(no subject)

[labellementeuse]

Wow, typing S.H.I.E.L.D. is annoying.

So I watched the SHIELD pilot and what an unsurprising pilot it was. I enjoyed it, in an unsurprised way, because it does the usual unsurprising Joss things that I love - snarky characters, committed characters, a general degree of positivity, hints at found families, cartoon violence, hints at deep relationships and relationships that will develop, actually equal numbers of male and female recurring characters. I was particularly into Melinda Mays and the scientists. I liked the "journey into mystery" reference (and given Loki's prominence in the MCU I idly wonder whether that's some kind of hint) and, sorry, I loved that Lola can fly. the Cool Car (warning: TV Tropes) is a hallmark of a lot of TV I've loved. I'm hoping it's a good sign.

Even Agent Manpain (a nickname I steal from polarisnorth) was, while in himself not particularly exciting, at least treated a bit interestingly by the narrative (i.e. the idea seemed to be more about him learning from the people around him than the people around him learning from him). I thought that the narrative was a bit more obviously questioning his ... personality, skills, attitude. The fast-penta thing was such a Joss-typical choice: thoughtless with regards to consent and violation and ethical treatment of others and even Coulson's characterisation in the service of interesting character moments.

It also pissed me off in a number of unsurprising ways, like the incredibly un-ethnically diverse cast (I observed on twitter that he's done a kind of reverse Firefly which is, uh, special). I was also not a fan of the J. August Richards plot - and I was really, really excited to see J. August Richards. In the first place, I thought the racial dynamics of the black single dad losing control of his physical strength-based power and turning into Angry Black Man are as gross as I think the gender dynamics of River losing control of her mind-based power are.

White people who use black people as tools for experimentation has a horrible history in real life and there are some famous antecedents in the Marvel Universe. JAR's storyline was probably a reference to these but, well, they don't work as references. Without unpacking the references to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study all you have is a poor black guy wanting more power but being unable to cope with the power he's been given - more like, frankly, Eli's steroid storyline. He pretty quickly goes from a sweet single dad into a pretty classic Scary Black Man (warning: TV Tropes), which is really just a modern spin that draws on old, old tropes that portray non-white men (especially of African descent) as violent, scary, and animalistic.¹

In the second place, well, again I quote Polaris:

Look, you can't give J. AUGUST RICHARDS an amazing speech that basically speaks for the millennial generation AND ALSO the experience of the poor & POC, and expect me to swallow what happens next cheerfully. "We know what's best, so shut up and let us help you," especially coming from gov't agents, isn't something that I can follow.

It was clear that Joss was trying to address The Plight Of The 99% in an anvilicious way (and those anvils are a little unusual for Joss and kind of a shame). It was unfortunate that he chose to represent it through a black guest star who then violently murdered a couple of people - something Joss has definitely done before - confused his messages. He lets his details run away with themselves and his political metaphors eat themselves. Jaynestown is a great little episode with proto-unionist feelings, but Firefly/Serenity's overall pitch is a radically conservative small-government message, which I'm not sure was totally intentional. SHIELD, by contrast, is more or less from the perspective of the bluehanded boys (albeit a bit less inclined to melt people's brains). JAR's character is clearly supposed to be sympathetic, a victim of circumstance and malicious white people - but you know what the overall message felt like to me, when JAR says "I'm a superhero" and the audience knows that what he really is is a timebomb? What that narrative said to me was no you aren't, and no you can't be. The black single dad who works in a factory isn't a superhero. "The hooded hero"? Won't happen - not if the hood is meant to invoke the kids from the wrong side of town rather than the guy from Sherwood Forest.

It reminds me a lot of what happens in The Dark Knight Rises. Sure, Selina's a little bit sympathetic, but what that movie shows is that when poor people take power rich white guys have to take it back from them; that rule by the people is a delusion. Robbing the rich to give to the poor? Nah. Just accept your oppression, poor people. Accept that you can't get a job. Accept that you can't feed your children. Accept that you're not a superhero. That you can't be.

It's not a message I'm thrilled by.

¹Here's an interesting quote from TV Tropes' Othello page:

As the Atlantic slave trade gained ground and racism developed as a justifying philosophy for it, it became increasingly implausible to audiences that the intelligent, complex Tragic Hero of a Shakespeare play should be a black man. As a result (and also because not having to cake on blackface made it easier to convey emotion), a paler-skinned, Arabic Othello came into fashion, who was usually characterised as being mild-mannered and civilised or aristocratic and arrogant rather than passionate and 'bestial'. These versions stuck around even after black actors playing the lead began to become more acceptable, both because of lingering racism and because of increasing guilt over the rather grotesque caricature blackface-Othello had so often become.

There's no reference there but I believe it. That's how successful racist political propaganda became - to the extent that audiences no longer found Othello a believable black character because he was, to borrow today's coded language, too articulate.