Thursday, September 3, 2009

I Can Never Ignore Buffy for Too Long

So it comes to no surprise that my first actual entry is devoted to a discussion of feminism...and of course Buffy the Vampire Slayer. With a strong female lead and a brilliant set of supporting characters, Buffy pleads the case that all hope for the modern world is not lost. And that's not just because Buffy Summers always finds a way to save the world.

A rather insightful blog that discusses Buffy and its feminist themes is this ain't livin', a site authored by s. e. smith (penname meloukia) that covers topics from health care to Harry Potter and everything in between. smith updates her blog quite often, and most of her posts are rather lengthy, but in-depth and chock full of witty wisdom and insightful social commentary.

Recently on her blog, smith has written a series of examinations into how Joss Whedon’s shows reflect his personal claims of being a feminist, and if his work stands up as a reflection of his personal beliefs, or if his beliefs are sacrificed for the sake of plot and audience size. She warns her audience numerous times that it isn't her right in any way to judge Joss's personal beliefs or to revoke his feminist card, and I think she succeeds in never judging his beliefs on their own, just the choices he makes as a key component of the show. I cannot wait to tackle this very same topic of whether or not Buffy holds up as a feminist character.

In her article on female empowerment in Buffy, smith discusses Buffy’s relationships with Angel, Riley, and Spike, and the role that Willow and Joyce play in the series. It’s an article founded on a plethora of evidence from the show, and which requires a certain amount of background Buffy-knowledge. Her article on demons and Slayers is a follow-up to her first article, and dives into the other Slayers and Slayer-potentials and the demons that are featured each week on Buffy. These articles provide a great basis for future debate about whether or not Buffy is a good example of a feminist show, or if it’s just Joss’s personal opinions and the lens through which one looks that provide the basis for any opinions one might form.These articles provide a thorough discussion of exact particulars that would support the argument for Buffy being as feminist as some may claim, but also gives the differing side of the argument, detailing in which ways Buffy fails as an exemplar of gender equality in prime time television.

Where smith fails, however, is in giving the show some deserved wiggle room. In the end, Buffy wasn’t made in a vacuum, and had to be accepted by network executives. In terms of how progressive it is, one has to look at the culture in which it was made, and the other forces that controlled the show. Though smith recognizes that “it’s hard to be consistently on message for 7 seasons”, she also berates Joss for incorporating a character like Jenny Calendar, saying that she was used simply as a plot device and that her existence in the show “is another case of a situation in which feminism had to take a back seat to storytelling”. It’s in details like this that smith’s opinion differs from my own. While it would be nice to think that the sole purpose of Buffy would be to fight the battle for feminism, it wasn’t. Buffy had to be a compelling drama, and though I recognize that the title of “compelling drama” doesn’t give a show free reign to be as anti-feminist as possible, it’s clear that a scripted show without plot or variant characters wouldn’t last terribly long on prime-time television, even if it were spouting the most honest social theory. While smith’s articles on Whedon’s work bring up many good points and backs up those assertions with ample evidence, there are many holes in the argument made.

It is those holes that I would like to dutifully fill in my upcoming posts, and I would like to just as thoroughly dissect what it is about BtVS that makes it feminist television. this ain't livin' provides solid groundwork for the upcoming debate I would like to make in favor of Buffy being a mostly gender-equal view of life, and that Whedon’s personal beliefs do, for the most part, make it through to the final cut.

3 comments:

  1. I actually remember reading somewhere (or maybe hearing in a commentary) that Jenny Calendar was not originally intended to be a member of the gypsy clan that cursed Angel, but rather when they got to that part of the storyline, Joss and the writers thought it would be cool to make her that character. I didn't read the article you are discussing here, but if the above is true, Jenny wasn't merely a plot device. Good post though, looking forward to more

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm looking forward to your series; if you collect them all in a single archive, please let me know, as I suspect that a lot of my readers will enjoy them as well and I'd like to be able to link to them as a whole.

    Also, in re:wiggle room, I'm primarily talking about the problematic aspects of the series, and not so much about the positive aspects, because I think that the problematic parts are often ignored. That said, at some point in the future, I will probably explore Buffy's characterization/the era of the show/the positive impacts of Buffy. I just haven't gotten there yet! I'm trying to lay out the negative side of the thesis first, in other words.

    ReplyDelete
  3. meloukhia- Thanks so much for commenting! I'll be sure to let you know if I get this jumbled mess together. This is my first blog, and so it's great to hear anyone is reading what I have to say. You'll be the first to get a link!

    Also, rereading my work it seems I come across a little snippy about your articles, but honestly I think you treat Buffy in an honest way that most solely Buffycentric-blogs miss, due to sheer fanship overwhelming any logical reasoning people might have. With such militant fans as those Joss manages to accumulate, your voice is a brave one to put on the line. I'll definitely be along for the ride in your upcoming articles and look forward to seeing what's to come!

    ReplyDelete