Like many Whovians, I sat through a tennis match I wasn’t interested in yesterday in order to watch the live announcement on who the 13th Doctor would be. The speculation began the moment that Peter Capaldi announced that he was leaving this iconic role. Naturally, everyone had opinions as several names were bandied about. Some of the names in rotation were: Kris Marshall, Natalie Dormer, Alexander Siddig, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Sacha Dhawan, Cyril Nri etc. When it came to the casting, the central question always seemed to be would the Doctor remain a man, as he has been for over fifty years, or would he follow Missy’s lead and become a woman?
When it came to conversations about a male Doctor, the challenge seemed to be about whether or not the Doctor would be of colour or be yet another incarnation of straight, cisgender white masculinity. Naturally, the traditionalists spit their damn dummy out at the very idea that the Doctor might no longer be white, even if they were relieved that he could potentially stay male. This of course is the problem with toxic fandom, of which Whovians are only a part of. Think about the character of the Doctor. He sweeps in when things are at their most desperate and he saves the day. The Doctor is always the smartest one in the room, the first to solve the puzzle and if necessary, the one to cast judgement and lay down the law. No wonder people continue to see the Doctor as male - he is the perfect example of our patriarchal power structure.
The majority of heads of state are male, the majority of judges are male, the majority of police officer are also male. These are positions of authority which are responsible for laying down the law, figuring out what went wrong and assigning punishment. For as much as I love the Doctor, he is a cop, politician (president of the world) and finally judge. How could any being embodying these roles and not be considered male, when women are still very much outliers in these careers despite the gains of feminism? Because this bullshit has gone on so long, it reads as traditional; the problem is that no one wants to think about what these damn traditions are based in because to do would be to admit the toxicity not just of a fandom we gleefully participate in but a deep rooted rot in our system.
Even though the series has spent some considerable effort explaining gender through the perspective of Time Lords and actually portrayed two Time Lords changing gender from male to female, traditionalists simply could not, nay would not consider a woman in the role of Doctor. Even as I write this, there are people across the globe pouting, shaking their fists and spitting their dummies out en masse. Some even having the nerve to question why their disapproval of a female Doctor makes them sexist. There is always controversy when a new Doctor is cast. Many were not happy when a relatively unknown Matt Smith was cast as the 11th Doctor; however, by the time he left, many (though I am not part of that group) came to consider Matt Smith as their favourite Doctor (these people are wrong, of course). It’s hardly surprising now that Peter Capaldi is leaving that those who found him to be old, grumpy and just plain too mean to be the Doctor are now all up in their feelings, blowing through boxes of Kleenex, expressing their sorrow at losing him. This is the cycle of how Whovians mourn the loss of one Doctor and prepare for the arrival of a new one. Certainly, no one expected near universal praise for the casting of Jodie Whittaker, but to base that disapproval solely on her gender, rather than, say, her previous work, is SEXIST. In fact it’s undeniable SEXISM.
Lady Midnight (The Dark Artifices #1) by Cassandra Clare
Though its buildings have been repaired. the Shadowhunters are still dealing with the results of the war. At the Los Angeles Institute, Emma, Jules and the entire Blackthorn family are very much on the front lines of the destruction. It's been five years since the war ended and though she has been told by the Clave that Sebastian is responsible for the death of her parents, Emma is convinced that he is not the guilty party and is determined to find out who the murderer really is. Julian has been taking care of his younger siblings after having to kill his father in the war. Julian struggles each day to keep his family together and to hide the fact that it is he and not his uncle running the Institute.
It all comes to a head when the fae arrive at the institute wanting to make a trade. Years ago they had stolen Mark Blackthorn and forced him to be a part of the Wild Hunt. When Emma learns that there are bodies being discovered in the city with the same markings as her parents, Emma becomes convinced that this is the long awaited clue she needs to discover who murdered her. With bodies piling up in Los Angeles, the fae are determined to get to the bottom of what is going on and since no one will work with them but the nephilim, they offer to trade Mark for the identity of the killer. The clock is racing. Somehow they have to find the murderer without letting the Clave know what is going on.
Finding out that Cassandra Clare had written yet another Shadowhunter book didn't please me at all.
She has after all written the same series twice and simply changed the name of the characters. To be perfectly honest, I didn't go into Lady Midnight with a lot hope which is a good thing because I avoided any disappointment. It's official, Clare is going to drain this world for every dollar it can produce because she suffers from an extreme lack of imagination. Love triangles and angst abound in this 500+ page tome to which I unfortunately sacrificed hours of my precious life.
Sure, this time Emma isn't a young girl with no idea about what really inhabits the world but Clare once again has teenagers saving the world. TEENAGERS. Of course there are no reliable adults and the kids always know better than anyone how to deal with danger. However, with all the danger, they still have time for relationship angst, love triangles and sex.
Clare is nothing if not repetitive and this holds very much true for Lady Midnight. I am sure she wanted to give us an update from The Mortal Instruments Series and the Infernal Devices Series but to do that she had to forcefully ram in Clary, Jace, Jem and Tessa in such a fashion, it felt like she was trying to push a square peg in a round hold. If the focus of this story is supposed to be about the Blackthorn family and Emma, why is it that we had to read repeatedly about Emma's former crush Jace and how he is the shadowhunter of his generation? What was the point of squeezing in a Jace/Clary love scene into the book? Why did Magnus supposedly accidentally run into Emma and Jules to impart some crucial information and then absolutely disappear from the story? Sure, it was great to learn that Magnus and Alec have adopted a demon child together but it had nothing to do with the plot of Lady Midnight.
Even if were to forgive the awkward cramming in of characters, there's still Clare's appalling writing style to deal with. I have never read such verbose descriptions of eyelashes, hair and facial expressions in my life -- causing me to wonder if Clare believes that her readers will forget what her characters look like -- if she doesn't describe them in painful detail every few pages. Emma is a blonde, Jules has blue eyes and Mark has heterochromia. I didn't need to have these simple descriptors repeatedly mentioned in the text to remind me, as though I had the attention span of a toddler. Her descriptions are at times ridiculous. "It was there in the way his lashes brushed his cheeks when he concentrated," thus causing me to wonder how long are dudes eyelashes really? How can he even see if his lashes are long enough to touch his cheeks when his eyes are closed? Then there's the purple prose:
The Walking Dead, Season Six, Episode Fifteen: East
The East is the penultimate episode of season six, setting us up for the appearance of Negan and the big season finale. With the exception of Michonne and Rick, much of Alexandria seems to be reeling from the loss of Denise. Rick, being Rick is over confidant, certain that they can handle anything that comes their way and that it won't be like when The Governor attacked the prison. Rick's in an ultimate state of denial about exactly how much trouble Alexandria is in. Rick is just happy to be in bed with Michonne. I do however think that shot of Richonne sharing an apple in bed together is sweet and shows us exactly how far these two have come since they first met.
Exit is appropriately titled because people just started streaming through the gates of Alexandria. Darryl is angry that he allowed Dwight to live and thus blames himself for the loss of Denise. Darryl hops on his bike seeking justice and is quickly followed by Rosita, Michonne and Glenn. Tobin gives Rick, Carol's John Doe letter and Rick and Morgan head out in search of Carol.
The juxtaposition between Carol and Darryl is really quite interesting. Darryl is feeling guilty because despite all the reasons he had to kill, he chose mercy and even helped Dwight. His choice to believe in innate good cost him in a way he couldn't possibly have predicted and now his greatest desire is to make it right. Glenn rightfully argues that this isn't about Denise because Denise is dead and that nothing Darryl does outside of the walls is going to bring Denise back. Carol on the other hand is a loving nurturing person (as long as she is not asking you to check out the flowers) who realises that she simply doesn't want to kill again. The problem with loving people in the zombie apocalypse, is that you have to be able to protect them and that means killing. Carol may not want to kill but she will if she has to and it becomes evident, as we watch her sewing a gun into the sleeve of her jacket.
When we see Carol standing outside of her vehicle after having the tires shot out by the Saviours, we know that these men are already dead. Carol's body begins to shake and she's clearly hyperventilating, giving the impression that she is weak and defenseless. Carol begs them repeatedly, saying that no one has to die but it's clear what she really means is that they don't have to die. Carol shoots her weapon, gathers their guns and takes off. Carol is bad ass and while she may not want to kill, she will if she has to. What is perhaps most interesting about Carol facing off against her attackers is that they see her gender and the fact that she is alone to be a sign of weakness. It never occurs to them that a woman who has survived this long in a zombie apocalypse must be capable in some way.
The Rick/Morgan day trip is also quite fascinating. Rick has now decided that he was wrong for sending Carol away, claiming that today, he would have killed Karen and David and that Carol did the right things because Karen and David were beyond hope. The Rick who turned Carol into an outcast still had hope and today he offers no one a chance. Morgan very much still believes in redemption. Morgan explains what happened with the wolf and even stops Rick from killing someone who runs from them. Morgan thinks that even in this horrible environment people can change and come back from the worst. Carol may be family to Rick now but it's Morgan who understands her because he has been her. Morgan like Carol, no longer wants to kill. Morgan sees the entire circle of life.
If you’ve been connected to the internet at all over the past week, you will have seen a lot of fan reaction to the death of Lexa on The 100. Emotions have been… high. Twitter hashtags #LexaDeservesBetter and #LGBTFansDeserveBetter have both been full of outpourings of pain and anger over this death. A lot of people are very angry, especially LGBTQ fans of the show who, for a brief moment, allowed themselves to hope.
It seems, yet again, that we should have known better - the media teaches us harsh lessons against hope for LGBTQ happiness time and time again
In many ways, Lexa’s death on The 100 is especially painful because the show has a bisexual protagonist (and CW shows with LGBTQ protagonists are RARE. Well, shows with LGBTQ protagonists at all are rare - of the 108 shows we’ve watched we’ve seen 4 LGBTQ protagonists and 4 LGBTQ dual protagonists - and many are lacking) and genuinely seemed to be a show whose writers had a clue or at least were trying. I mean, they weren’t perfect - they told us no-one in the world of The 100 cared about sexuality but then had no LGBTQ characters until the very end of the second season (it took that long to reveal Clarke was bisexual in this homophobia free world). And Miller and Bryan bro-hugging goodbye. But, still, it was rare, it was unique, it was hopeful - and it’s that level of hope that fans, especially LGBTQ fans, invested in the show that made Lexa’s death so devastating and enraging. They expected better, they were given every reason to expect better
Since Alycia Debnam-Carey is contracted with Fear The Walking Dead, we knew that she wasn’t going to stay on the show for much longer - so removing her from the show in some way was definitely something the writers were faced with. But there were so many ways they could have done this differently.
They could have had Lexa die in a way that was actually remotely respectful for her, showing her power, her importance - rather than a stray bullet meant for Clarke (a death which eerily echoes the death of Tara in Buffy the Vampire Slayer which, really, is a comparison the writers should have taken pains to avoid). Or they could have stepped away from Clarke/Lexa relationship since they knew that it couldn’t possibly have a long life - especially since they had story reasons for the two not to want to get close again. Both could have worked together, found other relationships and we could have had grief without the endless tragedy
They could have simply had other/more prominent LGBTQ relationships. It wouldn’t match the power of the protagonist’s relationship, but it would have had something.
Or they could have had Lexa’s death not follow mere minutes after Clarke and Lexa had sex. After a season of potential growth, they finally came together - Clarke and Lexa were finally couple, finally, clearly in love and DEATH. I can’t even think of worst timing for this, or a more cruel way to depict this relationship and its tragedy. It’s also not the first time they’ve teased this relationship before cruelly slapping it down. At the end of season 2 they teased LGBTQ fans with the kiss between Lexa and Clarke followed almost instantly by Lexa’s betrayal at Camp Weather driving them apart. Now we have hope being raised again - and cruelly slapped down, but much more permanently.
Also that week we had The Magicians killing off Elliot’s short lived love interest Mike. Again we see the same patterns - a LGBTQ character seemed to be finding happiness, was introduced to a love interest, began to form a relationship aaaaand…. Death. Again, the death was exacerbated by how distastefully it was portrayed. With Elliot and Mike’s treatment with Margot and the Djinn, the terrible GB trope - and Mike turning evil and running towards inevitable death seconds after the relationship starts to get meaningful (and Elliot shared his secret past with him). As soon as this relationship was established as an actual relationship, it had to end. For an added, sickening gut punch, Elliot is the one who killed his love. Just so we have maximum pain and despair - but why do I think Elliot isn’t going to exactly dominate the next few episodes?
The Magicians even doubled down on this terrible trope the very next episode - introducing a Black, disabled Lesbian or Bisexual woman in order to give a straight, white able bodied woman a Life Lesson before shuffling off her mortal coil. Yes, she was introduced for another character's development and then killed in the same episode - one week after the terrible death of Mike. At this point you kind of wonder if they're TRYING to be terrible?
Let’s be clear, both shows will continue to have LGBTQ characters - but they’re fraught and problematic. The Magicians continues with a tragic, horrendously stereotyped Elliot while The 100 has Clarke who now has All The Pain with vanishingly minor characters Miller and Bryan already at odds. We have LGBTQ characters, but they can’t be happy and the can’t have relationships - and this is something we’ve seen a lot on our shows:
True Blood killed off Jesus when he and Lafayette were becoming a couple and killed off Tara when it looked like she and Pam were actually building a relationship (Pam and Lafayette’s tragedy and usefulness managed to get them through this show - seriously there were a lot of dead LGBTQs over the seasons). Hemlock Grove decided to go The 100 route and have Johann killed off just as he found a real relationship (that’ll teach you to be happy!) doubling down on Clementine’s previous gaydeath. The Originals punished Josh and Aiden’s relationship with death, no mourning and Josh returning as a good GBF (that’ll teach you Josh!). Orphan Black killed off Delphine when it seemed she and Cosima were finding a connection after a very very rocky road. Dracula threw in 2 gay men in a relationship expressly for them to die tragically before we followed the tragic story of tragic Mina and her tragic unrequited love. Penny Dreadful disposes of Angelique as soon as her relationship with Dorian became dull to the writers and Stahma is forced to kill Kenya on Defiance (is this another pattern? LGBTQ people having to outright murder the people they’re supposed to care about?) If so, does Hex count having to bit part gay man killed by the straight guy he had a crush on? On Dominion, Arika lost Uriel (who died off screen) and then Daria (who just disappeared/ceased being important/is sideline) which is even more salt in the wounds as neither character seems to be someone Arika even cared over much about. And on Game of Thrones Renly not only died (after precious little characterisation) leaving Loras tragic alone, but his next love interest testified against him for the gross homophobic trial storyline. On top of that, Oberyn died (after a few episodes of all swashbucking sex all the time) leaving behind a tragic bisexual love interest, Ellaria Sand.
The Walking Dead, Season Six, Episode Ten: The Next World
After watching The Walking Dead, my mind is absolutely blown. HOLY SHIT!!!. Okay, we will have to start at the very beginning, but I warn you, I'm full of major squee. Because of the events this episode I am going to put a major spoiler alert on this recap and review for the simple fact that if you are even remotely a fan, you should watch this yourself first.
It's been two months since the events of the last episode and the residents of Alexandria have settled into a new normalcy. Michonne, Carl and Rick have created their own little family talking about things like running out of toothpaste and playing classic rock. Michonne has always lived in the house with Rick and Carl but it seems that a new level of intimacy has been created. After getting dressed for the day, they head their separate ways.
Michonne heads to watch on the wall but leaves when she notices someone walking through the woods. Michonne meets up with Spencer, who says that he likes to walk after his shift is over but doesn't really want to go into details. Michonne tries to encourage Spencer to return home, but Alexandria no longer feels like that to him now that he is the last survivor of his family. In this moment, Spencer is a representative of the Alexandrians. Before Rick et al arrived, they had been sheltered behind the walls and now they finally know real loss and devastation.Spencer is now forced to finally really confront the fact that he is living in a zombie apocalypse and that means no one you love is ever safe. Spencer is insistent that there's something that he has to do and Michonne decides to tag along with the hopes of figuring out what is going on after she notices that Spencer is walking around through woods with a shovel strapped to his back. At this point, I really didn't want to Michonne babysitting yet another white person, or slip into the role of wise Negro. We could all do without that especially given that The Walking Dead loves to put her in the mammy role far too often.
Rick decides to go on a run for supplies with Darryl. Rick is clearly in the best of spirits whereas; Darryl seems grouchy, even for Darryl. They head out to find sorghum, a grain which Eugene feels just might be helpful with their food situation. Rick starts to puts on some music though Darryl begs him not to. In many ways it seems that Rick and Darryl have switched roles since dealing with the big swarm of zombies. Rick is optimistic and Darryl has become the pessimist, seeing bad in everything. They come across a factory and manage to find a truck full of supplies. It seems fortuitous, until Jesus crashes into Rick and the process steals the keys, unbeknownst to Rick and Darryl. Rick is immediately interested in finding out more about Jesus to consider whether he belongs in Alexandria but Darryl simply wants Jesus to go. Jesus backs away from the two men claiming that he was running from walkers. Rick starts to ask Jesus questions but Jesus quickly makes his exit. Darryl and Rick prepare to leave when they hear what they think are gun shots but it turns out to be firecrackers being set off in a barrel. By the time they get back to the truck, Jesus is driving. And thus begins the buddy section of this episode.
I cannot say that I remember actively laughing so hard at an episode of The Walking Dead ever. Rick played good cop to Darryl's bad cop as the two chased down Jesus. I loved that they both shot and killed a walker when Jesus accused them of not having bullets in their guns. In this moment, you can see how well these Rick and Darryl know each other. The Keystone Cops moment happens when Rick and Darryl realise that though they had tied Jesus up and left him on the side of the road, he has somehow managed to get on the roof of their truck. Darryl decides that he is not going to take it anymore and hops out of the truck, even as Rick tries to stop him. Darryl ends up chasing Jesus around the field, as Rick awkwardly maneuvers the truck. Rick is finally forced to get out when walkers get loose, leaving Darryl to try and capture Jesus. Jesus manages to grab Darryl's gun and orders him to duck and then promptly kills the walker sneaking up on Darryl. Darryl is still angry and demands his gun back. The two men struggle and fall out of the truck. Jesus hits his head and the truck sinks into the lake. Darryl wants to leave Jesus behind because of the trouble he caused but Rick decides the right thing to do is to bring him back and have Denise check him out.
Carl spends a part of his day in the woods with Enid. Enid is not at all comfortable being in the woods but Carl tries to blow it off as kids stuff. This is another case of role reversal. It used to be Enid who would take walks in the woods and Carl who would suggest that she shouldn't be outside of the walls. Clearly, Enid didn't emerge unscathed from the events of two months ago. When a walker comes out of the woods to attack, Enid is adamant that they should kill it but Carl simply pushes it out of the way. Enid is convinced that something is wrong with Carl and storms off.
Alex Craft is one of two grave witches in Nekros. Since discovering that she is Fae, Alex has been trying to balance dealing with the drama that comes with it, her overly complicated love life and her business. When a new drug called glitter hits the seat, Alex is tasked by the Queen, who believes that someone is trying to end her rule to find out the guilty party. This is made even more difficult because Alex, who is not tied to a court is fading. As a fae, Alex needs a tie to faerie to survive in the modern world and her unwillingness to pledge herself to any court makes this a big problem. Somehow, Alex has to convince the Queen to give her unaligned status, avoid the marriage that her father set into motion for her and find the person responsible for distributing a very dangerous drug.
Grave Memory, book 3 in this series was published in 2012, and I actually read it in 2013. That's a long time between books. While I read our previous review, I have to admit that because this series has so many moving parts, it took me a bit to catch up and get back into Price's world. It was helpful that in many ways along the way, Price did recaps reminding us of who these characters were to Alex Craft and some of their history.
The story begins when Alex sees a man ride by on a unicorn. Yeah, I would stop and stare if I saw that as well. It seems that a new drug called Glitter has hit the streets and people are dying because their life essence brings to life their worst nightmares. Drugs are bad Mmkay. I could have used a little bit more nuance with this part of the storyline. There are various reasons people turn to drugs yet none of this was explored. Essentially, Price puts drug use down to simple youth experimentation and then couples it with the most negative consequences. The direction this took reminded me very much of those old eighties after school specials. Yes, I know I am dating myself so shut up about it.
Price spent a lot of time on Craft's romantic life. At present, Alex's boyfriend is Death and this poses a problem because they're not really allowed to be a couple and so consequently he is in and out of her life. Death cannot be there to talk through Alex's problems or even be a steady shoulder to lean on. In fact, Alex doesn't even know Death's real name or even how long he has been a reaper. Alex has known Death since she was a child and begged him not to take her mother's soul but she doesn't really know him and this bothers her more than she cares to admit. Then there's Fallon, who is sworn to the Queen and therefore cannot be trusted. This doesn't mean that the attraction toward Fallon has dimmed, it just means that Alex has acknowledged that there's no future between them no matter how many times Fallon tries to show his love for her. It's Fallon who jumps into muddy pond to save her life and Fallon who stands between Alex and the Queen whenever he senses that she is danger of losing her head to the monarch. The problem is that if the Queen orders Fallon to kill Alex, he must obey that order. It seems that there are really no good options when it comes to romance for Alex.
Alex is one of the few disabled protagonists in this genre. Alex is night blind and is losing her sight because of continued use of her magic to raise shades to solve murders. Every time Alex uses her powers she is unable to see and at one point actually has to be guided around my Fallon. My issue with this is that Alex often turns into a super crip. She supposedly is trying to use her powers less because of a fear of going blind but throughout Grave Visions, Alex constantly uses her powers. Sure, there are reasons for Alex to rely on her power but my issue is that she never tries any other alternatives. Does this sound like someone worried about going blind to you?
Much of the media in this genre is created in the United States, which is hardly surprising given the hegemony of American pop culture. Because of the pervasiveness of American pop culture it has come to constitute a form of American soft power. No country ever wants to see itself as anything but the center of the world but American pop culture has exceedingly made a point of this not only in the fantasy genre but in pretty much everything it produces. In the eighties, it was all about some brave American taking on a Russian threat and ending up victorious; the hero often wrapped in the stars and stripes, delivering a big dose of patriotism with their knock out punch. In the nineties, with the end of the cold war, we saw a brief time of antagonists coming from different geographic areas but the hero resoundingly remained American. With the dawn of the 21st century and the rise of the McWorld vs Jihad dilemma, antagonists have overwhelmingly been Middle Eastern, while the hero remained American. The point of all of these stories is to suggest to the reader, viewer and consumer that no matter the situation or the villain, America is always on the side of right and will emerge victorious based solely American exceptionalism. The bigger the threat, the faster and stronger the American response will be and whether by might or intelligence, some American will have the right answer to the situation.
The very first time I became aware of this phenomenon in speculative fiction was the movie Independence Day. Yeah, it was great to watch Will Smith, as Captain Steven Hiller, take on the aliens but it’s telling that it was Jeff Goldblum, as David Levinson, who came up with the solution to the alien invasion. Yes, Levinson graduated from MIT and was an environmentalist but am I really supposed to believe that there was no one else outside of an American smart enough to figure out the invasion countdown clock? And what about the fact that the rest of the world seemed to be sitting around waiting for someone else to come up with a solution? Not only did Hiller and Levinson take the war to the aliens on behalf of the rest of the world, the Americans co-ordinated the attack which occurred on July 4th. Could American exceptionalism be any more obvious? Even President Thomas J. Whitmore, played by Bill Pullman, joined the fight because he was a former Gulf War vet. If that were not enough, Whitmore declared July 4th the Independence Day for the world. It's not like the independence of any other country from colonial rule could possibly be significant.
“Perhaps it’s fate that today is the 4th of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom, not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution -- but from annihilation.
We're fighting for our right to live, to exist.
And should we win the day, the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:
"We will not go quietly into the night!
We will not vanish without a fight!
We're going to live on!
We're going to survive!"
Today, we celebrate our Independence Day!”
Considering that the Americans would not have gotten to their Independence Day without the French, one really had to suspend belief to buy into the whole rally the troops moment delivered by the impassioned Pullman, as President Whitmore. Naturally, the president had to get into the action because like the rest of his people, he was a problem solver and epically brave. Thank goodness this is fiction because despite having the title commander in chief, there has only been one president since Eisenhower to actually serve in an active duty position.
When I read World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max Brooks, one of the things that impressed me was the global nature of the story itself which is quite unlike many of the zombie apocalypse stories currently airing (think The Walking Dead or I Zombie for instance). Not only did the novel cover many different areas, each country dealt with the zombie invasion based on their culture. North Korea for instance, simply moved its people below ground and cut itself off from the rest world. When this story however became the film World War Z , the international narrative completely changed. I suppose the producers thought that with Brad Pitt taking on the role of Gerry Lane in a story that didn't originally have a protagonist, we wouldn’t notice the change in focus. Instead of the story reflecting how different countries and cultures dealt with a zombie apocalypse, we were offered one globe trotting American saving the world, with the rest of humanity serving in an ancillary position. Naturally, Gerry is excellent at his job and comes up with the solution. The world was saved by the handsome Brad Pitt in 116 minutes, so who cares about the original narrative, or the fact that the change served the agenda of promoting America as the saviour of the world?
Continuing on with American exceptionalism being expressed through military might in a dystopia, we have The Last Ship. A plague is killing off the human population but thankfully, the American government acted quickly at the first sign of mass contagion, and sent out the U.S.S. Nathan James to find a primordial strain. It’s funny how in fiction, the U.S. government can act quickly because when presented with the first deaths from HIV/AIDS, the government was quick to turn its back. I suppose the difference is that in The Last Ship, the government actually feels the people who are dying are actually human and that the contagion is not an act of an angry God dealing out justice to sinners.
The Last Ship gave us some nostalgia in the first season because the Navy quickly found itself facing off against the Russians. I’m sure that this is no accident given the current furor over Putin. Naturally, the bright CO CDR Tom Chandler is able to outsmart and defeat Admiral Konstantin Nikolajewitsch Ruskov. Americans supposedly won the Cold War all on their lonesome, so how could they possibly then be defeated by the supposedly evil Russians in a dystopian? With the Russians defeated, the next antagonists were the British. There may have been a time when the sun didn’t set on the British empire but as far as the crew of Nathan James is concerned, the British are not going to set the agenda for the new world. And besides, everyone knows that the British are just evil, listen to those accents! Unlike the British and the Russians, the seamen of the Nathan James only have the good of humanity in their hearts and are absolutely incorruptible. They even manage to rescue the president and prop him up for good measure. Yeah for the American way of life and their much vaunted democracy, that is unless you are a person of colour and are trying to vote, or your daddy has enough money to buy an election.
On The Originals we have a number of female characters - both plotting against the Original family, and the eternally troubled Klaus in particular - and working for them. And, of course, sharing Klaus’s bed. These women need to be careful, though, because there’s fine print - get too close to Klaus and you may become his chattel. And since he’s one of the most powerful creatures on the planet, how free are these women to reject him and his claim?
We have been complaining about the portrayal of Rebekah Mikaelson since early on in her appearances on The Vampire Diaries (TVD). Over time, we have seen her backstory on both TVD and The Originals. There has been one long running theme to Rebekah’s past - she is not free. Rebekah is not free to fall in love and she most certainly is not free to have sex. You might think that a 1000 year old female vampire might just be able to make competent decisions about what do with her vagina but according to Klaus Mikaelson, you would be wrong. Klaus spends an epic amount of time either killing Rebekah’s suitors, or scaring them away. This, of course, is done under the guise of love because what good is a patriarch for if he doesn’t keep the family vagina pure? No man can possibly be good enough for Klaus’s little sister and while he projects this as a sign of his high esteem for Rebekah, it is really just the same ordinary patriarchal desire to control female bodies that has been going on since the beginning time.
That his infatuation with his sister’s genitals is downright incestous is ignored. No, that would be creepy, so instead it is wrapped in sexist justifications that reduce Rebekah’s personhood. Klaus is just intense when he loves people and because he believes that he is protecting her it’s deemed okay and it is further troubling because, as Klaus is the protagonist of The Originals, the audience is expected to see his POV. Yes, Rebekah continually rebels and she talks about wanting to be in a loving relationship and even raise a child some day. What Rebekah doesn’t do is simply express a desire to get laid. Casual sex is something the males of both the TVD and The Originals can and do engage in sex without much direct consequence. When Rebekah seeks a partner it is almost always about wanting a relationship. At times it reads as justifying her sexual desire as chaste enough in the hope that Klaus will break down long enough for her to get her groove on.
What is further galling about this whole situation is that Rebekah has come to accept Klaus’s policing of her sex life. When she finally confronts Klaus about his policing, it’s not because he has no right to control her sex life - but because his standards are too harsh and limiting. She doesn’t think he should have no say in policing her - he just needs to be more relaxed about it, less exacting. She doesn’t question his right to make those decisions for her - she questions whether he’s making good decisions.
The second blonde in Klaus’s life is Camille. Klaus was introduced to Camille by Marcel and from almost the moment he meets her, Klaus manipulates her. Klaus uses compulsion to force Camille to date Marcel, messes with her memory, forces her to provide counselling and, when things begin to look like they just might get rough in the quarter, tries to force Camille to leave New Orleans (it’s for own good, love honest.) Somewhere in the middle of all of that manipulation, Klaus decides that he must police the vagina of another grown woman. And what does Camille do about? Why she panders to it and justifies it of course.
Prior to Rebekah leaving the show, Camille was a fairly independent character who fought back against Klaus’s manipulations every chance she got. The moment Klaus got down to one blonde, there was an instant transfer of vaginal rights to everyone’s favourite vampire patriarch. This manifests after Camille decides to sleep with Marcel in a drunken binge. She is absolutely clear that she doesn’t regret her decision to sex; however, instantly becomes concerned with how Klaus is going to feel about this. Why would a woman who has been so abused by a violent man have concern with how her abuser feels about her decisions regarding her own body? I’ll tell you why - the writers have deemed Klaus’s penchant for collecting vaginas to be non problematic. Klaus’s vagina collection has become such a thing that Genieve wounds him by informing him of Camille’s night of passion with Marcel. When confronted, Camille doesn’t tell Klaus that her sex life is none of his business but stands silently like someone admitting guilt and feeling shame.
On their own, the issues with Rebekah and Camille are terrible but when you add in that what they have in common is Marcel, the policing of these women takes on a racial element. Marcel knows good and well that both Camille and Rebekah have been declared Klaus’s possessions and he pursues them almost to the exclusion of all else. Each time, Marcel is told that he must back off by Klaus based on the idea that no one is good enough for them. Keep in mind that Klaus essentially raised Marcel from childhood and changed him into a vampire but somehow, Marcel isn’t good enough for Klaus’s blonde collection. The visual presents as a White man (read: Klaus) saving White women (Rebekah and Camille) from an overly enterprising Black man, who just doesn't know his place. That Marcel has only been linked romantically with White women enforces that White women represent the epitome of womanhood and must be possessed to present an image of competent, virile masculinity. This further reifies Rebekah and Camille as possessions and paints Marcel as a lascivious sexual monster who good White women must be protected from.
Our first influences in life are our parents. Along the way, perhaps, our teachers, pop culture or friends also weigh in to change our perspective in life but our parents usually have the longest and most dramatic hold over us. It’s hardly a surprise then that when it comes to speculative fiction that parents have become a recurring trope in many ways. We have discussed dead mothers and absent fathers ad nauseum but what we haven’t looked at is the placing of blame for horrendous actions on one’s parents. Yes, really, it’s a thing I swear.
For me, perhaps the most pervasive example is Klaus from The Originals. Klaus would have us believe that were it not for the fact that he is the child of an affair and that his parents were so cruel, that his artistic soul would have soared through the stratosphere and he would have given the world great works of art to cherish forever. Clearly, he hasn’t looked at his own art. There’s no doubt that Mikael was an abusive parent but none of Mikael’s actions explain and or justify Klaus’s bloodlust. Sure, Esther lied to Klaus repeatedly but does that give him the right to control every single woman he interacts with?
Klaus has even started to get counseling for his mommy and daddy issues with Cami. I’m not knocking counselling but let’s stop and think for a moment about the fact that Klaus is 1,000 years old. The events that he is most upset about happened a millennium ago. There’s holding a grudge and there’s blaming mommy and daddy because you don’t want to take responsibility for your own shit. I think that we can agree that Klaus easily falls into the later. He repeatedly uses his pain and his damage to make himself more appealing to women. It has just become another weapon in his arsenal, no matter how many times he gets all teary eyed and tortured artist.
Jafar from Once Upon A Time in Wonderland is quite similar to Klaus. Jafar entered his father’s castle under false pretexts and worked as a servant for the Sultan for quite some time. After Jafar revealed his true identity, Jafar’s father not only abandoned and rejected him, he ordered Jafar to be taken out with the garbage. In this moment, Jafar swore revenge and turned to the dark side. To that end, Jafar would kill, deceive, steal and torture until finally he had his father in his grasp. No matter what evil he did, Jafar could not come to any kind of closure about his parentage. In fact, his greatest wish was for the Sultan to call him son, a wish that would be denied repeatedly. Jafar is actually willing to rewrite the entire rules of reality to compel his daddy to love him, no matter who he destroys or what suffering he brings.
Then you have people like Rumpelstiltskin, who hit the Daddy issues from two sides of the equation. Rumplestiltskin’s father is Peter Pan and Pan is certainly not the friendly, childlike creature that we first met in Barry’s books. The Pan in Once Upon A Time, is angry, calculating, evil and willing to sacrifice anyone to get what he wants. Sounds like Rumpelstiltskin is a chip off the old block doesn’t it? To his credit, Rumplestiltskin does blame some of his decision on his cowardice and love of power but he does suggest that at least an element of his ongoing problems are based in his daddy issues.
Then you have Rumplestiltskin as a father to Neil. Rumplestiltskin knows that he is a failure as a father and that is obvious by his ongoing obsession with the fact that he deserted Neil.
“I wanted to look for you, but I was too afraid that you wouldn't forgive me because I never forgave myself. There hasn't been a day that's gone by that I don't regret having left you.”
Rumplestiltskin constantly invokes Baelfire and connects it to his shame but Baelfire never really serves as motivation for real and lasting change. Ultimately, what Rumpelstiltskin wants to do is to do all the heinous things he desires, exercise his power, and manipulate everyone in sight, all while whining about his failure as a father to garner sympathy or claim justification. Baelfire is like a trump card that Rumplestiltskin pulls out of back pocket when he needs to humanise himself. Oh he has Daddy issues but they are convenient Daddy issues.
We, along with many others, have said time and again how important it is for us to have marginalised people depicted. Erasure is extremely damaging, and tokenism is little better improvement.
Many authors and writers are catching on to that - either due to a genuine hope to make things better or because they’ve caught on that diversity may be a useful marketing ploy in some circles (yes, I tend to be that cynical - indeed anyone looking at the conquest of the Shondaverse should have realised there’s money in diversity).
One of the things that feeds my cynicism are the “Quiet Portrayals.”
“Quiet Portrayals” can come in many forms: the Blink-and-you-miss-it-bisexual, the ambiguously-olive-skin-tone, the absent POC ancestor, the careful avoidance of labels and identities, relying on vague descriptors or relying on brief one off mentions in long series.
Ultimately, they are portrayals of marginalised characters - but kept as low key as possible. It very closely resembles the idea of having to Google The Minorities, but while there you can only tell that a character is marginalised by looking for extra-textual clues and statements by the author (the infamous Word of Gay which renders Dumbledore gay, honest), in this case you have to carefully study every book and every episode and pick out the one or two references that indicate that a character is a minority. The information is in the book, it’s definitely there - it is just very brief and easily missed to people who aren’t taking careful notes.
The marginalised person is portrayed as marginalised in the book or on the show - but but carefully masked, subtly presented to not be too overt or too present or too offputting for the privileged mainstream. That’s not saying that the writers here are expressly thinking in those terms - in many cases I would say certainly not. However the pressures of “maketability”, the societal default and our overwhelming sense of what a protagonist should look like, as well as the ongoing insistence that a book with marginalised characters must be entirely about marginalised issues make the Quiet Portrayal a very easy trap to fall into.
For marginalised readers this may be a portrayal of themselves - but it comes with a subtext: yes you can be in these stories so long as you are quiet. So long as you aren’t TOO Black/gay/Asian/trans. So long as you don’t “flaunt” or “stuff it down people’s throats.” Again, this may not be the intended message of the author - and they may even have more overt marginalised characters (but who are probably not more prominent, not as major a character or not the protagonist), but it does carry this message. The main characters, the protagonist can be marginalised so long as they are sufficiently “low key” while marginalised characters who cannot hide, cannot pass or whose marginalisation is not easily overlooked are pushed to supporting roles.
There are many ways this Quiet Portrayal can be achieved. One of them is to make references to the character’s marginalised nature to be brief and one off in a more overarching story. Take Sanctuary, Dr. Helen Magnus, who despite being a co-protagonist and appearing in 58 episodes over 4 seasons there is one, one single episode, where her bisexuality was referenced. If you missed that episode, you would think this series completely lacked LGBT characters, it certainly didn’t help that this belated revelation only crept onto the scene in the second-to-last episode of the show. Doctor Who also lept on that trope with River Song giving us a last minute spoiler that she is bisexual. Witches of East End lasted only two seasons - but it was two seasons full of overwhelming amounts of graphic sexuality and sexual relationships between opposite sex couples; except two episodes. Two episodes in which it was revealed Joanna is bisexual and has had a female lover who we briefly meet. Her bisexuality is not mentioned before this and never mentioned again - in a show that is wall-to-wall naked skin and humping.
Writing characters of colour has often proven to be a difficult thing to do for Caucasian authors. Because we live in such a segregated world, many often don’t know enough about cultures outside of their own to write a convincing portrayal. One of the biggest stumbling blocks outside of ensuring proper cultural markers, is creating a proper description. How many times have you read about coffee coloured skin for instance? Often, there’s absolutely no nuance because there is a tendency not to see the individual uniqueness of people of colour. We are not now, nor have we ever been a homogeneous group. Furthermore, different racial groups have specific markers and while not always present are often in exsistence.
Far too often the descriptions of people of colour are lazy and are used as quick and easy ways to convey one thing only - Otherness. This character is not described with any real desire for us to know what they look like but simply so they can be duly labelled as not white - as not default
This can be so glaringly seen when we see descriptions of white and POC characters next to each other. Often the race of the white character will not even be mentioned - because there’s no need to mention it, it will be assumed. When two children are described in A Kiss Before the Apocalypse they are described as “a girl and an Asian boy”. Quick quiz - what race is the girl supposed to be?
If you said anything other than “white” you know you’re kidding yourself. Sure there’s nothing overtly labelling her as such, but the mere fact that she isn’t described while he is, is labelling enough.
In some ways we can see why an author would do this - there is such an overwhelming assumption that all characters are White that even characters that are described as POC are too often assumed not to be - making it all the more important to clearly label minorities (as we mentioned when talking about Quiet Minorities). In some cases this may even lead to such overwhelming excessive labelling that we have the Blackety Black Black trope; it almost feels necessary to try and force an audience that is almost unable to see POC to see the non-white skin!
But by singling out the POC for this kind of description while leaving the White characters as blank slates that we know the societal default will fill in serves to Other the POC. The fact you’ve spent several paragraphs mentioning the mocha, caramel, chocolate skin of the POC but not done the same level of milk vanilla yoghurt description of the white characters is glaring. When you talk repeatedly about “the man doing this” or “Jane doing that” or “the lawyer said this” but then that all becomes “the Asian man”, “the Latina woman” or “the Black lawyer” when a POC is involved then you are underscoring the difference; constantly reinforcing the idea of the societal default, the societal definition of normal, by overly drawing attention to POC as needing emphasis, as needing description.
The contrasting different descriptions emphasises the Other, reinforces the Other, underscores that these characters are Other. That doesn’t mean the characters shouldn’t be described or have their race mentioned - again, our objection to overwhelming societal default means we want minorities to be clearly labelled as such - but make that description universal so it doesn’t other someone. If you’re going to spend 3 paragraphs being slightly fetihistic about dark skin tones, then do the same with white ones. This is also a useful tool to see if you are being fetishistic and slightly creepy when it comes to describing skin tone or any racial characteristic - if that jumble of words describing a White character seems slightly-in-need of a cold shower or a restraining order, then there’s a good chance it applies in the same way to the description of POC. If you’re going to mention the “Asian wizard” or “Black shapeshifter” doing something, then include the same racial identifiers for White characters as well - do not allow the very absence of description to be a filler for assumed Whiteness. We see this excellently done in the Bone Street Rumba series - by not singling out POC, race becomes a characteristic to describe rather than a marker of the Other to draw attention to.
Lucifer Morningstar is the devil which means that we expect him to be evil. We expect him to cross every boundary that there is. We expect him to be smarmy, dishonest and clearly untrustworthy. Tom Ellis as the devil is absolutely incorrigible and embodies another in a long line of anti-heroes which the audience is encouraged to root for. Considering Lucifer’s ability to harm, we should be far more concerned about him than we actually are. Sure, some of our laissez–faire attitude can be blamed on Lucifer’s rakish charm but a good deal of it is the fact that despite years of work by women, consent is still something we don’t take seriously.
Lucifer Morningstar on Fox's Lucifer is yet another in a long line of anti-heroes which the public has been offered. From Tony Soprano, to Walter White, to Dexter, to Francis Underwood, to Michael Corleone, audiences have rooted for these men despite their bad acts. Though we have yet to see Lucifer do any real long lasting on screen violence like rape or murder akin to his fellow anti-hero counterparts, he is perhaps even more explicitly evil and or problematic given his identity. When we see Lucifer using his magical powers to force people to confess their deepest desire, we are intrigued rather than repelled by the gross violation that this represents. These secrets he compels are private for a reason and yet Lucifer cavalierly forces people to openly confess, headless of the consequences his target may have to pay. There’s a reason we don’t share with the world everything that goes through our heads. From the very beginning, and perfectly shown when he outs a gay security guard against his will and with no thought for the consequences, it’s clear Lucifer has no respect for anyone but himself. This is the foundation of his relationship with Chloe.
When Lucifer first meets Chloe Decker, he is amazed when he realises that his ability to appeal to directly to women’s unconscious desire for the so-called bad boy, or what Lucifer likes to call the “feral urge” doesn’t seem to work on her. Lucifer even wonders if something is biologically wrong with Chloe, or if she hit her head as a child. What he cannot accept is Chloe repeatedly explicitly saying no to his advances. Chloe goes as far as tell Lucifer that she finds him repellant but for him, it only serves to fuel his ambition to have sex with Chloe.
Chloe repeatedly sets boundaries and makes it clear that, at best (and reluctantly), she will consent to a working relationship with Lucifer but none of this stops him from showing up in her home uninvited to make her breakfast. Lucifer is more concerned about being thrown out of Chloe’s home than the fact that he violated her personal space. Lucifer then escalates his behaviour and appears naked, like some kind of subway pervert when Chloe comes to meet him at his piano bar. Sure, Chloe might like the view but exposing your naked body to someone without their consent is not some form of harmless exhibitionism. It’s predatory and in this case, the exhibitionism isn’t about mutual consent but about Lucifer’s sexual gratification and desire to validate his sexual viability. There’s a reason why flashing is a crime.
No matter how you look at it, no matter how charming Lucifer is, he is a sexual predator. It’s a fact that is being hidden behind Ellis’s good looks and charm. With each violation of Chloe’s boundaries, Lucifer (the show) makes sure to include some hint of her obvious attraction to the devil. There is a line, however, between finding someone physically attractive and wanting to sleep with them. Attraction should not open a woman up to ongoing and escalating sexual attention. Lucifer’s behaviour is the kind that women take out restraining orders for. It’s the kind of behaviour that makes women carry rape whistles, afraid to ride the subway late at night, or walk to their cars in a parking lot. Men like Lucifer make the world unsafe for women.
It’s Awards season! With the handing out of little statues to lots of very very practiced speeches now nigh, it is time for Fangs to prepare our own awards to the gems of the genre we know and love!
And unlike the real Oscars (#oscarssowhite), we actually value depiction and inclusion of marginalised people in the genre. As we watch a wave of uber-privileged cis, straight, white, able bodied folks pat each other on the back for being so incredibly awesome
Over the next few weeks leading up to the Oscars we will be calling on you, our Fangèd Followers to give us your nominations, cast your votes, battle it out until one emerges victorious and is given the coveted prize of the GOLDEN FANGS!
Because we’re us, and we’re mean Negative Nancies equally committed to excoriating the awful every bit as much as we’re joyfully yapping after our favourites, we also have categories for those that will shamed by and award of the DREAD FANPOODLE!
This week, we’re looking for Nominations! Put your contenders in the ring, polish up your vampires, and help us find the sparkling cream of the genre. To ensure as many people can pass on their ideas as possible, we’re be listening to suggestions emailed to us ([email protected]), sent to us through Tumblr, Goodreads, Librarything, Booklikes,Twitter, Facebook, the comments section and carrier pigeon.
Send us your nominations
Categories for Golden Fangs!
Best New Series of the Year
Best Indie Book
Most Original Monster
Most Original concept
Best Vampire
Best wereanimal
Best Fae
Best Magic-user
Funniest Series
Most Inclusive Series
Best Protagonist
Best book/series with a Female Protagonist
Best book/series with POC Protagonist
Best Book/series with LGBTQ protagonist
Best Book/Series with Disabled protagonist
Best non-western setting
Best Dystopian Series
Best Steampunk
Best Series that ended
Lifetime Achievement Award
What series, TV show or even writer, producer et al deserves a special prize for long standing awesomeness in this genre?
Categories for Dread Fanpoodles!
Most Blatant Token!
Most Awful Stereotype
Most Convoluted Romance
Most Ridiculous Erasure
Spunkiest Agent
Most Unintentionally Hilarious sex scene
Must Pungently Violet of Purple Prose
Series That Most Reduces Your Faith In the Human Race
This is a series that isn’t just bad - because bad books are pretty easy. No, this is a book that is adored by a truly terrifying number of people while being so bad it actually makes you question whether humanity deserves to continue to exist when this is so enthusiastically hailed.
Urban Fantasy, as a genre, is no stranger to “strong female characters.” It’s not perfect, by any stretch of the imagination - we still have a lot of female characters who make us want to tear our hair out, and Spunky Agency is, alas, so common that we’ve run entire posts trying to decide which Spunky character takes the prize for the worst decision ever. We also have a lot of “strong female characters” who are little more than weapons with breasts - which often also comes with “strength” being misinterpreted as “anger management problems”.
So, yes, problems. However, putting these aside for a moment, this genre has no shortage of women who can kick arse, claw faces, chop off heads and, occasionally, throw various kinds of magical death. These women are dangerous. These women are lethal. These women can take on small armies and come out the other side with nothing more than a snarl on their face and a very big cleaning bill.
So, with all these kick arse female protagonists and main characters, why do so many of them end up in peril? Why are so many of them severely weakened, traumatised, rendered helpless and, in all too many cases, in need of rescue?
I’m using the word “peril” here for a reason. When I do a google image search for the word “peril” I get picture after picture of women largely tied up and helpless. (Even when removing deviant art from the equation). Peril, the way it is used in fiction, has very different connotations than “danger”. I would expect any Urban Fantasy protagonist to face danger on occasion, it’s an obvious part of many books with any kind of action in them. But “peril” conjures images of helpless damsels tied to train tracks while some mustachioed villain cackles over their helpless forms.
It is peril - weakness and helplessness - that differentiates this trope from the classic action-hero who gets terrible beaten up but keeps on going because they are just that tough and awesome. Or the action hero who is taken prisoner and cooly spits defiance at his captors even when they use torture and prepare the slow-killing-laser. We are not meant to be awed by these women’s ability to suffer incredible damage and still keep moving, we’re not meant to be impressed by the will of these women to keep fighting like Harry Dresden carrying on the fight while his hand is seared to the bone, or Atticus fighting on with terrible burns all over his body. Those are scenes that use danger to emphasise the protagonist’s strength - not peril to bring them low.
Kelley Armstrong’s extensive Otherworld Series is, perhaps, the poster child for this trope, so much so that her own characters even lampshade it - with Savannah commenting on how she’s starting to match Jamie in the number of times she’s been kidnapped (yes, the female protagonists in this book can have a kidnapping league. It’s almost unrealistic for them to be scared because it should be such a mundane occurrence). It’s especially vexing with Savannah because so much of the series emphasises her power (when it’s convenient to have her as a loose cannon) then we have two entire books where her power is stripped from her - and she is imperiled. Jaime sometimes manages to be captured and imprisoned several times a book but Hope could quite likely take the gold from her in the kidnap olympics. They’re truly impressive damsels. Elena is little better, despite her being one of the most lethal women in the series: being kidnapped in Bitten (where her plan involves running off alone to the bad guys to be captured because Spunky), the whole plot of Stolen revolves around Elena being captured and abused (after she drove off alone seconds after being warned of disappearing supernaturals because Spunky). Broken is another book that revolves around Elena’s peril (made more perilous by Elena being pregnant) exacerbated by her deciding to go see the bad guy alone (because Spunky).
In the H&W Investigations series, Shiarra is repeatedly imperilled - the books even open with her desperately seeking a loophole from an Imperiling slavery contract (which she stumped into because Spunky). Throughout the series she is repeatedly targeted and captured twice by an enemy big bad - who abuses her in a way that is very close to sexual. The whole plot of Enslaved by the Others is about her being rescued from Peril.
2014 is now behind us; it’s been a bit up and down with various drama llamas hitting us in the summer, but we’ve still managed to get through almost 230 books this year (bringing our total to over 850 - how much over I don’t know and am not nearly drunk enough to count) - and have now covered over 80 shows along with films, the odd computer game and a whole lot of Friday Discussions. I’m sometimes stunned by how much Fangs has grown - and also vaguely aware we need to find some way to get drop down menus on this site.
Anyway, with the New Year it’s time to digest what passed!
Sparky
What were you Top 3 series/books you read this year?
In the interest of not being repetitive, I’m going to say that any book series that I praised the last 2 years continued to be awesome this year. None have crashed on me, they’re still my precious. I love these authors and they’d dominate this top-3 list year after year effortlessly
With that said, I am truly horrified with myself for not lavishing embarrassing amounts of gloopy praise over everything Ilona Andrews has ever written; including Magic Breaks this year. Mea Culpa, this series has deserved a mention a lot earlier than this. Second I’ll mention the awesome Witch with No Name by Kim Harrison because it PERFECTLY ended this awesome series (though I am still grieving). I have so many candidates for the third slot but I’m going to go with Don’t Tell My Parents I’m a Supervillain because it was SO MUCH FUN!
What book(s) pleasantly surprised you?
I’m going to go with Meljean Brook’s Iron Seas series here simply because it has completely validated my stubborn refusal not to give up on a series. When we read the first book in this series, The Iron Duke there were problems, terrible, rapey problems. My expectations plummeted… and then I read the rest of the series which are now some of my all time favourite books AND surprisingly social justice aware on several axis.
I’m also going to mention The Others series by Anne Bishop here - because I loved and adored these books (if I had more room above, I’d include them) because I went into this series expecting the worst - I’d heard terrible terrible things about her other series...
What was your favourite Television series this year?
The Stahma show! Aka Defiance. In depth storylines, excellent characters and Stahma just being so amazingly perfect every single episode that I started grinning like a fool every time her perfect self came on screen. Hail Stahma!
Since I think we’ve mentioned Defiance before, I’m also going to go with Penny Dreadful for surprises, utterly gorgeous gothic imagery and the best scenery chewing I’ve ever seen.
What was the worst thing you read this year?
Choices, choices. It’s hard for anything to beat The Last Werewolf since it has the line:
“Her asshole, for example. It’s like a stern coquettish spoiled secretary working for Himmler-“
That’s setting records of terrible. But then there’s Faefever’s awful depiction of rape - the only thing more cringeworthy than the depiction is the number of fans drooling over Barrons.
But I’m going to go with the Vampire Chronicles series because I’ve read the entire series this year and I suffered. Oh how I suffered. The terrible depiction of LGBT people, the racist happy-dappy slaves, the endless paedophilia and incest all to a background of the most impenetrable, awful prose, complete lack of plot and agonisingly melodramatic characters. There is a circle of hell where people have to read this series and they BEG to be allowed to push the damn boulder up the hill.
What was the worst thing you watched this year?
Da Vinci’s Demons, because I will never ever NOT be pissed about Da Vinci’s Demons. Beauty and the Beast probably takes the prize - when it went on hiatus and then came back (and by some demonic sorcery was actually renewed) I had so little interest in keeping up with the vapid shredded cannon of this show that I just couldn’t bring myself to pick it up again. Not even for the joy of watching Sendhil Ramamurthy.
Stick a fork in ‘em, they’re done: Shows that need to be cancelled:
The Vampire Diaries. Good gods, let it die! The only relevant plot lines on this show revolve around Bonnie and she’s continually sidelined - give her a spin off and let the endlessly dull, repetitive and self-absorbed trainwreck that is Elena’s extended love life just die already please.
What was this year’s guilty pleasure? Which book/series are you embarrassed to admit you liked?
Supernatural and The Dresden Files both hold spots as things I’m embarassed to say I love so much (though Supernatural is rapidly expending my patience). Both of them are epic Friday Discussion fodder but they bring me endless joy.
Biggest Disappointment of the Year:
Constantine and not just because of the straight washing (for the sake of rainbows and pride, can someone please keep Goyer away from established LGBT personages already!) but because I think it had an interesting concept, a decent cast and some nice gritty material and it has only occasionally come close to reaching its potential. Now I fear it’s too little too late - I wanted to love this show, I tried so hard to love this show.
Were your expectations for 2014 met?
Nope, which is kind of sad. I look back at last years post and I’m all enthusiastic about Helix, Bitten, Dominion and The Strain none of which I particularly enjoyed. There’s only really Penny Dreadful that actually turned out to be something decent. The spin off shows never happened
Diversitywise my expectations also weren’t met in many ways. We saw shows with main POC be cancelled: Almost Human and Being Human (US) while Sleepy Hollow greatly de-emphasised it’s POC. In terms of new shows, only Z Nation, From Dusk Till Dawn and, at an extreme push, Helix has POC in anything like similarly dominant roles.
On the LGBT front I’m doubly annoyed because this has been the year of the media tease - behind the camera we’ve had slashbaiting, and comments from show creators about The Walking Dead, Teen Wolf and several films we haven’t followed (Expendables, How to Train your Dragon and, yes, Dumbledore yet again) bigging up minimal inclusion. In front of the camera we’ve had so many teeny tokens that are weirdly praised in the media (Vampire Diaries is being mentioned. Vampire Diaries).
We may be talking about diversity more - but it seems that the discussion has turned into selling the same empty tokens but with more hype and praise.
What are you looking forward to in 2015?
The obvious awesomeness goes without saying - Penny Dreadful, Orphan Black. But I’m also looking forward to the return of Helix since the story has shifted so much it could be a very different show. Ilona Andrews has a new series coming as well which I really can’t wait for
I’d also like to see if any of those spin offs are actually going to happen! New series I’m eager for are Olympus (Greek mythology? SOLD!) and Izombie (which sounds nifty).
Most of all I am not so much looking forward to as demanding - diversity is entering more and more of our discourse in both publishing and media - so it’s time for some substantive change. And that doesn’t mean talking up your tokens to convince everyone that you’re super progressive because recurring minor character #976956 is a minority.
Renee
What were you Top 3 series/books you read this year?
Wow, I read so much this year that it’s hard to choose. I do however think that my favourite series were The Others by Anne Bishop, the Kara Gillian series by Diana Rowland and of course, The Iron Druid Chronicles by Kevin Hearne. With each new book, these series kept me late at night promising to go to bed after reading just one more chapter. Of the three, I would have to say that my favorite was Murder of Crows by Anne Bishop. I simply love the world she created and found myself walking around saying, “the Meg” for days after I finished reading this book. My only disappointment is that Bishop seems to only release one book in this series a year, which is not nearly enough.
What book(s) pleasantly surprised you?
I would have to say that it’s A Witch With no Name by Kim Harrison. The Hollow series has always been excellent but I really didn’t like the portrayal of Rachel in Dead Pool and was greatly concerned that the essence of who she was would be lost due to her budding relationship to Trent. I was so pleased that not only did Harrison dial this back and give us a Rachel who wasn’t overly obsessed with Trent, she neatly wrapped up the storylines of all of the side characters. I am truly sad that The Hollows is at an end though, while other less enjoyable series continue on.
What was your favourite television series this year?
Hmmm...you would think this would be easy because of the amount of sheer drek we have been subjected to this year but it’s not. I suppose I am going to have to go with the old standby of Game of Thrones. The acting is always superb and the staging is wonderful. This is not to say that Game of Thrones didn’t have its problems like the unacknowledged rape of Cersei by Jamie. That aside, it produced the most attention grabbing season finale of all of the shows we watched and left me instantly wanting more. Finally, who doesn’t get excited when they hear the theme song to Game of Thrones?
What was the worst thing you read this year?
So much drek, so little time. Zombie Fallout 2: A Plague Upon Your Family (Zombie Fallout #2) by Mark Tufo is certainly high on the list. In fact, this entire series should come with a do not read label due to sheer offensiveness and puerile humour. The protagonist is the worst sort of Gary Stu whom everyone follows without explanation. This is a book that you should never borrow from the library lest your library card stage or a revolt, let alone pay so much as one penny for.
Last God Standing by Michael Boatman, also deserves an honourable mention. I still cannot tell you what this book is about. Yes, yes, I know that Gods have taken human form and are fighting against each other but beyond that this story goes absolutely nowhere. There isn’t even a single likable character and Boatman seems to love using homophobia as the basis of his jokes. It’s the kind of book that makes you scratch your head and wonder how many trees died for this drek to be produced.
What was the worst thing you watched all year?
There is only one answer to this question: American Horror Story. Every week since this show started airing, I wait to either be offended or outright enraged. American Horror Story: Coven was certainly no different. We had Queenie who compulsively ate, ‘cause that’s what fat people do don’t you know. She was also the only virgin, that is until she had sex with a freaking minotaur. American Horror Story: Coven even gave us the storyline of the killer vagina. For a show all about strong female characters, American Horror Story Coven sure seemed to embrace misogyny.
Stick a fork in ‘em, they’re done: Shows that need to be cancelled:
Can I only pick one? There are a few things that really need to be cancelled. For instance, why oh why is Continuum still on the air? This show didn’t make sense in the first season and only got worse as it went on. It needs a mercy killing already. Then, there is Dusk till Dawn. I will admit that I hated the movie that this show is based on and so it never really had a chance with me; however, I didn’t expect to hate it as much as I do. It’s absolutely torture to sit through an episode. There isn’t a single likeable character and it doesn’t feel like the plot is going anywhere. Dusk Till Dawn is simply violence for the sake of violence.
What was this year’s guilty pleasure? Which book/series are you embarrassed to admit you liked?
Yes, I am going to say True Blood. I know this season was a hot mess but I still got excited every Sunday at 9pm and would sing along with the theme song. I know the best days were behind True Blood by the time this final season started but I still loved it and well, who could blame me, with all of the eye candy? Boo and hiss if you like but I shall simply answer you with, Ryan Kwanten (of course with a gag ‘cause Jason is annoying as all get out) and Alexander Skarsgård.
Biggest disappointment of the year?
This is a tough one to admit, largely because I used to be a huge Anne Rice fan. I think the issue is that when I read her vampire chronicles years ago, I was a much younger woman and there certainly weren’t many options in the genre. It was with much eagerness that I picked up Prince Lestat, only to find that I couldn’t wait for the damn book to finish. I didn’t remember her purple prose and just how damn long winded Rice is. Prince Lestat simply didn’t go anywhere and it caused me to stop my fond remembrance of this series which first introduced me to this genre.
Were expectations met in 2014?
To that I would have to answer a qualified yes. After consuming so many books and watching so many television shows and movies I have come to expect either bad representation or outright erasure in this genre. At this point, I simply have lowered my expectations. Nothing would please me more than to see more marginalized characters with fully fleshed out storylines but I fear we are a long way from that.
What are you looking forward to in 2015?
I would have to say that I am looking forward to Olympus. I have always been a huge mythology geek and since the cancellation of The Almighty Johnsons, there has been nothing on television to fill this void. I only hope that it is worth all of the anticipation.
Overall my expectations for this genre will remain low; however, I am still hopeful. If we can read about zombies, vampires, etc., then surely there is room for a multitude of marginalized characters all telling different stories.
As we review more and more media and see more and more shows, one thing we have learned to do is not get excited by apparent diversity in early episodes - and certainly not the pilot. We will pay attention, and make notes, but we will withhold praise and enthusiasm even when we seem to have a cast with numerous minority characters
Actually, that’s a lie - we start a stopwatch. We want to see how many episodes pass before all that promising diversity starts to die off. Yes, it’s cynical, but we’ve seen it before.
You get a pilot with a large, racially diverse cast. They’re all there for the cast photos, they’re there in the opening scene, we get introduced to several in the pilot and in the initial episodes. It looks good, a show that realises we need shows with decent POC characters.
Then one dies. Or two. And/or episodes go by where you realise the POC have been banished to the plot box. Or they have roles that require them to be elsewhere or the other characters have to avoid them. Sometimes they’re there - but always in the background, always on the fringes and you realise that they’ve maybe had 1 line of dialogue in 3 episodes (Hello T-Dog).
As the series continues several of the POC will be completely lost - dead (usually dead), vanished or heaved on the bus. Others will now be silent servants, hanging around the edges, facilitating the plot line of the White people. Few, if any of them will have actual storylines of their own. We realise then we have a case of Pilot Diversity and Minority Decay.
By the time the season finale comes round, or we’re 2 or 3 seasons in, the show will be notably Whiter. Often, the POC left in the cast will not be the same as the ones who started - while many of the White cast have been there since the beginning.
Diverse pilots offer false hope, but they rarely follow through on it. The Walking Dead, Falling Skies, Under the Dome, The 100 and The Last Ship all began with surprisingly diverse casts but as the episodes went by we saw the POC die off or fall into the background (we’ve written posts on The Walking Dead and Fallings Skies) while the White cast become more prominent, survived and kept moving.
Relatedly, we have a trope of shows presenting their minority characters as much more prominently than they are. They may appear on the promotional material, they may even receive high billing in the cast. The marketing for the show will give the impression that the POC cast members are full characters, just a little behind the major characters of the show - or even just not behind at all. Penny Dreadful presented Sembene as a full character in a number of the posters for the show and I kept waiting for him to develop a storyline… which never happened. He was a butler and occasional knife carrier, no more. On Warehouse 13 Leena seemed to be presented as a main character for the cast (it’s actually harder to find a full cast picture that includes Jinks than Leena) but, ultimately, beyond a very few rare moments she was little more than cook and housekeeper for the rest of the cast and rarely took much screen time. Secret Circle tried to present Melissa as a full and equal character with the rest of the circle, but she was clearly an add-on, circling the lives of the actual main characters.
This isn’t a matter of a main POC character not getting as much attention, agency or storylines as the rest of the cast (for example, Bonnie on The Vampire Diaries) so much as it is trying to present and extremely minor or bit parts as full characters. They’re not a poorly handled main character, because there’s not even been the most inept of attempts to make them one - but their presence is emphasised and it’s hard not to think that this is done deliberately to try and convey a sense of diversity that the show doesn’t have.
Mental Illness and the Non-Neuro-Typical in Urban Fantasy
Mental illnesses and non-neurotypical people are both very much misunderstood in society. Feared, reviled, pitied and shamed, there’s a lot of ignorance, a lot of misunderstanding, a lot of fear and a whole lot of damaging tropes that are assumed and encouraged. Collectively these present real barriers for the non-neurotypical to seek help and support they may need or want (or even be aware they exist) and create massive difficulties in interacting with neuro-typical people whose assumptions and worries can render it almost impossible.
Needless to say, media depiction has a huge effect on this - with repeated depictions adding to all of these problems as we see the same tropes crop up over and over
Almost ironically, the most common mental illness and non-neurotypical tropes we see in Urban Fantasy doesn’t even involve the mentally ill at all; instead it epitomises neuro-typical people’s fear of becoming mentally ill or, as it is repeatedly called over and over “going crazy.”
Indeed, it’s very rare for an Urban Fantasy series not to take a neuro-typical person, introduce them to the supernatural world and have them not think “oh my god, I’m losing my mind!” with additional levels of angst and fear. It is indicative of just how much we have demonised being mentally ill that, when the character is convinced that what they’re experiencing is real, they commonly feel profoundly relieved.
Because a world where there are immortal supernatural beings with immense power that literally feed on people to survive is much more reassuring than the idea you may have a mental illness in need of treatment? Hey a supernatural monster is currently hunting me, but thank gods I’m not crazy!
Looking at it logically, this is an appallingly ridiculous reaction - but in series where the supernatural hasn’t already been established and it has to be discovered then this doubt and relief is almost ubiquitous. It’s considered as much a staple as the dead parent.
This trope of mental illness being a terrible worse-than-death fate that may afflict neuro-typical people is really well ingrained in our culture and frequently arises in fiction.
In Witches of East End rather than have Maura live with the mental illness Wendy magically inflicted on her (and, perhaps, be treated for it), they choose to magically send her into a happy deluded coma instead. That’s an extreme example - but there’s innumerable examples of neuro-typical people suffering the terrible fate of being wrongly locked in an asylum (especially in programmes set in the past). The whole of American Horror Story: Asylum rests on the trope. Teen Wolf had Stiles wrongly confined in Eichen House, Penny Dreadful has Eva confined in an asylum. Once Upon a Time in Wonderland has Alice escaping from Bethlem - in fact, Bethlem could have its own subsection of its own!. Her Own Devices has Claire rescue someone from Bethlem, one of the main terrors of Xandra in the Immortal Empire Series is being shut in Bethlem. The whole concept of Bedlam is set on the horrors of an asylum now afflicting modern neuro-typical people - and it’s even named after the infamous asylum.
All of these feature a neuro-typical person being wrongfully detained in an asylum. And it’s not being locked up in an asylum that’s the problem - it’s that they’ve been locked up while being neuro-typical. It’s the wrongful accusation. This even applies when the conditions in the asylum are horrific and brutal - the horror isn’t horrific for its own sake, it’s horrific because these people are “innocent” of being mentally ill. In fact, mentally ill inmates of these institutions are often used as background wallpaper or to even add to the horror the neuro-typical protagonist must endure. The mentally ill are often freakish horrors that add to the protagonist’s misery and torment until they can escape the unjust abuse.
And that “unjust” abuse is important - because we’re expected to care much less about the torment of the mentally ill inmates; the “justly” abused. This failure to examine how mentally ill people are treated doesn’t just extend to asylums - The Tomorrow People had an excellent opportunity to show the difficulty of treating a mental illness on limited resources or a teenager attending school with an isolating mental illness, but, again, it’s lost because the character isn’t actually non-neuro-typical, none of the Tomorrow People are. We end up seeing them paying for pills they don’t actually need (knowingly so when it comes to Marla) which removes the whole conflict.
On the rare occasions when we do have actual mentally ill people they often serve less as characters than as narrative tools.
For example, in The Walking Dead, Rick reunites with Morgan who appears to have had a breakdown as a result of his son’s death. The whole purpose of Morgan in this episode isn’t to be a character, but to be a warning to Rick about what he could become. Elsewhere in the genre there’s a lot of psychics/magic users who will see the blasted, catatonic shells of their predecessors to warn them of the terrible fate that will befall them if they fail/misuse/overuse their powers (as seen in Rivers of London series where overuse of magic can cause brain damage).
Another use of mental illness or non-neurotypical people as a narrative tool is to use them as a convenient way to add twists or a barrier to the plot. The person’s mental illness becomes a way to stretch the plot out because the other characters have to navigate around it somehow.
A common version of this is the seer or otherwise knowledgeable person who cannot express themselves or cannot be understood because of their mental illness. Like Meredith on Teen Wolf, her banshee powers mean she has the answers they need - but her mental illness ensures getting the answers takes time and effort on the part of the other characters. She’s a resource that needs to be translated rather than a character in her own right and her mental illness is only there so Lydia and Stiles have to spend some effort finding the key (and be the ones credited with it) rather than Meredith just handing it over. Another example is Anton from Utopia, he quite literally has all the answers, but is incapable of communicating clearly except in brief (and narratively convenient) flashes of lucidity. He is, again, a resource to be plumbed by Becky and Ian, the information they glean from him is to their credit and he is incapable of simply conveying what he knows. Under the Dome has the oft-mentioned Pauline communicating through drawings. Even Orphan Black indulged in this trope for a few episodes with Ethan appearing to suffer from dementia and be quite confused (though this later seemed to be an act). Even Alphas which made some effort to present a number of non-neuro-typical and disabled characters had Gary often be an information resource who had, at times, to be carefully managed.
