Links

[selenak]

Darth Real Life keeps me busy, thus, only two links:

The Americans: Mother/Russia, thoughtful meta on the narrative strategies The Americans use - and twist - within the antihero genre: The antihero genre, dedicated as it is to selling us on characters who are neither wholly good nor irredeemably evil, is the perfect vehicle for this project, and The Americans hews closely to the antihero script. Philip and Elizabeth are special because they are highly trained Soviet operatives. (...) They’re humanized not only by their children but also by the remorse they feel when they kill anyone whose death does not serve their mission.

But what about the other important element of the antihero formula? Who are the easier-to-hate characters who make our murderous protagonists more likable? Here is where The Americans diverges from the genre as we know it and takes it to even grayer pastures. We would expect a show about the Cold War to present an abundance of options for antagonists and there are certainly a handful of stock villains who crop up throughout the show’s six seasons. But more often than not, The Americans surrounds Philip and Elizabeth with individuals who are, like them, neither wholly good nor irredeemably evil.


(I hadn't put it in these terms before, but it's true: The Americans basically avoids what 99% of all antihero tales does in this regard.) (The essay also offers good points on gender and audience sympathy.)

Doctor Who:

A little slice of heaven: in which a villain pushes the Thirteenth Doctor enough for her to show the Doctor's darker side, and Graham is there to witness (and help).

Comments

[rheasilvia]

That's a very interesting article - thank you for linking it!

I loved the Americans; it was masterfully done in so many ways. And it was near the ending of the series that I realized that the show was evidently very finely tuned for an audience that was not me (namely, a US audience), and I had been watching a slightly different show than the intended audience all along. :-)

At least, so I assume! I read an article that talked about the interesting internal conflict the viewer experiences because they want the relatable protagonists to succeed, but also want the FBI to succeed and catch the spies. I never once wanted the FBI to catch the spies, and it never even occurred to me I was supposed to want this. But on reflection, I see now that (and why) the series assumed I would. ;-)

[selenak]

:) I hear you, and didn't root for the FBI to succeed, either. Mind you, I did want Stan to find out and would have felt narratively betrayed if the show had ended with him either still in the dark or never given the chance to actually confront Philip and Elizabeth post reveal, but that's not the same as the FBI succeeding, it's about pay off to a key relationship within the show.

...not completely unrelated but still in another show, the "not the intended audience" factor for me also came when watching Alias; when Sydney, our heroine, working for the CIA, tells her mother, Irina Derevko, formerly a KGB agent undercover as Laura Bristow, now independent, "you are a traitor to this country". Because well, she's not - it was never Irina's country and she was doing exactly what Sydney does in the present. Mind you, it was ic for Sydney in s2 to say so, because the reveal that her mother was alive and had never been Laura Bristow, an American literature professor, is relatively new for her - she doesn't think of her mother as a Russian yet. But I bet Abrams and friends also assumed the audience would be with Sydney in this matter.

[rheasilvia]

Absolutely! I agree entirely about the necessity of Stan finding out - although this, I feel, was actually a bit rushed, and didn't have quite the pay-off I'd hoped (unlike Martha's ushering out of the country after she found out the truth about her "husband", which I thought was *excellently* done). But it still worked, and the show did have a lot of ground to cover in a short time, so I'm not mad at it for that. :-)

I haven't watched Alias, but yes, that is exactly the same assumption - that the viewers will automatically share certain common national viewpoints and opinions. I'm sure that by and large it's a correct assumption, for the intended audience, but as an outsider these moments range from interesting to extremely jarring for me.

Though I would have to think about this at more length, I must say that I suspect it isn't a coincidence that the shows that throw me out of my suspension of disbelief (and even anger me) with their false assumption are shows that are not particularly well-written, and tend towards hitting the wrong beats anyway.

[watervole]

Thanks for an excellent Dr Who rec.

[selenak]

You're very welcome.

[nolivingman]

The Americans surrounds Philip and Elizabeth with individuals who are, like them, neither wholly good nor irredeemably evil

I get this about the evil, but I read the FBI agents like Stan to be written as straight-up good, not very grey at all.

[selenak]

Hm, given that Stan in the first season shoots an unarmed prisoner (with his boss covering for him), blackmails Nina into becoming a double agent (much as the KGB uses leverage), is very much clearly kidding himself when denying to Nina that telling her to do everything to get intel from her boss (Arkady's predecessor), he meant sex as well, and afterwards (i.e. after Nina has made it clear how she understands "do everything to make him trust you") starts an affair with her, I would say he's shades of grey, and he's the FBI agent we see most of. As for his boss, the show even gives him and Arkady a scene in season 2 where they get to point out to each other neither can pull the moral superiority card here.