Joss Whedon’s new show, “Dollhouse,” released (or perhaps had leaked) this pre-casting description of one of the recurring characters:

November
20’s, any ethnicity, beautiful and heavy. Another Doll, a hopeful child in the house and everyone else you need her to be outside. A comforting, radiant presence, who tends to get fewer of the criminal gigs and more of the personal ones. Recurring.

(Empahsis added). I remember reading that and thinking “cool.”

Now the casting choice for November, Miracle Laurie, has been announced. That’s a picture of Ms. Laurie to the right. Not exactly “heavy,” is she?

I’m annoyed, but not surprised.

To be sure, there’s nothing wrong with casting a thin actress in a part originally written as fat. I’ve done a little theater, and I know that often minds change once actors read for parts. No doubt Miracle Laurie hit just the right notes for November, better than anyone else who auditioned, and that’s why she got the part.

But. Four points.

1) This sort of casting choice is a one-way street. By which I mean, producers will decide that a thin actor is right for a character who was originally concieved of as fat, and so rethink the character. But it will virtually never be the case that a fat actor is seen as right for a character originally concieved of as thin.

2) If a thin actor has the right “look,” then producers will make allowences for them being less than perfect in other ways. So, for instance, David Boreanaz — who wasn’t much of an actor on the first season of Buffy – was cast for his looks and his potential. And he grew in the role, and became a lot better as an actor. Fat actors are rarely given that chance to develop.

3) Because of who gets a chance to develop, I suspect that frequently thin actors are, objectively, better actors. This is because they get bigger parts early on and become seasoned actors, and seasoned actors are better actors, all else held equal.

4) I wonder how frequently “any ethnicity” on a casting call turns out to be “white” once they’ve actually cast the actor?

(I suspect that points 1-3, above, apply as much to actors of color as they do to fat actors. When the musical Miss Saigon originally opened on Broadway, they cast a white actor in an important Asian role, because the role required a star and there weren’t any Asian actors with that stature. Casting decisions like that become self-fulfilling prophesies.)

I’ve loved Joss Whedon for going on ten years now. Sometimes my fangirl moments can be fickle and short lived, but my love for Joss Whedon has remained constant.

It’s helped that every so often Joss will surprise me by being far more awesome than I ever imagined (have you ever listened to the Innocence commentary? There’s a lot of awesome there). The first I remember was from the Onion AV Club, way back when I didn’t know that much about his politics:

don’t want it to have my name on it if it doesn’t reflect what I want to say. Because once you get to the position of actually getting to say something, which is a level most writers never even get to, and is a great blessing, you then have to worry about what it is you’re actually saying. I don’t want some crappy reactionary show under the Buffy name. If my name’s going to be on it, it should be mine. Now, the books I have nothing to do with, and I’ve never read them. They could be, “Buffy realized that abortion was wrong!” and I would have no idea. So, after my big, heartfelt, teary speech, I realize that I was once again lying. But I sort of drew the line. I was like, “I can’t possibly read these books!”

Joss has often suggested collective action as the solution for the big problems and recently that’s got a lot more overt (I’m thinking the Buffy series finale, and ‘The Chain’ comic)

But I still didn’t expect him to become a militant union activist. He’s just posted on United Hollywood. He said

Our negotiators have the specific task of forgetting the past and dealing only with the numbers before them. Their ability to do that impresses me greatly, but I maintain that it’s their job to treat the studios like business partners and it’s our job to remember who they really are. The studios are inefficient, power-hungry, thieving corporate giants who have made the life of the working writer harder from decade to decade. They are run by men so out of touch with basic humanity that they would see Rome burn before they would think about the concept of fair compensation. I maintain that they have never revealed their true agenda in the causing and handling of this strike, and to expect them to now is cock-eyed optimism of the most dangerous kind.

and

This is not over. Nor is it close. Until the moment it is over, it can never be close. Because if we see the finish line we will flag and they are absolutely counting on us to do that. In the room, reason. On the streets, on the net, I say reason is for the ‘moderates’. Remember what they’ve done. Remember what they’re trying to take from us. FIGHT. FIGHT. FIGHT.

I have been mugged an embarrassing number of times, even for a New Yorker. I’ve been yelled at and chased, beaten down and kicked, threatened with a gun and the only mugger who still hurts my gut is the one who made me shake his hand. Until there is a deal – the right deal, not the DGA deal – held out, let’s keep our hands in our pockets or on our signs. Let’s not be victims. Let’s never.

He also did a radio show on the strike, which is of similar stuff.

To conclude my three day Joss-a-thon I’m going to review Tales of the Slayers. This is a collection of short comics about the lives of 8 slayers in different points in history. Although my reviews are usually spoiler-ific this review will be much more spoiler free. The very shortness of the stories means they rely on their plot twists, so while I do talk about the set up, I’m not going to tell the endings.

What stands out from me, particularly compared to season 8, is how interesting the art is. Very different styles of art are used for different stories, and they reflect often reflect the times the stories are set in. This is particularly effective with the story set in 1930s Germany.

The quality of the stories is extremely mixed. Two of Joss’s story’s are brilliant. The first is very short, and is about the first slayer. It is just one moment in her life, and sets up the rest of the stories.

Joss’s second story, set in the middle ages, is written in verse (which I bet made Joss very happy). It is a simple story, told from the point of view of the Watcher, but is very effective

Jane Espenson’s Regency era slayer is beautifully done. The author’s voice is deliberately modelled on Jane Austen, and works perfectly. Jane and Joss were the only authors who used the literary forms of the time they were writing about, and it makes their stories much stronger. I think they also both understood the limits of the space, and had the right sized story for a very few pages. Really the authors only had time to set up two characters, and one plot turn, and Jane and Joss both do this very well.

The other stories, set in Revolutionary France, America at the time of colonisation, Nazi Germany and 1970s New York, are less successful. The most dire is Sonnenblume, set in Nazi era Germany. It’s slightly less subtle than being hit over the head with a mallet (which is a real shame, because, like I said, the art is very good). I found the Revolutionary France story similarly trite, possibly because it was trying to deal with something very big in a very small space (or possibly just because Amber Benson doesn’t have very interesting ideas about revolutionary France). The story set in America at the time of colonisation, works for the first few pages, but relies on simplistic statements as a substitute for character development, and in the end appears to be making an argument for assimilation. Nikki’s story is OK, but not particularly interesting.

The comic ends with another Joss story, this one about Fray. By itself this short piece isn’t even a story (and I was disappointed, because after several stories of in period or practical clothing, Fray is wearing a very short, loose, cut off top, which you absolutely wouldn’t be able to fight in. I guess I should be glad no-one found a place in the story to have a bath). But it ends with Fray finding, and reading the Watchers diaries of previous slayers.

In the end despite the mixed quality of the stories, I would definitely recommend this to any Buffy fan. Because what it does do so nicely is expand on the idea, implicit in the Buffyverse, that struggle has a history and each generation in that struggle is connected to those that have gone before it.

The latest Buffy comic has a backstory. Last year Darkhorse ran a competition inviting 100 word essays on ‘How Buffy Changed My Life’ - Joss would chose the winner who would then appear in one of the comics. The winner was Jarrod’s essay, he wrote about his wife’s schizophrenia, and how they’d watched Buffy as she was getting sicker and sicker. Robin appears in this story, she is a minder who has to guard unstable reality fields (or possibly demons). It’s well done, and the more I thought about it the more sense it made. Although I don’t know that much about schizophrenia, so I don’t know how well the storyline reflects reality.

Overall I liked this comic, although I remain unsure about the genre. I’m going to like any comic which has Buffy and Willow talk about their relationship. Of course, the bitter part in me, that does believe in showing not telling, would have rather that they’d had Buffy and Willow have a relationship in season 6 an 7, than explain to us with small words what’s going on.

I loved the little details of this story, the ever developing ‘Anywhere but Here’ was really fun (and a nice little bit of continuity). I loved that we found out where the money was coming from, because it really annoys me when fiction ignores economics. I love even more that Buffy is stealing from Swiss banks, not being particularly fond of banks and all.

I wasn’t so happy about the Dawn revelation, if this is the final twist (and it may not be) it does bear a striking resemblance to her being punished for having sex. I love giant dawn; I love her giant suitcase of clothes. I don’t love punishing female characters for having sex.

The comic ends with Buffy and Willow walking off separately. It’s clear that this season is going to be about stripping Buffy of her allies. I can’t help but feel that we’ve seen that before and, like I said in my last review, these plotlines would be anchored better if we had more idea what normal was for the relationships between these characters.

On the art front, this is the first story arc in a Buffy comic which hasn’t involved a female character taking a bath. It was almost comical how hard the artists appeared to work to draw Robin so that she didn’t look like a comic book girl.

So I’ve got behind on my Buffy comic reviews, so I’m going to review the last three episodes of the Faith arc together. As expected Faith becomes close with the evil slayer who is a member of the English aristocracy (mostly by fighting the gargoyle), and then (again not suprisingly) Gigi is trying to kill Buffy.

It was well done, Faith was well captured, and Gigi worked as a character. Gigi’s Warlock friend seemed very much a cardboard cut-out, but that’s all he needed to be I guess.

And in the end the story wasn’t about Gigi at all, but Faith, Giles & Buffy’s relationship. But there were serious problems in the execution. This plot-line lost a lot of its power because we had no idea of what Buffy and Giles or Buffy and Faith’s relationship had been like since Sunnydale hit into a hole, so it wasn’t anchored to anything.

I think maybe it’s a problem with the genre, because there seems to be a lot of ‘telling’ rather than showing going on. Characters explain exactly what their motivations are, whether it’s Twilight or Faith. The ratio of fight scenes to conversations is so much higher than it was in the TV, so there doesn’t seem to as much space for character, which I miss. I do enjoy the comics, and like the ideas, and where the characters are, but I’m just not convinced by the way it’s told.

Talking of problem with comic books. The baths! Never in the history of literature have female characters been so disproportionately cleaner than their male counterparts. Why do Faith and Gigi make plans in the bath?

No, I know the answer, it just pisses me off.

Tomorrow I’ll review the ‘Anywhere But Here’ and then maybe I’ll review Tales of the Slayers (which I got ages ago). I’ve been remiss in the Joss content for a few months.

I would have expected to have written more about the writers’ strike, because it involves two of my favourite things: industrial action and Joss Whedon. The Writers Guild of America have been on strike for over two months now, and there’s lots of information out there and good blogs by striking writers. There are also several websites set up by fans who support writers. There was a Mutant Enemy Picket day, where Joss and the writers and actors from Firefly, Buffy & Angel all picketed together. Some fans came from as far as England and Australia to join the picket.¹

The writing for the Golden Globes and the Oscars is usually done by WGA members. THe Guild has announced that it will refused waivers to allow these ceremonies to be written by Guild writers, and will picket the ceremonies if they go ahead without the writers.² Now actors, the sort of Actors who get nominated for Golden Globes and Oscars, have unanimously announced that they will not cross a picket line if the ceremonies are picketed. The first thing Katherine Heigl (to choose one random example, because I have an inexplicable fondness for her) said when she was nominated for a Golden Globe, was that she wouldn’t cross a picket line. Without stars there isn’t much appeal to an award ceremony. What I thought was particularly awesome, was that the actors apparently took this decision themselves:

SAG decided not to pressure its A-List actors about attending or not attending the WGA-struck Golden Globes on NBC. So I’m told the decision not to cross picket lines came from the thesps themselves. In fact, SAG leadership took a meeting with all of Hollywood’s publicists (with a similar collection in NYC via video conference) who told the union that the clients they represent will not cross the WGA picket line for the Golden Globes without exception.

Actors support has gone beyond not getting dressed in pretty gowns and telling their publicists to talk to their union, Actors have picketed, they’ve used their media pull, they’ve appeared in a video campaign.

The reason actors are doing this isn’t just because Hollywood is full of liberals (or radicals in a few cases). Even Patricia Heaton who thanked the troops when she won an Emmy in 2001 supports the writers. The reason the actors, who are all union members, do this is because it’s in their own best interests. The main issue that writers are striking over - payment for work broadcast over the internet is one that is as important for the actors as it is for the writers. If the writers lose then there’s no way the actors would get their residuals. The actors solidarity obviously make the writers stronger (the absense of the nominees for best screenplay wouldn’t torpedo an award ceremony.

In this case, the urgency of that solidarity is really clear. The contracts expire within months of each other and the issues are identical. But the principle of solidarity works the same way whether the workers are half a world away (solidarity of German dockworkers helped win the recent wharfie strike in Napier) or a completely different industry (wharfies helped win the Progressive lockout last year).

The concept of solidarity isn’t hard (it’d be unkind to suggest that if it was people who send their publicists to talk to their union probably wouldn’t be able to grasp it so I won’t), but often it can seem abstract. Which is why such a show of solidarity, even over an event as ridiculous as the Golden Globes, is pretty damn powerful.

On a less solid note, I’m was sad to see that The Daily Show and The Colbert report will be returning tomorrow without their striking writers. I understand that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are under contractual obligations; I understand that they have been very supportive of the strike, I understand that there are lots of other people employed by these show, but crossing a picket line is crossing a picket line.

I do want to say something about editors, grips, craft services, and all the other workers who are involved in making a television show. Those who worked on a television series that has stopped production because of the strike aren’t working and aren’t being paid.

The situation of those workers, while difficult, is not a stick to beat the striking writers with. It’s an obligation of solidarity. When the writers win they, and the actors, need to stand solid with the editors, grips and craft services. Those workers need to know that their picket lines will be honoured, that the actors and writers will stand on the picket line with them. Writers and Actors need to do that because solidarity is a mutal obligation, but also beause it’s in their own best interest. Unless solidarity extends across the industry the gains that are won with this strike will just temporary.

1. I’m more than a little jealous that, odds are, the only people who could afford a twelve hour flight to support a picket line with Joss, probably aren’t as into the picket line as much as they’re into the Joss. (back)
2. It’s a little more complicated than that, it’s always a little bit more complicated than that, but that’s enough to get the point. (back)

Maia pointed out this webpage to me. Brilliant. Plus, it allows me to choose “Buffy” and “Elections” as categories for the same post, which I might not have done before.

Feel free to use this thread to post anything you’d like. Linking to your own stuff is encouraged.

I’m reminded of the episode of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” in which Spike commented, “If every vampire who said he was at the crucifixion was actually there, it would have been like Woodstock.”

A defensive Romney was peppered with questions today on exactly what he meant when he said — most recently on Meet the Press — that he “saw” his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. Recent articles have indicated that his father, the late Michigan Gov. George Romney, didn’t march with the civil-rights leader.

Admitting that he didn’t see the march with his own eyes, he said, “I ’saw’ him in the figurative sense.”

“The reference of seeing my father lead in civil rights,” he said, “and seeing my father march with Martin Luther King is in the sense of this figurative awareness of and recognition of his leadership.”

“I’ve tried to be as accurate as I can be,” he continued, smiling firmly. “If you look at the literature or look at the dictionary, the term ’saw’ includes being aware of — in the sense I’ve described.”

The questioning did not relent. “I’m an English literature major,” he insisted at one point. “When we say I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn’t necessarily mean you were there.”

Of course, since the Patriots play football, no one would see them at baseball’s World Series. (If Kerry, Gore or Edwards made that error, it would haunt them forever — elitist! girly-man! faker! — but Romney will be given a pass.) That aside, however, what a pathetically lame defense.

Incidently, Romney’s lie about marching with Martin Luther King Jr used to be more extreme. This week, he only lied about his father marching with MLK. Thirty years ago, he claimed that he himself marched with MLK.

As I’ve said before, since conservatives lack credibility on race, they cite MLK to “borrow” MLK’s credibility for their own purposes.

This is a useful tactic for politicians¹ because the large majority of Americans have forgotten the policies MLK actually advocated for. So claiming allegiance with MLK’s memory is a good way for politicians to pretend they’re against white supremacy without actually committing to any policy positions that might have the effect of reducing white supremacy at all.

UPDATE: Mark Schmitt points out that “in fact, Governor George Romney had an extremely impressive civil rights record.” But he also asks:

Is there the slightest reason to believe that in the same position as his father, as it was becoming clear that the Republicans’ path to the presidency ran through the South (Goldwater secured the nomination in 1964 in part by opposing the Civil Rights Act, and Strom Thurmond switched parties that year), [Mitt Romney] would have shown similar courage? Mitt Romney’s shape-shifting adaptation to whatever the Republican prejudice of the moment is (anti-immigration rhetoric, or denouncing the kind of health plan he enacted as “socialized medicine”) suggests that he wouldn’t have been doing any marching.

1. Democrats and Republicans alike (back)

A week ago today the New Zealand police invaded homes all over the country. They arrested 17 (or 18) people with breaches of the Firearms Act. But the search warrants were issued under the Terrorism Suppression Act. Those arrested were called terrorists.

The police invaded Ruatoki, a Tuhoe community. They set up a checkpoint along the confiscation line. Those who wanted to go in or out of this community had to stand by their cars and have their picture taken. Armed police officers boarded the bus that takes kids to Kohanga Reo.

That paragraph may not make much sense to non-NZers. Maori are the tangata whenua, or indigenous people of New Zealand. Kohanga Reo is immersion kindergarten. Tuhoe are an iwi, or tribe, from the North Island of New Zealand. This is an attack on the indigenous people of New Zealand. On the indigenous people who are fighting colonisation. This has dominated the news in New Zealand for a week. It is the first time the Terrorism Suppression Act (the New Zealand version of the Patriot Act) has been used and it is being used against indigenous people who have been terrorised by the New Zealand state.

If that was all that had happened I would have written sooner. But the police also invaded a house I’ve spent many, many hours in. They took three of my friends.

There is an element of ridicule to all this. The police took a backpack that people had taken to the farmers market - with avocados and potatoes, later they brought it back because they decided it didn’t contain any evidence of terrorism. The paper claimed that groups from all over the country working on many different issues were going to launch co-ordinated attacks. They clearly don’t know us very well (anyone who has ever worked on the left will understand why).

But when I laugh it is only to relieve the stress, because my friends still aren’t free. In New Zealand almost everyone gets bail. The day that our friends were arrested the other news included a man who had serially raped prostitutes who was out on bail. That they are still there, that we are still going out to the prison everyday, would have seemed unreal a week ago.

I have closed this post to comments. I’m sorry, but I cannot handle abstract discussion about people I love, when I don’t know when we’ll get them back. I will be writing more about this, I will be writing about some of the issues involved. Right now I just wanted to let people know why I hadn’t been posting, and explain some of the background for when I have the energy to write about what is involved.

* There is no situation, no matter how serious and stressful, for which I don’t have the perfect Buffy quote.

Sugarshock is Joss Whedon’s free on-line comic. If you haven’t read it yet you should: part 1, part 2, and part 3.

It’s an extremely silly, story about a band called Sugarshock. Made up of Dandelion who hates vikings and is authorised to use deadly force by the secret government agency that she works for, Wade, who likes groupies, Robot Phil, who is a robot and L’Lihdra, who seems rather robotic until her absolute awesomeness is made clear. Their music is fantastic (well we only get the lyrics to one song, but they’re hilarious - and I really want to hear ‘God bites Man’ even if Dandelion is off key). After an emissary from another planet falls on their car they enter the international battle of the bands it just gets stranger and there are stoves, squirrels, and lathes in places you’d least expect them.

I’m a big fan of Joss Whedon; I can (and sometimes do) go on at great length about the metaphors, characters, and meaning of his work. Sugarshock isn’t one of those moments, this is more like Doppelgangland - he’s having heaps of fun, throwing in more and more silliness, and it’s joyful.

If that wasn’t enough the art doesn’t suck. There’s a woman in it whose body looks like it might actually move if you touched her. I didn’t even know that was possible in comic book form.

So go read it - it’s free and it’ll make your day better.

I’m in.

I was undecided about whether the comic book was ‘Buffy’. I accepted it was cannon, Joss says goes. But I just wasn’t sure whether I was going to treat it like Buffy. I’m not a comic book person, and a month is a long wait. To treat it like I treated the show I needed it to be like the show was when it was good, not the last few seasons with flashes of brilliance within miles of boring.

Someone actually commented on one of these posts that it must be a new season of Buffy because everyone’s complaining about how the quality has gone downhill. There’s definitely some truth in that. While I have a lot of affection for all the Joss-penned opening episodes, beginnings are not Joss’s forte. They always feel a little like a reintroduction. #5 was, of course, the best comic ever written, with a two page spread which is up there with the end of Becoming II or that bit in Chosen. But I wasn’t convinced it wasn’t a sign of things to come.

If ‘No Future For You’ is a sign of things to come, then I’m sold.

I don’t have particularly strong feelings about Faith - I don’t dislike her, but she’s not one of my favourite characters. This story is good, and that’s what matters. The opening is brilliant, really capturing the horror and aloneness of Faith’s life.* The scene between Giles and Faith captures both their characters spot on (plus Giles was wearing a Yellow Submarine Jersey)**

I’m loving the plot. As the title of my blog suggests, I’m generally pretty pro-Buffy plots where the ruling-classes are the bad. As a metaphor it works for me. Pygmalion is a tad over-done, but going undercover as upper class to kill them, rather than to show your worth works for me (plus there are a few more nice moments of undercutting).

Just over 20 pages a month is still woefully unsatisfying. But I can’t wait to see where we go next.

There are still some issues of course. The dialogue was trying a little bit too hard. Faith never just said anything without turning it into a Faithism. It was almost like Buffy fanfic where every second sentence from Giles contains the word ‘wanker’.*** I think it’s probably justified in this episode from a character point of view, because it’s a sign Faith is on her guard with Giles, she’s thinking before she speaks and acting defensively, but if it continues it’ll get old really fast.

You notice how I haven’t mentioned the drawing yet? I’m putting it off. Actually this was the first comic strip where I felt the art added much to the script. There were a couple of frames where the expression on Faith’s face really captured something about her character and conveyed the complexities of her feelings (I’m thinking ‘So, who is this evil bitch, anyway?’).

But, and there’s always a but, women’s breasts are not balls. They are not round like balls and they’re not solid like balls. While I do appreciate that there was no random female nudity this episode and two characters wore an outfit that wasn’t a crop top (which is some kind of record), the breasts on the cover and the last page bug me. I wonder what it’s about, why comic book artists think that that’s what men would most like to see? Why would men like to see that. I don’t see that it can be a sexual fantasy thing in any real sense. Isn’t the way breasts move a large part of the fun? Obviously it’s partly about turning women into objects, in a very real sense, the less comic book girls look like people, the easier it is to dehumanise them, and then in turn dehumanise actual women.

I’m not saying that this is necessarily going to Geroges Jeanty’s mind when he draws the script (and I choose to believe it dosn’t go through Joss’s mind when he approves it). Just that comic book art must have developed this way for a reason, and I don’t get it. Anyone else got theories.

* Except the fact that Robin Wood is also running a team of slayers. I find it more than a little bit problematic that every male character who survived the season finale is running a team of slayers (even Andrew!). While we have yet to see a female character do so, except Buffy (unless the black dreadlocked slayer from last issue was supposed to be Rona, even so she didn’t appear to be running it alone).

** Although only the second coolest top in the issue - gotta love Xander’s Sunnydale swim team t-shirt.

***Not that I’ve read that much Buffy fanfic. Honest. If we were talking X-files fanfic I would be lying when I said I hadn’t read much. But Buffy fanfic never worked for me. Possibly because every second sentence from Giles contained the word wanker.

Wow.

This was what I was waiting for. This is a story of scope and shape that you couldn’t tell on TV, and it’s a story worth telling.

The Chain is the story of the slayer who is working as a Buffy decoy underground. We see her becoming, learning and doing and dying.

She tells her story in fragments, as she’s dying. We get moments out of place, people we don’t know asking her questions, and there are huge gaps in the story. She’s trying to convey her experience and she doesn’t have time to tell her life.

She’s trying to convey one idea with her story - the importance of working collectively. She learns with the slayers, she learns what it means to work together, that it’s actually amazing. Then she goes underground, and they build something together: her, the fairies, the slugs, the ravenclan and the thing that looks like a leaf-blower. We don’t know the details, but we know that she forms relationships that matters. We see some of the joy that comes from working together.

Regular readers of my blog will understand that this would have been enough to make me absurdly happy and forgive the art.* But Joss gets to explore an idea that he could never explore with Buffy the character.

Because in reality it’s not about individuals, even great leaders. It’s not about Buffy, (or Che Guevara, Sylvia Pankhurst, Jock Barnes, Rosa Parks…) - “there’s millions of people go into making a name. People facing things they couldn’t imagine they would.” It’s the workers who go on strike, not the leaders whose work matters. In every movement the people who you’ve never heard of are as important as those whose faces get on T-shirts.

Then at the end, is the bit that made me cry:

The real questions run deeper. Can I fight? Did I help? Did I do for my sisters? My Comrades, Children, slimy slug-clan… There is a chain between each and every one of us. And like the man said, you either feel its tug or you ignore it. I tried to feel it. I tried to face the darkness like a woman and I don’t need any more than that. You don’t have to remember me

When I’ve been killed by an underground demon who is holding by body above his head (which I hope won’t happen for many years yet) that’s how I will judge my life.

* I loved the comic so much that my usual complaint about drawing is relegated to a footnote. Could we have one comic where a female character doesn’t get naked for no reason? I also thought the slayers looked too generic, the one punk girl the exception which emphasises the similarities.

Then there was the line that this slayer needed her breasts padded to imitate Buffy. It was unnecessary, but also completely ridiculous. We can see the slayer’s breasts right there in the panel, we know what comic book and SMG Buffy look like; she didn’t need padding.

I don’t expect from Joss’s openings, they’re not as strong as his endings. Every Season (except possibly Season 6 where Joss wrote neither the first episode or the last) the first episode has been much weaker than the last, and less satisfying than many of the episodes in between.

Now I’ve read all of it, I’m not that impressed with The Long Way Home. I’d say it was about on par with Lessons, possibly slightly better than the season openers not j. But much worse than Anne, When She Was Bad or Sunday, which were more concerned with letting us see where the characters were, than setting up a whole bunch of new plot. Because setting up plot is often boring, and should be done really slowly.

A lot of the on-going ideas I really like I’m really looking forward to more Giant Dawn, and the army hating them. But there’s too much that is just a little bit off. Amy and Warren bear only the most superficial resemblence to the people they were on the show. Dawn’s ’she’s like a Mom to me’ about Willow doesn’t reflect the relationship we saw, and certainly not the events of Season 6.

I’m really unsatisfied with what had happened between Willow, Xander & Buffy. Even if we don’t know now what happened to Willow (and there’s no reason we shouldn’t, except contrivance, because surely Willow would tell Buffy & Xander as soon as battling stopped), we should at least know what happened from Buffy’s point of view (remember number one rule, we should go through what the characters go through).

I hope that the writers who wrote on the show soon get tired of the thrill of an unlimited budget. Just because you can now have battles of hundreds doesn’t mean that two battles (and a practice fight of dozens) are that interesting. Likewise the five spirits added less than nothing to the comic as a whole.

I’ll buy the next one, and I’ll probably buy the Faith arc. But so far the story has been more about the cool things they can do than people, and that’s not Joss at his best.

My grandmother died on the weekend. I’m going to try and write something about her life at some point.

In the meantime all I’ve got energy to write about is TV. They aired the season finale of Heroes* in NZ yesterday. My main reaction was to miss Joss Whedon. I know that he could never have kept as many threads going as the creators of Heroes did, but the season finale would have been much better if he’d written it:

1. The ending of Hiro’s story for this season wouldn’t have been him leaving Ando to go kill Sylar alone. I have no time for individualistic superhero crap.

2. The female characters would have occasionally talked to each other, this may even have lead to them developing relationships with each other.

3. The two characters with the most central arcs in the season wouldn’t be the rich, powerful, white guys.

Although we are spared yet another crazy, very skinny female character.

* A show I’ve only just started watching. It’s enjoyable to watch, and has its moments - but the virgin/whore complex is a problem and I’m not loving the existance of a mystical black man without a name.

I try to think how we got here. The theory I developed in college (shared by many I’m sure) is one I have yet to beat: Womb Envy. Biology: women are generally smaller and weaker than men. But they’re also much tougher. Put simply, men are strong enough to overpower a woman and propagate. Women are tough enough to have and nurture children, with or without the aid of a man. Oh, and they’ve also got the equipment to do that, to be part of the life cycle, to create and bond in a way no man ever really will. Somewhere a long time ago a bunch of men got together and said, “If all we do is hunt and gather, let’s make hunting and gathering the awesomest achievement, and let’s make childbirth kinda weak and shameful.” It’s a rather silly simplification, but I believe on a mass, unconscious level, it’s entirely true. How else to explain the fact that cultures who would die to eradicate each other have always agreed on one issue? That every popular religion puts restrictions on women’s behavior that are practically untenable? That the act of being a free, attractive, self-assertive woman is punishable by torture and death? In the case of this upcoming torture-porn, fictional. In the case of Dua Khalil, mundanely, unthinkably real. And both available for your viewing pleasure.

It’s safe to say that I’ve snapped. That something broke, like one of those robots you can conquer with a logical conundrum. All my life I’ve looked at this faulty equation, trying to understand, and I’ve shorted out. I don’t pretend to be a great guy; I know really really well about objectification, trust me. And I’m not for a second going down the “women are saints” route – that just leads to more stone-throwing (and occasional Joan-burning). I just think there is the staggering imbalance in the world that we all just take for granted. If we were all told the sky was evil, or at best a little embarrassing, and we ought not look at it, wouldn’t that tradition eventually fall apart? (I was going to use ‘trees’ as my example, but at the rate we’re getting rid of them I’m pretty sure we really do think they’re evil. See how all rants become one?)

That was written by Joss Whedon, you can find the rest here. I’m not even going to make a snarky comment about how well he knows objectification. I’m just going to say I’m feeling pretty good about naming my blog after him.

The pace has certainly picked up in this third issue of the Buffy Season 8 Comic book. We have plot, relationships, and many unanswered questions. This of course gives me even more to pick at. Since I’m about to rip it to shreds, I should make it clear that I enjoy the Buffy comic and would recommend it.

I’ve already written about the awfulness of Part III’s cover.

Even worse than the cover was the Andrew sequence. There are non-drawing problems with that sequences. I am not OK that in a world where there are heaps of women coming together to fight, men are acting as the leaders. I can’t stand the ‘heh Andrew’s gay’ jokes, which are lacking in the funny and try to compensate with the offensiveness. It’s even worse when the ‘joke’ is basically a set-up to have pictures of women in their underwear (because Andrew doesn’t find naked women interesting, isn’t that just the funniest thing you ever heard). The artist ‘just happened’ to have the woman with the most exaggerated hourglass figure front and centre in that panel (although my friend Rowan thought one of the slayers had a strap-on - which would have made for a much more interesting reading of the comic - unfortunately it is probably just underpants with a teddy bear on them).

The art is getting worse - women’s bodies are objectified more each week. There is no reason at all why Rowena is recovering in a sports bra and skin tight pants, except that in a comic her body isn’t created for her, but as a signal to readers of the position of women.

I guess I should be grateful that inside the book they’ve gone for the hideous witch look of OMWF for Willow.

Because I suspect someone will ask, there is an important difference between the way women’s bodies are portrayed throughout this issue, and how Angel and Spike were portrayed in the (hilarious) dream panel. In the three issues so far women’s bodies have been casually objectified and posed for the male gaze no matter what they’re doing. Fighting, healing, sleeping, standing, whatever - it’s been for men. If, in that context, there’d been a similar dream from Xander’s perspective, it wouldn’t have meant anything - just a continuation of the rest of the art. The only reason that panel stands out from the rest of the comic is because the artist isn’t randomly objectifying men.

There’s obviously a lot more to a comic than the art (particularly to someone as non-visual as me). For me, the most satisfying part of the comic were the dream sequences, which were pretty much perfect. I’ve always liked Joss’s dream sequences and this worked particularly well. I liked the idea of dreamspace - and like every other geek who owns this comic I’ve spent considerable time identifying what’s in the cubes (definitely Joss by the way) .

I thought the battle between Willow and Amy was pretty fantastic as well. I still think that Amy’s reappearance had more to do with a whole in the plot, than the character she had been, which sucks. But the fight was well done, I loved both the Zombie ball, and Giant Dawn.

I thought not telling us who kissed her was a bit of cheap tension. I hope they resolve the kiss soon, and not in a Chosen - whatever you want to happen that was what happened - kind of a way.*

I’m worried that Warren, like Amy, has been chosen for convenience rather than character (I don’t even care that there’s no way he could have survived). Unless the rest of Warren’s plotline involves intense Misogyny, then he was the wrong person to bring back.

But the big hole in the issue for me is Willow. Call me over-invested in these characters, but Willow, Xander and Buffy are friends. Now we’re landed in a situation where Willow hasn’t contacted Xander and Buffy for a long time. This is in a world with cell phones, and psychic communication. I’m not saying that it can’t work, but I think this is the wrong place in the story to bring us in.

I’m not saying that it can’t work, but I’m not sure this dynamic will hold my interest long enough for Joss to explain what’s going on. A month is a long time between issues, and the comics cost $8 each here.

Although while I’m being over-invested, enough with the retconning Willow’s sexuality. Willow was straight in high school, she totally ran with the stubbly crowd, from that badly dressed vampire in the first episode, to the stupid robot episode, to sex at graduation. Am I the only person who remember Oz?**

* I want Spike not to have been in Chosen at all and since I have a fan’s selective memory (Magic!Crack? I don’t know what you’re talking about) that’s relatively easy to achieve.

** Hey, maybe they’ll bring Oz back, that would be extremely awesome.

I’ve decided that the problem is that comics are too short. 24 pages a month is not enough, if you’ve been used to 42 minutes a week. A month is a long time between mouthfuls.

At the moment all I can say is that I’m enjoying the Buffy comic.¹ It feels foolish to pass judgement on any of the major plot-lines yet (although I’m not OK with any of the potential candidates for Buffy’s true love except Willow), since I don’t know where they’re going. Generally I’m excited by Giant Dawn, and the evil army, and everything else I’m going to wait and see.

It’s pretty cool to have the old characters back (and their dream sequences - I love a Joss dream sequence). I’m even beginning to like some of the slayers, which I never did with the potentials.² Although one of them has terrible taste in men.

The art bothers me more this issue. Mostly because Joss randomly set a scene while Dawn is washing in a water hole that won’t fit all of her. But apparently if Georges Jeanty ‘two women in their pyjamas attacking an intruder’ he thinks ‘butts, waists and thighs’. What he thinks when he hears ‘Buffy chained to a bed’ is even more predictable.³

1. Did you see Amp now has a ‘Buffy’ category - I’m so proud (back)
2. Except Milly from Freaks and Geeks, because Freaks and Geeks was awesome. (back)
3. I didn’t understand that at all actually, the bed looked like it had holes for her arms and what was this mystical protection that stopped her being stabbed, but didn’t stop her being tied up or enchanted? (back)

Last Wednesday I think I doubled my life-time total of geek points. It went something like this:

1. I bought a single issue comic book
2. that I’d pre-ordered,
3. from a comic book store,
4. on the first day it was released.
5. I had a conversation with the guy in the store about the quality of the book
6. that ended with me saying “of course it’s good it’s written by Joss Whedon.”

I am now the proud owner of the first issue of Buffy: Season 8. I even have it in my hands, which is rare - it’s been lent out to various people pretty constantly since I bought it.

I’ve never tried to review a comic book before, and it seems to be quite a difficult exercise. I’ve only got a very small part of the story. It’s like reviewing a TV show at the end of the first Act

I’ll start with the art-work - it’s not as bad as I’d thought it would be. The preview art showed the most obvious distortions of women who already have a body-type. It helps that I like the cover, while the proportions are annoying, the basic image is of Buffy strong and confident. Or maybe I’m getting desensitised already

As for the words (far more important to me, since they were the bits done by Joss), I’m excited. There’s not much there, and I’m nitpicking all over the place. But it’s definitely worth reading, and I’m excited about what’s going to happen next.

Now the problems:

• Xander the general of the slayer army - it’s not OK to have only one man in an organisation and have him in a leadership position. I’m fairly sure that goes against the message of at least two season finales (3 and 7).

• Amy? Really? That really disappoints me, and makes it clear that Joss’s thinking of her more as an object than a character - hey she’s someone we can bring back - people have heard of her so they’ll be excited. In the high school episodes Amy was a great character, and The Witch is one of the most successful metaphors they ever put together. I don’t see why they had to do this to the girl who was so excited about eating brownies. I’m aware that this is actually an objection to Season Six - so I’ll add, I didn’t actually need to be reminded of the Magic!Crack plot-line - I’m doing a good job of blocking that out - just like I block out Spike’s existence post Seeing Red.
• I trust Joss enough to believe that Dawn didn’t actually become a giant by having sex with a thricewise, because we really don’t need to go there again.

So those are my gripes. I love the dialogue (of course I love the dialogue, Joss wrote it). I’m very excited that the US military are treating Buffy like a terrorist cell - definitely a plot with a lot of potential.* I like where Buffy is emotionally, it seems quite realistic to me - the thing about changing the world is that when you do it the world’s all different. Sounds like a good starting point.

* Although hopefully less annoying than the actual potentials.

Audra Williams has a really great question“:

I said at a Mediawatch board meeting this weekend that I feel like it’s impossible to get upset with young girls dressing in revealing clothing without also signing onto the notion that it’s possible to dress as if you are sexually available. I would like to talk about this, because I feel like most people disagree with me but I can’t find a way to separate those two streams of thought.

What I mean is, I feel like people around the table believed that girls were dressing as if they are sexually available, and I don’t think it’s POSSIBLE to dress as if you are sexually available.

I don’t understand how the same feminist women who fought for the idea that the way someone dresses is NEVER a green light for sex can now say that teenage girls are “dressing like skanks” or use terms like “prosti-tots”?

I think the point she’s making is a really good one. It’s one thing to talk about the range of clothing available to girls, it is quite another to make any sort of comment about the girls that wear them.

But I actually want to take this off in a slightly different direction. One of the comments on my recent post about the Buffy comic books talked about the artist ’sexualising’ Willow. I really object to that language. The character of Willow was sexual - she once spent an entire episode in bed (and not in a bad way like Buffy and Riley). Giving someone larger breasts and an impractical garment doesn’t sexualise them - it objectifies them, and being sexual and being an object of desire are not the same thing.

Of course this conflation is hardly rare. There are many, many different ways women are taught that for us being sexual is being desired, rather than desiring. It is very hard to shake this idea off entirely. Women who do not fit the conventional idea of what is desirable have no way to be sexual.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be wanted, and I imagine most people find being found sexually attractive a turn on. The problem is that women’s sexuality is reduced to our desirability, and the extent to which we conform to a code of desireability, defines whether or not we’re seuxal.

Women can’t fight this by changing what we look like and particularly not by criticising what other women look like. Instead we need to reject any analysis which buys into the idea that women’s sexuality and appearance are one and the same and to talk about women’s desires and sexual agency, so that the next generation of girls knows that what they want matters.

I’d like to apologize about the amount I seem to be writing about the Buffy Season 8 comic book. Yes, I’m an obsessed fangirl, but it’s mostly because comics are a new medium to me. I find the sexism in comics new and kind of shocking, so I will be writing more about it than anyone wants to know.

So this is the cover of the third Buffy comic book:

That’s supposed to be Willow - who has grown a foot, had breast implants and stole Buffy’s pants. She has also apparently spent the years since we saw her last searching out the single most impractical garment ever made to wear as a top.

Bah - I was so excited about season 8, but I’m not sure I can take it if every female character is drawn for men.