Ubi es Cottia?

[selenak]

Okay, confession time: one reason why I haven't watched The Eagle yet is that I gathered via fannish osmosis that there is no Cottia in it. And damn it, I like Cottia. The Eagle of the Ninth isn't a sacred text to me, and yes, of course the main event is the Marcus and Esca relationship, but does that prevent me from liking other aspects about it, including Marcus' wife-to-be? It doesn't. My favourite Eagle of the Ninth fanfic at Yuletide was Aedificare, in which all three - Marcus, Esca and Cottia, that is - build a life together. So the news that there was no Cottia saddened me and kept me away from the film, as did reactions from people who'd seen the film first, then read the book and promptly objected to Cottia's presence in it as interfering with the slash. And I'm a sad puppy all over again, wailing "Why can't I like Alice/Charles as much as Bob/Charles, or maybe Alice/Bob if they have a relationship of their own, and best of all Alice/Bob/Charles?"

Granted, this does not work in every constellation. If Alice and Bob loathe each other canonically - bearing in mind that contrary to fanfic and Hollywood, not every hostility is a cover for sexual tension - then yes, it's not very likely the three of them will all live together peacefully any time soon. (But even then, I reserve my right to like Alice as much as either Bob or Charles.) Also, it's entirely possible Alice, Bob and Charles all like each other very much indeed but are not cool with polygamous relationships. This is not a crime, nor does it make them small-minded. (BTW, this is why West Wing's Jed/Leo works for me emotionally but not in terms of an actual sexual relationship during show canon time. Jed wouldn't cheat on Abbey. Leo, especially bearing in mind the way he needs Jed to be the best president ever, would not go there, either. Abbey likes and respects Leo, but I just don't buy Abbey taking the "whatever makes you happy, dear" road; I think she defines marriage as a monogamous union, too.) So no, I'm not prescribing sexual threesomes as the solution to being into slash couple Bob/Charles while there is canonical Alice around involved with Bob or Charles. I'm aware there are characters for whom this simply wouldn't work. And actually I prefer it in fanfic if Alice is written out (in a respectful manner that doesn't have Bob or Charles suddenly realise they never loved her at all) - than to see her badly characterized or bashed as a presence in a Bob/Charles story.

And yet it bothers me that the film version of The Eagle did just this. I tell myself: but this way, she won't be mischaracterized on screen and getting horrible treatment in fanfic afterwards. Doesn't help. Perhaps because a film adaption is different from fanfic; it's a canon of its own, which just declared this (female) character I like is not worth keeping. And immediately connects in my mind with the fandom treatment for female love interests of one half of popular slash couples in many a fandom, only, again, this isn't fanfic.

Now I'm seen some female fannish responses in various fandoms (not The Eagle, but then I haven't looked there, what with still not having seen the film) going to the opposite extreme of declaring Alice the only worth while character in her canon and loathing Bob and Charles instead, and that makes me feel sitting between the chairs all over again, because again, quite often I like not only Alice & Bob & Charles but also Bob/Charles in addition to Alice/Charles or Alice/Bob. I don't want to read Bob and Charles condemned as boring idiots not fit to wipe Alice's feet anymore than I want to read Alice Who? stories. And I'm so happy if canon, however flawed it may be in other regards, gives me, as for example Merlin did with Gwen, Arthur and Merlin, a constellation where the relationships Alice has with both Bob and Charles are developed, she's important to them both and we have a three way interplay that's crucial to the film/book/show in question. Never mind whether or not there is potential for a threesome in the sexual sense, if there are emotional ties to more than one person, this to me is something to be celebrated, not abhorred.

Perhaps it's a question of age. The older I get, the more off-putting I find it if a pairing - het or slash, this doesn't matter - is presented in a way that all other relationships of the people involved have to be sacrificed, disregarded or ignored (doesn't matter whether these relationships are platonic or romantic in nature), and the more I value stories that allow me to root for more than one relationship in them. Doesn't mean I'm always rooting for all relationships with the same strength, but - I'm just happy if they're there, you know?

In conclusion: cases of the vanishing other characters and relationships make selenak a sad panda.

Comments

[legionseagle]

That echoes a lot of the disquiet I've had about the film; also, that it's another element they've changed about the socio-political dynamic. I'm uneasy because they've emphasised so much that the relationship between Marcus and Esca is initially much tenser and more resentful than in the book and "brings out" the slavery/colonial issues in a way the film-maker prefers and sees as having more contemporary resonance. But the problem with that is the one Sutcliff herself notes and puts into the mouth of the tribune, Plancus; namely, if Esca does seriously resent Marcus, the moment they're north of the Wall it's the easiest thing in the world for him to slip a knife into Marcus and join the local tribes.


And one element I always liked about the Cottia storyline (apart from Uncle Aquila having to bestir himself to be nice to the neighbours, which I always found funny) is the nuance it allowed Sutcliff to explore with regard to those Britons who chose voluntarily to assimilate into Roman culture and what that meant for them; the discussion about the patterns on weaponry in the garden is very telling, for that.

Also, I got annoyed with reviewers who on the one side were preening that there wasn't a "grafted on love interest" and on the other saying that "with a bit of imagination" the film could have had female characters to give it a Bechdel pass, without noting that a range of female characters (because I bet the whole siege of Isca bit's been written out, too, and with it Cradoc's wife Guihumara and presumably if no Cottia no Valeria and no Nissa) have actually been excised by deliberate choice.

[selenak]

if Esca does seriously resent Marcus, the moment they're north of the Wall it's the easiest thing in the world for him to slip a knife into Marcus and join the local tribes.

Quite, and even if they're going love/hate, surely self respect would make Esca leave Marcus at that point.

Britons and Roman Britain in general get explored more via the Cottia storyline, true. I mean, granted, a film does not offer the same amount of time a novel does for subplots, but surely there'd have been some?

I got annoyed with reviewers who on the one side were preening that there wasn't a "grafted on love interest" and on the other saying that "with a bit of imagination" the film could have had female characters to give it a Bechdel pass, without noting that a range of female characters (because I bet the whole siege of Isca bit's been written out, too, and with it Cradoc's wife Guihumara and presumably if no Cottia no Valeria and no Nissa) have actually been excised by deliberate choice.

Oh, me too. And going by those reviews there isn't a single female character around, so aside from Cottia we lose everyone else, too.

[seraphl]

The thing with the knife never really bothered me because this story is just as much about Esca's honour as Marucs'. I mean think about it; Esca's family is dead, his tribe is gone (his immediate tribe anyway - the Brigantes were pretty numerous across northen England), he's miles away from home and there's nothing to go back to. Stuck as a slave for years he has to carry and preserve what memories he has of them. That includes their way of life. So when a man saves his life and his tribes rules demand that this puts him in their service, that's what he's going to do. If his tribe emphasised the importance and honour of keeping your word even at the expense of your own happiness that's what he'll do. Yeah sure, he'd love to simply knife Marcus and go home (in the book he didn't even plan to do that) but that would dishonour the memory of his family, and by abandoning their ways he would dishonour himself, leaving him rootless and adrift.

That tension is what makes Esca's character so interesting to me. He's somewhere he doesn't want to be, with someone he doesn't like, doing something he doesn't want to do, but he retains his personal integrity and his own honour which is why he still has his pride. Even though his home is gone, he preserves it by continuing to hold their values and act in the way he was taught is right and honourable. Not stabbing Marcus is actually the braver thing to do.

Ubi es Cottia

[seraphl]

I liked Cottia too (I like fiesty girls in my stories, rather than weak pansies), and like you I understand that the book would inevitably lose a lot in translation, but I honestly enjoyed the film. It won't win any Oscars and there are a few cliched moments but the lead actors are surprsingly good (Jamie Bell in particular) and the story is engaging. The emphasis of the plot is more about the boys' relationship than the quest, and the timeline is shuffled around to increase the drama but what mainly comes through is the vision of Britain Sutcliffe had. The way it's shot matches well with her writing, i think, showing Britain and the Highlands in particular as somewhere vast, alive and lush, grey and cold, usually damp, but all the more beautiful for it.

I always assumed they'd left Cottia out because we see her so briefly in the books and it takes time to build an emotional connection with someone on screen -if they'd left her in she would have been a bit-character, plus modern audiences would have found it hard to relate to one of their main characters having a romantic interest in a 14 year old girl. But there are a few nods to her. In the arena, when Marcus petitions for Esca to live, one of the first people we see joining in with him is a red-headed woman in Roman dress who is clearly not enjoying the spectacle. She's only there for a second, but in my mind, that's Cottia.

I'd watch it and then make up your mind. It has it's pro's and cons but it's worth a watch just to gain a new perspective on the story. Maybe rent it first if you're not sure.

Re: Ubi es Cottia

[selenak]

Renting it sounds like a good alternative.