At 04:44 3-2-01 +0000, Neil Faulkner wrote:
From: Jacqueline Thijsen inquisitioner@wish.net
And here you're doing it again, I'm afraid. You take it as given that Deliverance contains sexist themes, and measure the reactions of other
fans
by assuming that they must have seen those themes, too. Well, I haven't,
or
at least not in the way you seem to have done.
Er... hang on, are you trying to say that some people haven't noticed the *sexism*? The misogyny I can quibble over, but the sexism is so blatantly obvious it doesn't need querying.
I agree that it doesn't need querying, because I feel there's nothing there to query about. For me, there's just people in that ep doing their own thing, and the only ones trying to force women into a certain behavioral pattern are the hairy barbarians. Who try the same with the men, BTW.
The "relationship" between Meegat and Avon strikes me as amusing rather that sexist
But the sexism isn't Avon's, it's Terry Nation's. You know, the bloke what wrote the script.
Isaac Asimov once wrote about how some eager young student enthusiastically told him about all the wonderful symbolism that he'd found in the Foundation trilogy. Asimov told the student that he hadn't consciously put any of that symbolism in there. The student looked at him as if he'd just been told that the Earth was flat and asked "What's *that* got to do with anything?"
Anyhow, the bloke what wrote the script becomes just another viewer after the script has been put on tape. His opinions and prejudices count for no more than my own.
(I do love his expression at her worshipful attitude)
Stop looking at the characters and consider the episode in terms of its ideological topography. It's a bloody great mountain of Victorian bourgeois complacency.
Nope, I'm too busy admiring the characters. I like admiring the characters. Looking at societal implications is boooooring.
and my reaction to the hairy barbarians is pretty much the same as Neil's. I just groan and wait for
the
good bits of the episode.
But do you groan for the same reasons as I do?
I dunno, but I do groan. Mostly because I've seen so many of 'em before in both SF and action flicks and nobody ever managed to make 'em interesting. So I'd very much appreciate it if film makers could please retire them and replace them with good looking Greek gods and goddesses. They still wouldn't be interesting, but at least they'd be fun to look at.
I've been on the lyst for almost three years now, and I don't remember
ever
seeing that portrayal. I've seen several people explaining specific bad behavior in a good way and in some cases I even agreed with them, but I don't think anyone on this lyst ever called Avon a saint. Well, not seriously, anyway.
I too have yet to see anyone describe Avon as an out-and-out saint, but when I first entered the hallowed ranks of fandom (nearly ten years ago now) I was immediately struck by the massed ranks of Avon apologists on whom I will pass no comment as I have no wish to start a flame war.
Oh, c'mon, you know you really want to :-). Anyway, there are always several explanations for most kinds of behavior. I don't see why seeing some particular actions of Avon in a positive light suddenly turns one into an "Avon apologist", just like seeing some of those actions in a negative way does not necessarily turn one into an Avon basher.
Neil (currently rather angry)
There, there, (note the neat tie-in to the hurt-comfort thread), you can rage on about bourgeois idiots and I'll just keep admiring the characters. Especially the ones in tight leather trousers. Sexist, moi? Not at all, I admire men and women in tight leather trousers equally. <drool>
Jacqueline