Game of Thrones

Is there such a thing as "chick flicks" and "boy humour" in film and tv? Are we really such simple creatures that we can draw hard gender lines when it comes to entertainment? I would like to say no, but I am loathe to admit that this hard line keeps showing up when I try to watch film or tv with my partner. Generally I don't watch much of either, so I am very picky with how I spend my precious time watching a screen. It had better be worth it - and plotless action flicks with lots of things being blown up just don't tend to do it for me.

For him, on the other hand, it is a release of his frustrations of a hard day to watch other people release their anger and play out the hero against the evil guys. He lives out his frustrations vicariously through this mindless entertainment - his own words!

And I admit my Sex And The City addiction - it's like a box of chocolates when I'm feeling down or ill. I know all of the episodes inside out but I still get a gentle high from emerging myself in the light but moving entertainment of listening to four women deal with the paradoxes of being independent, career oriented, and still seeking love. Whereas my partner is done after a few minutes.

So it was quite something for us to find a series we both enjoy - and Game of Thrones has us both completely addicted, partly because of how cleverly woven together an increasingly complex cast of characters and shifting alliances keeps emerging. Who would have thought medieval power play could be so enthralling? It's like one endless chess game and we have caught ourselves discussing the next possible moves over a meal....

Which has led me to wonder at the gender aspect of this series. One friend of mine calls it "Tits and Dragons", which is kind of summing it up - minus the zombies, of course. There are endless gory bloody scenes to satisfy the need for violence, interspersed with unashamed shots of women dropping their clothes to reveal perfect white breasts. Is this not a series aimed at a particular male gaze?

I do find myself rolling my eyes occasionally when a titty shot seems contrived, inserted simply to satisfy the quota in an episode, but I can't help appreciate the diversity of characters of both gender. There are men playing out the shadow side of masculinity just as there are women playing out this same desire for violence. There are women representing the divine goddess just as there are men representing the divine protector.

The women inspire me for what they represent of the unwanted side of the female as well as their strengths. There are indeed dumb helpless blonds, who learn to use sex as an instrument of affection but also of power. There are prostitutes who both enjoy their sexuality and are prisoners of it. There are women who have ensured their seats of power by seducing with their dark side, fully aware of how to manipulate through the use of their lips and hips. And there are intelligent women, the ones who represent the queen archetype from her more enlightened side. There are the ones who refuse to be ladies, playing out their true nature in mens' roles dressed as boys or men, but not denying their identity. Women are portrayed as virgin, whore, mother, queen, crone, and never entirely dependent on the men around them for their status.

The men intrigue me. There are those with limits in the eyes of society - dwarf, bastard, illiterate, poor - who find a way to assert themselves. There are virgins and abusers. There have been several kings and leaders who have absolutely no idea how to lead, and some young princes who have had to step up and learn how to do so. There is the megalomaniac, the sadist, the torturer, the rapist, the soldier, and some of these can also be the righteous warrior, the king, the lover, the magician. The good guys sometimes suck at protecting the village, the bad guys sometimes turn out to be the good guys. Some of them are weak in the face of womens' sexuality, others are inspired by it.

The point is, there is a lot of humanity represented here. Good and evil are not represented in a squeaky clean Hollywood style, but as elements in all of us. We all have the potential to love, to lead, to inspire, to injure, to kill, to humiliate, to destroy, both covertly and overtly  I love how many powerful women there are in a context that could have become a "boy's" festival of tits and blood and power. And I love how many archetypes keep showing up without it being a moralistic story of good and evil.

 And on a personal note, I love how many redheads keep appearing!









Nature shows up as a powerful force as well - in spirituality, in seasons, in the long summer and the long winter, the representation of life and death, in prophetic dreams, and in the White Walkers. There are many layers of mystical storytelling that represent so much about us as men and women, that makes it unexpectedly appealing and

Only one question remains: How the hell did the zombies make it into this story?

The Neo-Cons hijacked Wonder Woman!

I have to admit, I am a little concerned. It's not just a matter of resisting the re-writing of a character who I consider to be pop culture's most important female role model. It's not just a matter of resisting change as such. Heck, when they showed photos of model-come-actress Adrianne Palicki in the newly styled Wonder Woman latex costume I kinda thought it was hot.

At least it was an improvement on the attempts to re-vamp the comic book character's outift a couple of years ago, when she looked like a 1990's fashion victim (see left)....

No, my concern goes deeper. Having just watched the 2011 pilot of the NBC Wonder Woman series, I am convinced that some neo-con lawyers were heavily involved in the script-writing. I know it sounds funny, but I am serious - there is some uncomfortable political agenda behind much of the script. And the consistent "evil-eye" hard face worn by Palicki throughout the pilot episode did nothing to soften the blow of references to torture as evidence gathering, manipulating the legal advisory department to sidestep the law, and use of the PATRIOT Act to justify some highly questionable behaviour.

Wonder Woman's character was invented by a psychologist during the second world war when DC Comics approached him to create a new patriotic hero. He was an adamant feminist and created the first female superhero, whose powers were bestowed upon her by the (Greek) gods and goddesses. Her task was to bring the lessons of peace, love and justice to a world that was warring. She was given a lasso of truth and bracelets to deflect bullets. Wonder Woman never attacked, she only ever defended....

70 years later, in the umpteenth attempt to bring Wonder Woman back into mainstream popularity, Palicki lashes out with her golden lasso and strangles people to unconsciousness, she threatens wounded bad guys and jabs them with needles to get blood samples. In fact she silently admits to using torture to elicit evidence from one man. Her detective ally refuses to let her make a move based on this evidence gained as "poisonous fruit" but she remains righteous - apparently if many lives are at risk, it's ok to torture the bad guy.

Wait a minute. I'm sorry WHAT???? Does this not sound reminiscent of the Bush

administration's justification of the use of torture to elicit evidence from detainees in Guantanamo Bay and hundreds of other locations around the world where the CIA sent their "extraordinary renditions"?

Any international lawyer will tell you that the prohibition of torture is one of the few absolute pre-emptory norms which exist in concrete terms. Despite what the neo-con lawyers were advising the Bush administration in the torture memos.

It went further in this disturbing pilot episode. At one point, a character who is Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee confronts Wonder Woman, accusing her of such disgusting behaviour that "not even the most liberal reading of the PATRIOT Act would justify what you did". The USA PATRIOT Act - in full, the "Provide Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism" Act, introduced in 2001 - was a bill passed in response to the Sept 11 attacks. It removed numerous procedural restrictions on police, FBI and CIA actions, leading to indeterminate detentions, huge invasions of privacy, a veritable roll-back of civil rights in the US and a discriminatory focus on immigrants. It was also was part of the neo-conservative lawyers' justification for the use of torture.

So what is one to think of the fact that the woman whose original task was to teach the ways of truth, peace, justice and sexual equality, has now been reinvented as a unilateral crime-fighting

machine who goes above and beyond the law, ever scowling at both her enemies and her allies, threatening and in fact using force, justifying torture to elicit evidence?

Her "don't mess with me, I'm a hard bitch" face seemed to portray this deep shift in political paradigm. (I'm serious, she only smiled once in the whole episode, when she spoke to the victim around whose plight the episode centred, and of whom she made a point of informing everyone at her press conference that he was a black teenager from the ghetto. I was a bit confused until her new right wing stance started to become evident, and my only conclusion was that this was an attempt to show she really does care about the underdog. Kind of like Bush flying over New Orleans a few days after Hurricane Katrina, to show he really cared, too.)

Perhaps this 21st Century Wonder Woman is after all completely in line with what happened to the national identity of the country for whom she was invented 70 years ago. Then it really was about bringing ideals as a leader to a new world order. In recent decades it has rather appeared to be about imposing ideals as a unilateral world police force down the barrel of a weapon of mass destruction. Perhaps I shouldn't be so disturbed that my long-time heroine is once again speaking the truth, I should just accept that the truth is a little uglier. Perhaps I should accept her ever angry face as the replacement of the one that was created of the earth and bestowed with Aphrodite's beauty and Athena's wisdom, just as the face of US foreign policy has lost its beauty in the decades since the second world war.

Still I am disturbed, and it's because of the very reason I love (the original) Wonder Woman so much (see my previous blog posts). She is a pop culture role model. If she is now the voice of the 21st Century America, it disturbs me that this might be internalised by the next generation of world leaders.

And I am disturbed as to what happened to her feminist ideals as well. She used to be a champion of sexual equality, (apart from demonstrating that women can be both strong and vulnerable, in one comic book adventure rather than act from pure hatred or righteousness, she

convinced a female member of the Nazi regime to return to her humanity and abandon the Nazi project) now she is spitting hatred at the sight of another powerful, beautiful woman and threatening to kill the female villain played by Elizabeth Hurley (shown left in character).

And although Palicki's Wonder Woman makes a point about dolls being made in her likeness with impossible breasts, she admits that she needs to sell them in order to fund her crime-fighting, and she even uses her latex-packaged breasts to sexually intimidate men: "Like my outfit officer? This outfit opens doors for me. It's gonna open that one, isn't it?!"

I'm not sure this was what Wonder Woman's original creator had in mind when he published in The American Scholar in 1941:

"Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don't want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women's strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman."

I breathed a sigh of relief to read that NBC has already axed this failed pilot. And I have to re-iterate, it's not because I'm opposed to an update of Wonder Woman. It's because her core values had been hijacked for disturbing political ends. It's not the fate we should wish upon any super hero!

Love letter to my man

If the King is the rock, the core of the earth,
then the Queen is the soil, the plains, the fertile land.
His leadership, lordship and blessings over the soil
will have her flourish and fulfilled.
Like the Pharoah whose seed kept the Nile rich
and fertilised;
Like King Arthur whose even, just leadership
kept the people ordered, calm and happy;
the Queen who is granted the space
and the just leadership and blessings
to grow and flourish and be her full self,
will provide the fertile land for her King
to fulfil any of his grand plans and wishes.
She will offer her lands to him
from which he too can grow and build and be his full self.

And she may test him
with her unpredicatble, tempestuous nature,
and her ocean of emotions,
and her questions and taunts.
But in the end all she is seeking
is reassurance
that her King will remain rock solid
in the face of her changeable nature
So that she may relax
and give in, and give herself entirely
to him.

And together,
rock core, fertile soil, and the nourishing water of their love,
Earth, Air, Fire and Water,
They create and fulfil Life itself.