Breaking Bad, Part 3--I'm Over The Feels Now

Hello hello, and welcome back for the final installment!

So; a couple of weeks ago, I mainlined Breaking Bad. I thought two posts would be enough, but I realized there was one tantalizing issue I hadn't explored fully. In fact, I hadn't seen much of it around the internet. That issue is simple--what about the women? While the mens are running around getting blow'd up and taking down gangsters, what are the female cast members doing?

At this point, I have to dock a mark or two from the series. It's still excellent, but in spite of some very good moves, there were a lot of genre cliches. Gilligan, like Steven Moffat of Doctor Who and Sherlock fame, seems to have a problem I've noticed in quite a few male writers otherwise known for quality--they can write an interesting woman, but they can really only write one woman, or perhaps two or three if they're skilled. I do quite like both Moffat and Gilligan's writing, but this really does bother me. And that's not the only thing.

 Let's go through the named female characters and get started with the one that bothered me most: Jane. Obviously, I'm leaving out Walter's principal/colleague person because I can't remember her actually doing anything other than responding to Walter, Wendy the hooker, the receptionist at Saul's, and a few of the drop-in mothers, etc. Now, I'm going to remind you all that there are going to be

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS 

So if you haven't seen the show, really, either watch it and finish it, or be prepared for the fact that you're going to learn some stuff that might seriously spoil plot twists.

Source. The lovely and doomed Jane.

Jane Margolis 

As soon as she showed up in series 2--I mean season 2, sorry, I've been watching a lot of British television--I knew she was dead meat. She was flirting with Jesse, she was a Cute But Remote Goth Girl, and she was an ex-junkie. In other words, dead meat. She did get an interesting character arc, I suppose. I mean, I really enjoyed it, but it certainly couldn't be called unpredictable. As her storyline went on, I remember muttering at the computer, "please don't make her into a Girlfriend in a Fridge. Please don't make her into a Girlfriend in a Fridge." And guess what? They did. There is nothing I can say about this other than to express my disdain that Gilligan introduced a character for the sole purpose of killing her off for Jesse Pinkman's personal development. BOO BOO SHAME BOO. That's awfully cheap.

Gretchen Schwartz

This character was interesting, in that she was presented a few times in the first season and had a pretty interesting role--the 'might-have-been' girlfriend of Walter White. She was actually a really interesting character, both condescending and sympathetic. (My, that word interesting comes up a lot.) However, after a truly undeserved tongue-lashing from Walter, she complete disappeared. BYE! *waves* That is, until the final season, when she was one half of a human plot-device by way of the Elliots. I'm assuming something happened with the actress, but I liked her and hoped to see more of her than we did. Her writing was unfortunately quite thin, and the moments where she was unsympathetic seemed really contrived. Oh, well. At least the worst thing that happened to her was a laser pointer and some embarrassment.

Lydia Rodarte-Quayle 

Oh, Lydia. Just in case you thought Marie was too laid back and sympathetic, we got...Lydia! I almost liked Lydia; she was a love-to-hate character, but without Marie's moments of compassion. I enjoyed the fact that she was in a position of power, but what did one of our only mover-and-shaker characters do? Cringe, cry, and moan to manipulate the d00dz, of course, even leveraging her child to guilt Walter. She was even grossed out by dead bodies. Really, Lids? Really? Even Joss Whedon did a decent job of making the Black Widow playful in The Avengers, and made a point of giving her a chance to get the upper hand on Loki. And considering she was one of the weakest characters, that's saying something. Lydia was whiny, underpowered, and a wuss. I was really, really hoping she'd pull out a gun and go all cold, but nope. I'm pretty sure there's not a single person who didn't cheer when she got a packet of ricin-laced Stevia. Would have been nice to get some sympathetic moments, especially since she was deviously clever, but nope.

Women, according to Vince Gilligan.

Marie Schrader

Oh, Marie. For all the complaining about Skyler, which we'll get to in a moment, it was Marie that bothered me. Her character development was so...fragmented and inconsistent. What a disappointment. In addition to being annoyingly high-strung (sometimes humorously so), she was loyal, protective, and a completely reactive character. Sure, there are women like this, and the actress did a great job, but it would have been nice to see her do more. Be more sympathetic. I'm not saying she needed combat boots and a big-ass gun (though that would have been hilarious and awesome), but just...something. I can't imagine her with Hank, and all of her desires (except for that neat shoplifting plot) were reactive. I do have to give her character points for the love and concern she showed, but she was kind of a human plot-complication. She showed up to annoy people and express concern. That was it. However, I do have some kind things to say about her sister.

Skyler White 

Skyler, who started as an uptight failing writer and stay-at-home pregnant mom, was one of the best and most interesting characters on the show. Where Gilligan often rewrote the same 'almost nice, mostly neurotic' female character several times, he actually succeeded with Skyler. She's willing to be devious and even enjoyed it, was capable of being aggressive, and actually showed some backbone when Walter was abusive. Her daughter Holly popped in and out (did I mention that I hate human McGuffins?) at plot convenience, but Skyler actually tried to go out and do things. Did she succeed? Enh. However, that lack of success made her interesting! She had feelings about things that weren't related to Walter! She argued! She was unethical, but had a moral compass and struggled with it! The only thing that really bugged me was the way she had interests in writing and the plot was completely dropped in the rest of the show. (Writers don't work like that. I smell a failed plot thread.) Sure, she was bitchy, but most of the time, Walt really deserved her tongue-lashing. It's a cliche to have a female character act as the voice of decency in a wasteland, but her character brought life and personality to the role. Not merely a soapbox or a plot device, but a person, and an imperfect one at that. Skyler White is actually my favorite Breaking Bad character.

Final Verdict

So, in addition to the 'rewritng the same woman' thing I've highlighted, my biggest complaint with the show is probably the lack of women with self-determination. All of the female characters above are attached to a man in some way. Lydia was attached to Mike (platonically) and was a villain; the rest were all romantically involved with male main characters in some way. I will give the show points for not resorting to cheap sexytimes that were out of character, but it was still so disappointing to see these interesting male characters complimented by half-deflated women. 

Women, according to most writers in Hollywood. I'm probably going to get in trouble for this. 

YO, BITCH, FIX IT!

So, as always, how would I fix it? My recommendation would have been to add a couple more female characters in there. It wouldn't have killed them to gender-swap a few minor characters. Yes, it was a realistic show about crime, and that's a misogynistic field, but if you can buy a Gatling-gun in a car trunk and a Walter White plan actually working at the end of the series, a couple of women shouldn't break your suspension of disbelief that much. That's just silly. I'm not saying Jesse should have been female (though that would have been interesting!) or that Hank and Marie could have been gender-swapped too, but--no, wait, that's exactly what I'm saying. Wimmenz don't always stick around the home to annoy their husbands. There's also more to us as a broad category than being pool sluts, inconvenient girlfriends, wistful exes, or villainous cry-babies.

Come on, Hollywood. We can work with this. Show us the goods. And while you're at it, maybe sneak a few gay people in through the side entrance? It would cost absolutely nothing to have more inclusive roles in TV, and would add so much to the possiblities and diversity of the cast, that I really hope we seem more stuff in the future. Orange is the New Black, which I have not watched, is apparently an imperfect show--but even touching on some issues has really made for interesting stuff and plenty of audience attention.

So, finally, stop using female characters as cheap character development black boxes, give the wimmenz some self-determination, and let ladies out of the home and into non-traditional roles. I'd prefer not to see tokenism here, but hell, at this point, anything would be nice for a change. Will it break immersion for some people? Maybe. However, it could also be a talking point, and when people are talking about your creative work, that is a Good Thing.  Imagine that--thinking! Dialogue! Ultimately, I don't think being entertained should mean clicking the 'off switch' for one's higher cerebral functions. I didn't hate the show, and I still quite liked it, but this theme left me more disappointed than 'the greatest show in the history of TV' should have. 

*****

Thanks for dropping by the nest once again. Don't miss any of the phuquerie. Find Michelle on Twitter, Facebook, and on Tumblr. More interviews and witty commentaries are coming. Keep checking back to see those surprise posts, too. This is your darling SciFiMagpie, over and out! 

An Unexpected Bounty: C. J. Marco's Counterargument!

Hello hello!


Today I have a bit of a treat. This is a repost from my friend Colin's blog. I challenged him to write a counterargument to my fantasy post on Tolkein. Do you agree? Or do you guys think I was right--that classic mediaeval European fantasy needs to be adapted to maintain its relevance?

*****

All right, I'll admit it: I did not really care all that much for the prose in Lord of the Rings. I preferred The Hobbit, to be perfectly honest. The Hobbit recently hit theaters and is being released for home viewing today, actually. My aim here is to talk a little bit about Tolkien's works, a little about the film adaptation, and a lot about what Tolkien's massive body of work means for those who both write and read fantasy fiction.

The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (along with a dearth of other, less-known-to-those-who-are-not-hardcore-fantasy-fans works like The Silmarillion) are all set in the pseudo-medieval world of Middle-Earth, a place populated by mysterious, magical, wise, haughty elves, mine-dwelling, gold-greedy, proud dwarves, peace-loving, restive, often-hungry-yet-overlooked hobbits, and the race of Men, the wildcard race. Sound familiar? Probably. These are the most commonly-touched on tropes of the fantasy race mix. Magical objects and swords and runes? Check. Epic struggle between the forces of light and darkness? Oh yeah.  Why does it all seem familiar now? Because Tolkien took off the blinders and showed us how it was done.

Prior to the saga of Middle-Earth, such stories were the province of T.H. White and Le Morte d'Arthur as well as myths, legends, and a few sword and sorcery novels. The Hobbit primed the audience for the saga of the Rings trilogy.

Many people have said that the Lord of the Rings movies were better than The Hobbit, and any time that a fantasy epic comes out in theaters, it is always inevitably compared to LotR, though the reviews generally refer to Rings as being the superior in the mix. Why? Because it is just that damn good. The Lord of the Rings is one of the primary building blocks for fantasy literature, and it also shows on the silver screen. 

But, the well's run dry! Everything's the same as Lord of the Rings! Where do we go from here?

A wizard is never boring. Nor is he cliche. He entertains precisely when he means to. Source.

NO. High fantasy is thriving. It's bigger than ever right now. The Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, Diablo, Warhammer, World of Warcraft, and my personal favorite, D&D/Pathfinder, are all influenced to a certain degree by their mighty predecessor, but they are extremely varied and have potential to be even more so. Great stories will always be great stories, regardless of some possible similarities. The sheer number of fantasy products out there are naturally going to incur some overlap. Many of the product lines I mentioned earlier are also equally influenced by Moorcock's tales of the albino Elric, Howard's Conan the Barbarian, H.P. Lovecraft, Ursula Le Guin, Lewis' Narnia, and any number of other sources. In fact, Michael Moorcock has gone on record saying that "one thing I'm pretty sure of, I was not in any way directly influenced by Prof. Tolkien". (Source)

This would have happened even without Tolkien. Source.

Fantasy is still largely populated by pseudo-European characters and isn't LGBTQ friendly! Is there any hope?

Fantasy is taking great strides to get some variation in it, particularly in the fields of fantasy roleplaying games. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Pathfinder roleplaying game. According to company reps, all of the iconic characters (characters which personify the features of the classes they represent) are ostensibly bisexual, and include a black female paladin, an albino half-elf magus, a monk who appears to be from the Indian subcontinent, an Asian ninja, a middle-eastern oracle... the list goes on. There's only a handful of identifiably "European-looking" characters in the mix, and even then, they are not the majority, given that many other classes are either demihuman or near-monstrous races, such as orcs. The Paizo staff have actually said that they wanted to move away from the image of the "sword-wielding white guy"

The object of much scorn, Regdar was shoe-horned into D&D against the will of the design team. Sigh. Source.

Most of the Pathfinder design team worked for WotC back in the days of 3.Xe D&D. Regdar, the white-guy-with-a-sword of D&D, was almost universally hated by the design team, and so generally Regdar was typically the first to die in any artistic representation. This even carried over into 4e, where Regdar is both dead on the chapter intro for Rituals, and again in the Monster Manual in the medusa artwork. The team wanted a more diverse team of iconic characters, and instead, the corporate bigwigs forced Regdar upon them. 


For a little variation, culturally speaking, check out Legend of the Five Rings, which is set in a swords-and-sorcerers version of feudal Japan called Rokugan. It's a setting of pure epic fantasy, but it is mostly about warring clans of human samurai and the evil demonic overlord Fu Leng's treachery. 

Come to Rokugan for a break from your knights and wizards. Samurai and Shugenjas will fill the gap. Source.

Fantasy has also been moving away from simple tales of a male youth who grows from being a lowly pigherd into the Chosen One who saves the world from a stereotypical "Dark Lord", as Frodo was, but those archetypes and tropes will ALWAYS persist in fantasy literature. Ari Marmell is an established writer who consistently breaks the mold when it comes to his fantasy literature. His novel The Conqueror's Shadow is an inversion, where the archetypal Dark Lord (spiky, skull-helmed armor and all) becomes the hero by taking on someone worse than himself. His companions are an ogre farmer, a witch who eats people, and a grumpy bound demon. And they're the good guys.

Corvis Rebaine, the Dark Lord who nearly crushed the world beneath his iron heel, and reluctant hero. Source.

Now, I'll geek out a bit more here and I'll say that Marmell's work is EXTREMELY well-written and his other works also diverge from the norm of the fantasy tropes. I am eager to read his book The Goblin Corps, which is apparently a novel told from the perspective of a bunch of goblins, who are usually cannon-fodder in other fantasy books, games, movies, etc. I am big fan of Marmell and, honestly, I think he may write some of the best dialogue I've I've ever read. Read it. It's worth your time.
As cultural perceptions change, we are bound to start seeing more variety in our fiction. Female characters have been taking a greater role in fantasy. The "boys only" concept of fantasy is already viewed as outdated. Racial and cultural diversity is being given greater emphasis. It's a matter of the new, young authors taking steps to look at the existing tropes and finding ways to turn them on their head.


TL;DR - Gimme the Bullet Points!

- Lord of the Rings made fantasy popular, but it's not the only epic out there.
- Not all fantasy is influenced by LOTR. In fact, there's some very popular stuff that was never touched by Tolkien's influence.
- The future of fantasy is diverse, glorious, and is not doomed to endless repetitions.
- Fantasy is evolving, shifting, changing as our cultural perceptions are changing.
- There will always be imitators of great authors - Imitation is still the sincerest (if most annoying) form of flattery.
- If a fantasy novel/movie/show/series/product moves you emotionally or really draws your interest, that is marvelous! Don't let anyone tell you that you don't like "good" fantasy. It's all subjective anyway.

So...

Is there a work of epic/high fantasy you feel really moved you? Do you feel that fantasy is played out? What's your favorite world to lose yourself in? You can always reply here on the blog, or hit me up on Twitter @colinjmarco. I look forward to hearing what fantasy you enjoy. My particular tastes are pretty broad, running the gamut from anime like Record of Lodoss War, games like D&D/Pathfinder, movies like Clash of the Titans, and lots more. Let me know what you think. Am I out to lunch? 

*****

Thanks for dropping by the nest once again. Don't miss any of the good kind of crazy. Find me on Twitter, Facebook, and on Tumblr. Watch out for my fantasy-themed spring: interviews with fantasy authors, content related to fantasy films and reviews, and some political commentary--the phuquerie you've come to expect from me. Keep checking back to see those surprise posts, too. This is your darling SciFiMagpie, over and out!