Ever hear of overcompensation? Well, the 90's was full of it, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a fine indicator. Feminists want chick heroes, guys want hot chicks, and television stations want money. The grand compromise ended up being something which encouraged me to turn off my TV and get to my chemistry homework.
I had a couple of friends who were crazy about the show and I would just roll my eyes. The movie was one thing. The movie was entertaining. The show had some promise, but I couldn't stand the characters. I don't understand Joss Whedon. He's pumped out some ace stuff, but I could only tolerate Buffy in barely measurable doses.
In "The Buffy Effect," Rachel Fudge seemed as cynical as me. She frequently mentioned the subtle details of offerings to girl power, which was a prevalent theme in the 90's. She described Buffy who could not only take care of herself, but she could take care of her friends as well and she looked good doing it.
I personally don't take issue with a girl who has power. I'm a fan of women who can kick butt. I just don't like the image thing. The fact that she's the perfect little high school Valley girl annoys me to no end.
In general, I feel that lately, creating a female character who is given more power than the male characters is more of a device for political correctness than anything else. Just like the "token black guy" thrown in the mix so that people don't complain, the strong heroine keeps the feminists happy.
That brings me to "The Phenomenon of Lara Croft," written by Astrid Deuber-Mankowsky. I would consider myself to be a moderately hardcore gamer, but I had no idea how massive of a following the Tomb Raider games had amassed in the name of their protagonist. To tell the truth, it made me laugh. I personally am a huge fan of these games, but that's because they're fun! They are written well and the situations are exotic. The fact that Croft is a hobby archaeologist always pleased me. Being a wealthy English Lady, she has the means to go on all of these adventures and we can live vicariously through her.
Deuber-Mankowsky mentions the multi-dimensional enjoyment audiences reap from such a character. Women like that she's strong and kicks butt and men like that she's beautiful and has large breasts.
I never paid attention to the chick; I just played the games. As I mentioned in a previous blog entry, the only thing Croft's body did for me or my brother was shared humor. Ultimately, I wasn't satisfied with the analysis.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You wrote: "In general, I feel that lately, creating a female character who is given more power than the male characters is more of a device for political correctness than anything else. Just like the "token black guy" thrown in the mix so that people don't complain, the strong heroine keeps the feminists happy."
ReplyDeleteI think this is an important observation. In a way, what you're hitting on is post-feminism (in the gender discussion) and modern racism (in the race discussion). Several critics have pointed out that these "positive images" can sometimes be just as threatening to the social status of marginalized groups as the earlier, hateful, negative images. When I see on TV and in movies--all of a sudden--a bunch of kick-ass girls or powerful female corporate execs or black generals or police chiefs, all holding these powerful positions with no apparent, gender- or race-related difficulty, I'm not seeing a picture that fairly reflects the off-screen reality.
It's almost the opposite of symbolic annihilation--it's symbolic wish fulfillment. TV and film gives us the chance to wave a magic wand and suddenly create a world where our embarrassing history (and present) of sexism and racism are almost completely erased, and while that's a fun fantasy to indulge, it's worth questioning whether these fantasies offer us tools that will actually help us negotiate issues of identity and society.