Dr. Horrible and Gender and Race and All

[alixtii]

Well, it also not only fails the Bechdel test so badly that it not not passes it but flunks it so badly it could be sleeping with the professor and still not manage a D. Which is a function of the fact that there are only four speaking parts (at least so far) in the whole thing (and NPH, Nathan, and Felicia are all perfect for the roles)--but explaining away the individual situation is always a bingo card response.

So it comes down to me that it's all about a pattern--Whedon has a good track record on feminist issues and a lousy one on race issues. After Buffy and its (admittedly multi-faceted and contradictory and self-problematizing) messages of female empowerment, and Angel and Firefly with their wonderful female characters in their ensembles even if the protagonists are male (and Firefly/Serenity is ultimately River's story at least as much as Mal's), not to mention Astonishing and Sugarshock (which I still have not read) and Runaways (which Amazon tells me is in the mail!), it's okay to me that he's telling a story with only one female character, and one who is essentially a prize to be won at that (although Felicia plays Penny wonderfully).

"This is the story I wanted to tell," is a bingo card response not because we shouldn't be telling stories like that (I mean, there are times when I think romcom formulas can be doing actual damage, but I'm not sure this one), but because it sidesteps the issue of why other stories aren't being told. The answer is always pluralism, more voices at the table, not less. Because I have a love for stories like Dr. Horrible, too, I've pretty much spent the entire time since I've gotten home work in tears, first crying through The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement and then through Superman: Doomsday, so the traditional stories are able to affect me in ways that are near and dear to my heart.

Dr. Horrible is so short--about the length of a single (non-musical) episode of Buffy--and simple that I don't think there's really enough to hang a critique on. OTOH, neither does it suddenly earn him points or turn over a new leaf when he should be working to do so. Luckily for me from my position of privilege, I can roll my eyes and just groan, "Oh, Joss" at just how white the show is and go on loving the show (almost three hours until the denouement!--how will I go on after there is no more left to look forward to?)--but not everyone is so lucky.

. . .

So once the canon is closed (or at least flat-lined, if one will be treating Commentary! as canon, which I probably won't be 'cept for RPF), and the possibility of being jossed eliminated, what Dr. Horrible femslash should I work on?

[Poll #1225918]

ETA: I forgot to put Who on the list! I really want a Dr. Horrible/Torchwood crossover. I mean, like, badly.

Comments

[tacky-tramp.livejournal.com]

I left a review on the official Facebook page, and I think I was the only person not to give it five stars -- I gave it four, and mentioned Penny's lack of agency as the reason. I'm crossing my fingers for a sweet turnaround in Act III. On dr_horriblesing, people have theorized that she might be Bad Horse!

And is it me, or are Pennys invariably sweet, frail, female love interests?

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Well, the first Penny I think of when I hear the name is Inspector Gadget's super-competent, take-charge-and-save-the-day-from-behind-the-scenes niece (I mean, obvious that hit my narrative kinks pretty hard back when I was six or whatever), so it's certainly not invariable.

I hope she's not Bad Horse--there's really no foundation laid for that, and it'd really invalidate pretty much everything we've heard Felicia sing so far. I mean, I'd love to watch Felicia rock a singing supervillain, but it'd be a cheap twist at this point. I think at the end of the day this forty-five minutes isn't a story about Penny's agency--or Capt. Hammer's, or Moist's, or anybody else's--and that's okay sometimes. Just not all the time.

[cereta.livejournal.com]

explaining away the individual situation is always a bingo card response

I had a post written and never revised on the whole "individual versus pattern" thing, wherein one set of people keep asking "is this thing, taken solely on it's own, racist/sexist/etc?" and the other is asking, "is this thing part of a larger pattern withing which it is racist/sexist/etc?" I need to get back to that some day. It may be supplanted by a post entitled, "I'm criticizing Doyle, and you're defending Watson."

[alixtii]

I'd love to see that post!

[kurosau.livejournal.com]

Did you enjoy Superman: Doomsday? Or were you crying for that other reason?

[alixtii.livejournal.com]

Well, I wasn't crying because it was so bad, if that's what you mean--although I suppose I did mourn the loss of the Superman animated series I remembered from the 90's. I'm not a purist, and I tend to get frustrated with people who object to adaptations on purist grounds, but I'm not sure I understood the purpose of the reboot, or the continuity into which this fit, which left me unsure of the significance of exactly what was going on--do supervillains other than Luthor exist in this 'verse? Which ones? Does Kara? Batman? The Justice League?

I suppose a film which makes me cry has affected me in some way, but since The Kid and Eight Crazy Nights both had me bawling I'm not sure "enjoy" is the right word--pretty much anything with the right mixture of will-to-poweriness and sentimentality will get me every time; I'm particularly susceptible to fictional funerals, with all that sudden outpouring of love and devotion. I get jealous of the corpse.

But yes, I enjoyed both Princess Diaries 2 and Superman: Doomsday, although of the two the former was less ambitious and thus was probably more easily able to accomplish its objectives. There were problems with the pacing in Superman: Doomsday, but mostly my problem with it is that it didn't on its own manage to make sufficiently care about the characters divorced from the continuities with which I was familiar in order for there to be much point to all the dying and resurrecting. It would be an awesome two- (or three- or four-)parter as part of an ongoing series, but on its own I'm mostly, "Yeah? So?"

[kurosau.livejournal.com]

I was surprised that they managed to make it better than the comic book storyline. I'm just angry at it because the whole Doomsday storyline is a bad way to bring about the death of Superman. So many better options existed.

And yeah, crying because it was so bad was the other reason I was talking about.

[drifterskip.livejournal.com]

Just happened to see this entry so I figured I'd put in a late vote.

[http://users.livejournal.com/peasant_/]

Given that no single story can tick the box for inclusion of every minority group I can never see the point in criticising any individual story for failing to include any one thing in particular. It would strike me as more productive for the criticisers to go off and write their own stories that do include the particular character or storyline or whatever that they wish to see. Otherwise it's really no different from people who complain there isn't enough unicorn fic - all they need to do to solve the problem is go write unicorn fic for themselves, Joss isn't beholden to write it for them. Because ultimately the only answer to why people aren't writing particular stories is because they aren't interested - so surely the place for the people who are interested to begin is by writing, or at the very least by engaging other authors' interest, not by criticising other people for lacking that interest. It seems to me it's better to do something positive rather than just negatively complain because other people aren't doing it for you. (That's not a snide remark directed at the person you linked to, I have no idea whether she writes or what she writes if she does, it's just a general opinion on the situation.)

I think it's all especially true because of the nature of writing - write what you know is after all a very strong rule for us, and for good reasons. Some things you can find out by research, but race, gender, the intimate experiences of being disabled or homosexual or extremely old or in any other disadvantaged state - those are precisely the things it is really hard to write about without direct personal experience. It might be possible to draw some broad brush strokes, but only someone with real experience and understanding can draw in the fine detail well enough to make a character worthwhile, so I think it is for people to write their own stories, because they'll only get annoyed if they leave it to someone else to do it for them.

Anyone can write. If you can form words to complain you can form words to tell a story. This is why when people write to me and ask me to write a plot bunny they've had I always say no - go write it yourself. And what is exciting is that I've encouraged at least three people to start writing that way, I've lost touch with one but two of them have become bloody good writers and have told their own stories in the way they wanted to tell them and far better than I ever would have done.


Anyway.

How about Penny/Bad Horse? I know plenty of girls who have a pretty damn close relationship with their horses. And she did seem to know who Bad Horse was - maybe there was a tinge of too much interest in that 'the thoroughbred of crime?'...