for herself*. She herself can't live with being someone who could kill a Pilot without feeling anything. She herself doesn't want to be someone who could betray a lover just to get a better assignment. She wants to change to be someone who could live with herself, not because she wants others' approval.
And because of that, I think the question of whether or not she deserves redemption becomes almost moot. She's not asking for redemption. She is asking for a chance to grow, to "become more." And that, I think, automatically makes her more sympathetic than Angel and Spike.
Re:
Date: 2004-01-30 06:02 pm (UTC)Absolutely on all fronts!!