![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
But god, that trip is hard work -- it's more than a mile walk RT (which isn't the hard part except when it's 94 out), pushing heavy groceries and then it's 3 trips to get all the groceries up stairs (4th floor) and a fourth to retrieve the cart.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
My complaint isn't a lack of queer characters (although queer characters would be nice), it's that every interaction in every scene is about Male-Female desire. It's the central drama, the secondary plot, the one tool for spying, the witty banter, the comedic relief, the backstory, the family tension.... really not fun to watch a show where all motivations are the same motivation and that motivation is kinda alien.
The fact that there is little to no interaction between any same-sex characters in any capacity, with the exception of Annie's boss making her cry, is also weird, and this isn't me complaining about the difficulty of applying slash-goggles to the show (which in this case, remind me that the original application of such was less about "yay porn" and more about looking for hidden queer narratives because there could never be overt ones) so much as it is me complaining about the sense of overcompensating fear that comes off the show for me. It reminds me of being in all girls school and how all public displays of friendship had to be tempered lest anyone get the slightest whiff of even non-existent queer.
Only Auggie seems to transcend this, despite being all after the chicks and being written in his own over-compensatory way, but as the blind guy he's the only character the show is letting out of that extreme heteronormativity at all (i.e., he's friends with Annie, not trying to sleep with her; he banters briefly with the other men in a way that is about power dynamics and sexuality even if that sexuality is directed at women; and he fakes being the call-center guy at the escort agency Annie pretends exists, which is just BIZARRE, you'd NEVER have a male phone person in that sort of gig ever (precisely because of homophobia, johns don't feel straight enough talking about buying sex with (essentially from, even if a woman is doing the servicing) a man, especially one not previously known to them. Women work phones at agencies that supply women. Period. You'd think the CIA would know this)).
And this is both refreshing and problematic. On one hand, yay for the character with a disability being the most fully-written character on the show and one who they've managed to avoid a lot of cliches with. On the other hand, as AWESOME as Auggie is, the show others and fetishizes him pretty severely, although less because of their fail about him and more, instead, because of their fail about everything else.
I want this show to fix itself so bad, so that it survives. Because right now I feel like I'm going to keep watching so I can keep doing this particular line of criticism, which is less fun than it seems, or something.
I also want IMDB to be wrong in saying that Auggie's only in three episodes.
Also, hat tip to the show's costume designer. Auggie's outfits are so texturally focused, and that, at least, is a very smart choice.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 02:45 pm (UTC)Is it bad that I'm actually a little impressed by this? I mean, it takes effort to be that single-minded.
And I, too, will be cranky if Auggie's only in three episodes. That, and his character seems too central for it to be that way.
ETA: I also now kinda ship Annie/Auggie, if only because that's the one pairing that *wasn't* beat over our heads. Also, because Annie is the POV character, so I want the POV character to be with the character I fancy the most. ie, Auggie. ;)
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 02:55 pm (UTC)So basically they've remade the series Moonlighting?
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:17 pm (UTC)Also, yeah, Moonlighting much? Though I did love that show when I was a child watching reruns :)
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:24 pm (UTC)Well, I'll be reading your meta/fic regardless, so it should be interesting.
Oh and related, I finally caught up on White Collar, which is cleverer than I anticipated, it took a while to get there, only at ep 7 did I feel something... more. The 2nd season première was interesting, I hope they don't fuck up (which they've already done a bit) on the PTSD. Arrgh.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:30 pm (UTC)Also, if you haven't Googled it yet, visual reference for Auggie, since I'm writing that crossover: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2856092416/nm0330913
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:32 pm (UTC)Why is Piper Perabo squinting? I wish she'd stayed in indie movies playing dykes. I loved her for that.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:34 pm (UTC)And the point C connects to that really flawed study CNN had me griping about the day before.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:41 pm (UTC)I missed the CNN gripe, but it's a rampant trope (pub name?) that needs to die.
I know I figured out a lot of my own stuff about food when I realized that it was an idea that exists within my family. We're a country of puritans. If it's not sex, it's food, and as ever, the appearance of virtue is what matters.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:42 pm (UTC)And the sex/food thing? You are SO right. Hadn't occured to me before, but so so so right.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 03:48 pm (UTC)What can you do but laugh? It would take more years off my life to try and keep up with each latest and best piece of health advice and worry endlessly about conforming to it.
I've had something percolating about the sex/food thing for ages, but can't quite get it into words. Everything I've written so far seems either too subjective or too obvious.
All Studies About Weight Are Suspect
Date: 2010-07-17 03:36 pm (UTC)Certain study topics automatically fall into this category, pacticulary if/as reported on by the MSM. It's a given.I suppose I should compile a list.
You'd Think the CIA Would Know This
Date: 2010-07-17 03:41 pm (UTC)What people know is not what Hollywood knows.
Re: You'd Think the CIA Would Know This
Date: 2010-07-17 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 04:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 05:49 pm (UTC)Also, I should really not add MFIF to my blagroll as it will only depress me and make me oh who am I kidding, arg. Some things are worth being angry about.
~Sor
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 06:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 06:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 06:47 pm (UTC)It's the last two words of a 200K+ fic I wrote with Kali that ends in the death of the character that later got killed off on the show for real and became the central point for the paper that took me to Bristol.
Also, it's very me. You'll get it when you see it. It's both an act of love and a "fuck everyone and their bad attitude and their ironic distance" sort of thing.
I got it the morning I left London for the States again.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 07:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 07:11 pm (UTC)Have you ever seen Coupling? It's written by Steve Moffat, and is very smart and well directed, but it's about a bunch of straight people who are in relationships with each other. I suspect it fails the Bechdel test because whenever the women are alone they talk about the men (and sex), but whenever the men are alone they talk about the women (and sex), so at least it's well balanced. They're all kind of crazy and the heteronormativity is over the top in ways that I find kind of fascinating, just because I can't identify with any of the characters at all and their behavior is so bizarre to me.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 07:13 pm (UTC)What's freakish about Covert Affairs is that it's supposed to be about the CIA.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 08:43 pm (UTC)I could see being able to make an argument about the sexism going either way; whenever someone says or does something that makes you want to hit things and you can't believe someone actually said/did that, there's usually another character who can't believe they just said/did whatever it was either. So the show is very aware of playing with all of the stereotypes that go with gender roles and relationships. But it is pretty much all stereotypes, all the time, so you can wonder if Moffat thinks that all heterosexual relationships are like these, if you take them to their extremes, or if he knows that they're not, and is just poking these particular extremes because that was the focus he wanted for the show.
It's an interesting show, and I have no idea how much sociologically bizarre I find it because they're not "my people" and how much because they're just, well, bizarre.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 08:30 pm (UTC)My biggest problem with all this is that I don't see anything better that's made in the US - the alternative seems to be various boys only club shows (ranging from the active misogyny in Supernatural, to having a significantly greater focus on male characters in White Collar, to intermediate cases like Stargate Universe. Other than shows by Joss Whedon (other than Dollhouse), if you have the sort of geeky action or SF&F shows that I prefer to watch, the choice seems to be either a near absence of female characters or an overwhelming focus on male-female desire. I'd definitely enjoy more female-centered shows like Xena as well as more shows like the X-Files or Farscape, where you could have mix gender casts w/o desire being such an overwhelming focus, but I see essentially no examples of either on modern TV - that's very sad indeed.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 08:39 pm (UTC)I didn't see this comment previously. Right now, from my PoV, it's watchable, but just on the bare edges of good. I assume that the show will improve past the pilot, but getting rid of the most interesting character is definitely not a way to keep me watching a show.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 08:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-17 11:15 pm (UTC)Sometimes schlumpy Southern California dressing annoys me, but it's times like this that I'm grateful that our cultural standards don't include wearing a full suit and tie when it's 95 degrees out with high humidity.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-18 02:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-18 08:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-18 09:47 am (UTC)Though Augie in the interrogation room just completely saves the show in my opinion.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-18 08:47 pm (UTC)I think I've watched the episode about three times now; the first time or two I came into it late then I finally got to see it from the start. I actually like it more than I thought I would (as I did with White Collar...but I prefer White Collar so far). Annie and Neal are both sort of in that same mysteriously disappeared love that got away boat right now, so I guess Ben, whoever he is, will play a similar role to Kate in WC's first season.
The subplot with Joan and...whatever Peter Gallagher's character's name is, I don't really get. Unless they plan on playing with their interactions in terms of the way Annie's character is handled, their marital issues seem unnecessary and uninteresting, and while I often like entering a story in medias res, this plot just doesn't seem to have a place in Annie's story yet. As for her family, I do hope they play at least a somewhat significant role in the series, partly because I really like Anne Dudek and she seems to keep playing characters who get killed off or written out, or in the case of Mad Men, are just plain unbearable, so it would be nice to see her be a series regular finally.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-18 08:52 pm (UTC)