The Violent Masculinity of the BioShock Franchise

I wasn’t always an avid gamer. My first real introduction to video games (aside from Mario Cart and Super Smash Brothers being played in my dorm lounge in college) is the fault of my friend, Michael, who got me hooked by sitting me down and having me play the introduction to BioShock on his laptop. This occasion wasn’t even that long ago – it’s been barely two years, but since then, I’ve been hooked on story-driven games, and the first BioShock game remains one of my favorites.

After finishing the series, Michael and I happened to talk one day about our obsession with Rapture, and I was (maybe not all that) surprised to hear that he did not finish BioShock Infinite due to his discomfort with the politics of the game. It makes some sense: while the games are very much connected, the enemies of BioShock and BioShock 2 are different from those of Infinite, and the fact that the player has to fight characters that he/she/they may be sympathetic to in Infinite doesn’t quite match the satisfaction of defeating Frank Fontaine and Sofia Lamb in the first two games.

Bioshockparallels7

The PC protagonists of the BioShock franchise

The shift between BioShock 2 and Infinite, I think, is important. While the first two games give players a protagonist that is somewhat absolved of wrongdoing via their backstories and construction of Rapture, Infinite removes those possibilities and implicates the presumably straight white male player in the violence of the world. While players do have important choices to make in each BioShock game that determines light or dark endings, I still think those choices are excused in the first two games to some degree – and excused in a way that Infinite does not allow. To illustrate my point, I want to read Infinite against its predecessors, BioShock and BioShock 2, rather then taking it as a stand-alone game. I also want to focus on the topic of violence and masculinity, in keeping with the theme of gender on my blog.

Spoilers for all of the games, as well as trigger warnings for discussions of violence.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Empowering the Other or Reveling in The Bad Old Days? Two Readings of “The Shape of Water”

I have a friend and colleague who is a film scholar. He writes about cinema, primarily queer cinema and how queerness is represented both behind and in front of the camera. I write a lot about history and how our portrayals of history are working, but I also love monsters because I’m a medievalist (and we have no shortage of strangeness in medieval studies). Needless to say, when we saw The Shape of Water, we had a lot to talk about.

shape-of-water-ff241f20-736f-4311-830c-a1cec5955ee4

The Shape of Water won the Oscar this year for best picture, and to be clear, I really did enjoy the film – but there was some debate over whether or not it was groundbreaking (it was) or the “safe choice” (it also was). This debate, I think, nicely parallels the discussions I’ve had with my friend about the portrayal of the Other (namely, people of color and LGBT+ people). While I had a positive reading of the characters and their growth, my friend read it more negatively because it repeated tropes that we, as culture, would do well to bury when crafting our narratives.

This post presents two readings of The Shape of Water: one sees the characters receive meaningful growth throughout the film. The other sees the film as repeating tired tropes and portrayals of history that keep women of color and queer characters from being fully realized in a historical drama.

To be clear, I think both readings are valid, and any person can love or hate The Shape of Water as they please. I also think both readings can coexist, and we can see a piece of art or media as a flawed and complex product of storytelling.

Continue reading

The Imperfect Feminism of Some YA Fantasy Books

Lately, I’ve been struggling to find a YA fantasy novel that I’ve really liked – and yes, I know that I’m generalizing an entire genre, but hear me out. Fantasy – YA or not – is one of those genres that I really, really want to enjoy, but a number of things make it tough for me, personally: first, I’m a medieval lit scholar, so any fantasy that draws on vague ideas of the middle ages tends to bother me when it repeats tired tropes. Second – and this point is related to the first – fantasy is one of those genres where anti-feminism can be a huge problem because many authors draw on the middle ages or the vague historical past. The idea that life for women was “hard” and that they were little more than breeders is incorrect yet widespread in historical fiction, so it’s no surprise that fantasy which draws on the historic past tends to insert some of that anti-feminism in stories with no relationship to our actual history.

So, getting to YA fantasy, specifically.

I’ve read a number of fantasy novels written by (primarily white) female authors and targeted towards younger audiences that seem to adopt the trappings of feminism. There’s a “strong female protagonist,” usually one who kicks a lot of ass, who finds herself in an environment that is completely foreign to her. Something about the protagonist’s awesomeness attracts the notice of a (usually) broody male love interest, and after a number of adventures, the two fall in love and overthrow some kind of oppressive power structure.

Of course, this is an extremely loose and general overview. Fantasy YA novels themselves are more nuanced than this, and even those that aren’t can still be enjoyable. I’m not suggesting anything is wrong with this general outline. What is wrong is the particular way many YA fantasy books develop their romances. The romance aspect is going to be the subject of this blog post, and below, I want to explore how some books use the appearances of feminism while drawing on the anti-feminist trappings of the vague medieval (or historical) past to create love stories that may do more harm than good. In particular, I’ll be analyzing books such as A Court of Thorns and Roses by Sarah J. Maas and others.

SPOILER ALERTS for ACOTAR and some plot points for other YA books. Also TRIGGER WARNING for discussions of assault and rape.
Continue reading

Why do we always skip the Phoenix Saga?

I love the X-Men. I watched the animated series as a kid in the 90s and when I first started picking up superhero comics, X-Men was the first team I fell in love with. At the risk of sounding a little bit pretentious, I’ll admit that I haven’t been completely satisfied with the film adaptations – sure, there are exceptions (Days of Future Past and Logan were phenomenal, and other films have their moments), but overall, I’ve felt that the big studios are trying to make a quick cash grab.

That’s why when the upcoming Dark Phoenix film was announced, I had to roll my eyes.

uxtuhvyiu3ucr1pd59i5

Jean Grey is one of my favorite superheroes, and the films have never really done her justice. X-Men: The Last Stand is notorious for its butchering of the Dark Phoenix Saga, and though I’m not a critic who insists that movie adaptations need to follow the source material to a T, the mishandling of the famous comic arc has been the subject of a number of feminist criticisms. Generally, the film is lambasted for making the Phoenix a part of Jean rather than the cosmic entity as portrayed in the comics. In The Last Stand, Professor X reveals that he had to suppress Jean’s innate power because it posed a threat – not just to humanity, but, implicitly, to the symbolic order in which men are the most powerful heroes.

Part of my fear with the upcoming Dark Phoenix film is that it will do the same. Entertainment Weekly revealed that the movie will feature a space journey in which a solar flare “awaken[s] a long-dormant power in Jean Grey.” iO9 comments: “What’s interesting here is that these details are implying that rather than being a cosmic force that encounters Jean (as in various iterations of the comics canon), the Phoenix is something that’s always been inside Jean, just waiting for the right trigger to appear.”

While a number of critics have unpacked the implications of trying to suppress innate female power in the X-Men films, I want to focus on something slightly different. The current X-Men franchise is repeating the sins of its past in not only changing the essence of the Phoenix Force, but in failing to set up the Dark Phoenix storyline by completely ignoring what made the original Dark Phoenix Saga so impactful in the first place: the preceding Phoenix Saga. In this post, I want to briefly discuss how ignoring the Phoenix Saga makes adaptations of the Dark Phoenix Saga more problematic, both on the level of narrative and the level of portraying female characters with cosmic power.

Continue reading

Anatomy of a Trope: Sleeping With the Target in Spy Flicks

Yesterday I saw Kingsman: The Golden Circle. To be clear, I loved the first film, and I did enjoy the sequel, despite some major problems in the narrative. I do love the characters: Eggsy is fun to watch, as is Harry Hart and Merlin. I’m also a fan of men in well-tailor suits beating up bad guys and over-the-top, ridiculous fight scenes set to upbeat music.

maxresdefault

But Kingsman has gotten a lot of attention for a particular scene in which Eggsy has to seduce a woman (named Clara, played by Poppy Delevingne) to plant a tracking device on her, which he hopes will lead the Kingsmen to Charlie, Clara’s (ex?) boyfriend and one of the major antagonists of the film. Simple enough, but like me, a lot of viewers found the scene uncomfortable for a number of reasons. First, the tracing device had to be planted on a mucus membrane so some chemical could be absorbed into the bloodstream – so naturally, that means the woman’s vagina. Second, as Eggsy is fingerbanging the target, the camera pans down her body so we get an up-close shot of CGI vulva. What the actual hell?

Kaila Hale-Stern for The Mary Sue wrote about her discomfort watching that scene, and I want to make clear that I absolutely agree with putting responsibility on Matthew Vaughn. I also want to express some sympathy for actor Taron Egerton (who plays Eggsy), who had to be diplomatic while promoting the film and who was clearly uncomfortable with the scene – so much so that he refused to be the one to film it (the hand shown in the film was actually that of Poppy Delevingne’s husband).

But I want to also use this post to respond to other things that have been said about this scene, mainly Vaughn’s commentary and something Egerton said that has been repeated around social media. Vaughn told Entertainment Weekly:

“Some bloody feminists are accusing me of being a misogynist. I’m like, “It couldn’t be further from the truth.” It’s a celebration of women and the woman being empowered in a weird way in my mind, which will cause a big argument again I’m sure. It’s meant to be tongue-in-cheek and crazy… I was surprised when people are saying to me, “I loved the movie. I think it’s great, but I was offended by that.” I said, “Really? That’s more offensive than exploding heads, massacres in church, swearing, people being cut in half?” I was like, come on. It’s just a joke. It’s not even graphic […] For the 20 percent who were offended by it, there are 80 percent who are rolling around laughing so hard. Those 20 percent of people just need to lighten up a little bit. It’s about pushing boundaries and having a bit of fun. It’s not meant to be offensive, and it’s definitely not misogynist or any attack on women. That’s for sure.”

Egerton told Screen Rant:

“It’s what Matthew [Vaughn] does, it’s his signature thing. He likes to do something that shocks. In Kick-Ass it was Chloe Grace Moretz saying the C-word, in Kingsman 1 it was the bum shot of the Swedish princess, and in this one it’s the thing. And, you know, it’s not to everyone’s tastes, but it certainly gets people talking. All it is is explicitly showing what Bond alludes to and says in a double entendre kind of way.”

Together, these comments got me thinking: is the scene different than what Bond does, or any spy for that matter? Is the whole “sleeping with the target” trope inherently misogynistic, or is there a way to do it that is empowering?

In this blog post, I’m going to compare the Kingsman sex scene with a number of other instances of spies or secret agents sleeping with a target, hopefully illustrating why I was so uncomfortable with Kingsman while also exploring the trope as a whole.

Trigger warnings for misogyny, including rape and graphic images of violence against women. Also a brief mention of homophobia and the “Bury Your Gays” trope.

Continue reading

“My Middle Ages Will Be Intersectional Or It Will Be Bullshit”

Medieval Studies has a reputation of being a conservative field dominated by white men – and to be fair, a lot of it is. But while there is a large percentage of scholars who are actively pushing for diversity, it doesn’t help when one of our own reinforces the status quo. Over the weekend, a white tenured faculty member wrote a blog post targeting a junior scholar of color, attacking her for pushing for diversity. This blog post also pointed out her race… as if that was a reason to discredit her work. It spiraled out of control from there – the bullying professor tagged a notable alt-right troll, who in turn wrote a blog post filled with numerous pop culture references that was meant to threaten physical violence – if not in real life, then at least online. You can read a comprehensive overview of the whole incident here, or, if MSM is more your style, there’s a link here.

I’ve signed a number of letters in support of the targeted scholar, and I’m notably not using names in this post to partially shield myself from potential blowback (I’m a coward). But the purpose of this blog post isn’t to repeat things already said by medieval scholars or reaffirm my personal commitment to diversity in my professional life. Instead, as a nerdy pop culture blog, I want to respond to a number of things: first, I want to explore the subtle use of pop culture imagery as a weapon in alt-right troll’s blog post and how the weaponization of pop culture imagery works in our current social climate. Second, I want to turn away from the negativity and highlight some of my favorite women of color characters in medieval pop culture and talk a little bit about how their presence (when done well) can enhance our understanding of history in addition to being good for representation and diversity in non-academic realms.

Trigger warning for discussions of racism and violence.

Continue reading

Asking Tough Questions: Ms. Marvel and Tokenism in the Classroom

I’m proud to say that teaching the first volume of G. Willow Wilson’s Ms. Marvel in my college fiction classes has become somewhat routine. In each of the zillion times I’ve helmed an “Intro to Fiction” course, Ms. Marvel has always been someone’s first encounter with a “Muslim superhero” (I put that term in quotes because of the difficulty in defining that term) and it has always been someone’s favorite work of the semester. Most of our conversations revolve around how Ms. Marvel undoes stereotypes that pop culture at large attaches not just to Muslim figures, but heroes and villains more generally. Thus, Ms. Marvel becomes a tool that I use to help students look at the media they consume more critically, precisely because it is “outside the norm.”

ms-marvel

Recently, I had the privilege of guest teaching Ms. Marvel for a 300-level course. At my university, these courses are typically reserved for professors and senior grad students. Having never taught anything myself above a 100-level course, I was admittedly quite nervous – these undergrads were smart, sharp, and would keep me on my toes. They did not disappoint: while I didn’t have to go through my usual schtick of “here’s is why representation is important,” I did have to teach in a way that required me to adapt and formulate ideas on the fly. I’ve never been very good at that, even as a student myself. So, when a student pointed out that Ms. Marvel was problematic because of tokenism, I froze. In teaching 100-level classes, this point had never been brought up by my own students, and I myself had never considered it. I was at a loss for how to respond, and looking back, I’m still quite sure I made a mess of it.

Continue reading

Gendered Space: The Alamo Drafthouse Wonder Woman Screening

If you’re excited for the upcoming Wonder Woman movie and have been keeping a close eye on on the press, like me, then you may know that a bunch of people have their boxer briefs in a twist because of an upcoming women-only showing of the film.

Alamo Drafthouse is a popular movie theater chain in Texas, and one location in Austin has recently announced a planned showing for June 6 in which only women (and people who identify as women) are allowed to attend. On top of that, the theater released a statement saying, “Everyone working at this screening — venue staff, projectionist, and culinary team — will be female.”

So of course, men flipped their shit.

1491990205555-1

People have been calling the event sexist and threatening to boycott the film and the theater. None of these threats had much effect, however. The Alamo Drafthouse defended their event, offered a second women-only showing, and made plans to expand the event across the country.

While it’s satisfying to sip a cup of male tears, I want to put snarkery aside for a moment and actually think about this whole situation. People (mostly white men) have been trying to make the argument that if the tables were turned in any way, the situation would not be seen as positively. How would a showing of Black Panther for African Americans-only go over? What about a men-only showing of any film?

They’re right in one regard – a men-only showing of a film would definitely not be the same. But why? The answer, I’d argue, has to do with purpose and privilege.

Continue reading

Visions of the Past and Corruption in “The Dark Phoenix Saga”

I’ll talk about Jean Grey forever. For comics fans, she’s probably the character that is most cited in discussions about women and cosmic power, and for good reason. Her bond with the Phoenix Force and her iconic storylines (such as The Dark Phoenix Saga) are rich with opportunities for critical inquiry. While scholars such as Lenise Prater have talked about Jean Grey and female power, many of these arguments merely end with a criticism of sexism in comics. In her article about gender and power, Prater specifically takes up the issue of adapting the comics to film, emphasizing how the X-Men films “exhibit an anxiety about women’s capabilities and construct their power as inherently dangerous” (Prater 160). Jean Grey’s turn to evil, notably, is changed from the comic to the film. As Prater observes, ” Jean Grey/The Phoenix is slowly corrupted by power thanks to the machinations of the Hellfire Club… When the women in the films lose control of their powers, it is because of something inherent to their powers rather than because villains exploit their weaknesses. Indeed, whereas Jean Grey cannot retain control over her powerful psychic abilities, the male characters’ loss of control is always due to an attack from an outside force” (Prater 163-164). While useful, I find Prater’s description of “power” to be vague – is Jean corrupted by power itself? I have a hard time believing that, since as the Phoenix (the good version), she seemed to do just fine.

In expanding this analysis and looking more closely at the ways in which the Hellfire Club seeks to corrupt Jean Grey, I want to examine the trajectory of the illusions which Wyngarde uses. Whenever Jean is overcome by the illusion, she is “transported” back to the 18th century. Given that the role of these illusions is to “[give Jean] a taste of some of her innermost – forbidden – needs and desires,” these visions of the past can largely be understood as a point of exposure for the pleasure taken in socially unacceptable emotions. In Jean’s case, I suggest, the forbidden need/desire is the privileging of the individual over the group.

wyngarde-and-jean

This blog post will examine Jean Grey’s “visions” of the 18th century in The Dark Phoenix Saga by Chris Claremont. By analyzing the way in which her individuality corrupts her, we can read The Dark Phoenix Saga as not only a story about the dangers of female pleasure and power, but also as a criticism of the individual, lonesome hero. Granted, the characteristics associated with the Dark Phoenix can be read as “unfeminine desires,” such as sexuality and superiority over men. Feminist criticism would read this comic, then, as a metaphor for patriarchal control of the feminine and the fallout that results from it. However, Jean’s power is not only femininity gone awry: by reveling in the pleasure of being not only a slave owner, but a monarchist in her 18th century vision, Jean’s “dark desires” are less female agency and more inappropriate models of individual power.

Continue reading

“That Has Nothing to Do With Us” : Renee Montoya and Male Entitlement in Gotham Central

Gotham Central is a 2002-2006 police procedural comic set in Batman’s hometown of Gotham. Focusing on the underappreciated Gotham City Police Department (GCPD), the comic follows various officers as they take on big bads like Mr. Freeze, Firebug, and Two-Face with minimal involvement from our favorite caped crusader.

gc-half-a-life-tpb

My favorite badass.

One of the story arcs, “Half a Life,” follows detective Renee Montoya as she is outed as a lesbian by Two-Face, who has fallen in love with her. The story is by far one of the most famous ones from Gotham Central, having won an Eisner Award, a Harvey Award, and the Gaylactic Spectrum Award, all in 2004. While many have praised the story, I want to focus on Montoya as the nexus point for male entitlement in the comic. Those who have commented on the topic before mostly point to Two-Face’s affection for Montoya. Two-Face still believes that he and Montoya can have a relationship, despite being at the center of the plot that outed her. Blogger LadyRhian for “Deep Thoughts” describes this assumption as the result of Two-Face’s mental state, writing, “You have to wonder why, knowing of Renee’s lesbianism, Harvey Dent thought it was still possible to win her love. Well, I suppose that’s part of why he’s insane- refusing to accept outcomes he doesn’t like.” While the inability to accept defeat can certainly be part of the explanation, I don’t think an analysis like this explores the comic as much as it could. The whole story is not just one of lesbian experience, but of male entitlement. Harvey Dent is just the culmination of everything the comic sets up from the very beginning.

In this post, I’m going to examine the story of Montoya’s outing and Harvey Dent’s refusal to accept her lesbianism as part of a larger conversation about misogyny and the rejection of queer women. I by no means am suggesting that author Greg Rucka is rejecting queer women or that the story is meant to reject queer experiences, but rather, “Half a Life” dramatizes society’s misogyny over the entire story arc, not just in the climatic moments.

Continue reading