Real world relevence of science fiction and the Whedon-'verse

POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Friday, January 20, 2006 16:58
VIEWED: 7719
PAGE 1 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

CHRISISALL

Saturday, January 14, 2006 4:24 PM

(Cont. from another rather noisy thread)

*The Central Planets are seen as "enlightened", but this faux enlightenment is depicted as coming at too great a cost, if not downright evil. Yet the Outer Planets seem to be depicted as equally bad, just on a local level. Could this infer [or is it imply? I forget] our trouble reconciling problems both at home and abroad in these "interesting times"--are there good guys anywhere?--, or is this the human condition where everything seems a vast wasteland of iniquity, depravity and hopelessness? How does this relate to the American/Anti-American sentiment? [or UK or Canadian, etc. etc.]

*Other Sci-Fi movies/etc. that deal with the same types of issues [ie: Gattaca, trying to create the "perfect world", through genetics instead of pharmaceuticals]and any parallels we might draw...and lo and behold, our own 'verse trying the same with both.

*The struggle of Malcolm Reynolds and his fall from faith [in the 2 hour "pilot", before the battle of Serenity, Mal kisses a cross in an obviously habitual manner, yet afterwards he is actively hostile towards God, but not Book] ...is he really set against his former faith, or is he really seeking for someone to restore his faith? Are there real-life parallels here?

* Which female aboard Serenity has the greatest rack?

* The Reavers were the fault of the Central Planets. Is our present-day situation with terrorists the same situation: did we, with our policies, create Bin Laden and those like him, or are they more like the unruly outer planets with a right to war against the Superpowers?

[I put in number four to see if anyone can draw present day sociopolitical parallels with boobs.]

-As posted by Faramond

SERGEANTX

Saturday, January 14, 2006 6:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Faramond:
*The Central Planets are seen as "enlightened", but this faux enlightenment is depicted as coming at too great a cost, if not downright evil. Yet the Outer Planets seem to be depicted as equally bad, just on a local level. Could this infer [or is it imply? I forget] our trouble reconciling problems both at home and abroad in these "interesting times"--are there good guys anywhere?--, or is this the human condition where everything seems a vast wasteland of iniquity, depravity and hopelessness? How does this relate to the American/Anti-American sentiment? [or UK or Canadian, etc. etc.]

I think this was a central, if not the central theme of Firefly. It seemed obvious to me that things were never as black and white as Mal's vision of the evil Alliance oppressing the valiant Independents. Strong hints in the later episodes suggested this, as well opened the possibility that Mal might be realizing some of the contradictions in his view. "The Message" was particularly interesting in this light.

Ultimately I think it was pointed at a conclusion that the real heroes in such a morally bankrupt climate are those who stand up for themselves and those they love without losing their sense of dignity and humanity - people able to live righteously despite the pressures from the dominant political factions, whether Alliance, Independent, Republican or Democrat.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

THATWEIRDGIRL

Saturday, January 14, 2006 6:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
* Which female aboard Serenity has the greatest rack?

Hrmmmm. Our history has shown a preference to smaller hand-sized 'racks'. Traditionally, humans have valued athleticism and form. Lithe and agile people, women included, were more able to survive and compete. Yes, the fertility statues show large breasted goddesses, but that was an exaggeration. Most women have smaller chests. There are of course societies that value large women for their supposed wealth. Large women tend to have larger breasts since so much of breast tissue is fatty deposits. So, um...really all depends on your taste I guess. As a female-type person, I think men (and women) prefer the smaller, more average sized breast. B, I think is popular.

None of the ladies of FF are overly endowed. I think they represent females pretty well. Zoe, a soldier, would be fit and athletic. Slim build and small breasts are ideal for that life. Likewise, Kaylee is a worker. Presumably her family is and has been hard laborers. Though curves and roundness where valued by the underclass, the large breasts would get in the way. Inara and River come from the core where beauty is coveted. I liken this to ancient Egypt or Greece. Aphrodite was always depicted with a small pert chest. I suspect that the high society of the core would hold similar ideas of beauty. As such, the companions and daughters of the rich would be graceful with little to unbalance them.

I say Kaylee.

*please keep in mind that I've lots of insane family (what twg has insane family, couldn't be) in town and I've had many drinks this weekend and many strange conversations.

www.thatweirdgirl.com
---
"...turn right at the corner then skip two blocks...no, SKIP, the hopping-like thing kids do...Why? Why not?"

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 15, 2006 12:54 AM

Here's what I think IMHO

A. 'faux enlightenment'

My thoughts are that there are two messages here:
1. People are the same everywhere, flawed.
2. The Alliance is unfair, they are no better because of their prosperity, because really it comes at the oppression of everyone else.

B. 'gattaca et al'

Yeah, this is an obvious message of the show, utopia is evil, because to achieve it you have to subvert human will. It's one of the blatantly anti-socialist messages which abound here. And yeah, this is blatantly anti-socialist, not just a natural extension of the show's libertarian bent.

C. 'Mal's Faith'

What Mal has really lost faith in is people. He has lost faith in his mission because he sees people everywhere are flawed. He's looking for something worth saving. This would imply that Mal's God is more the collective will of the people. I don't think Joss is heavily religious, but this sort of religious imagery is throughout Buffy also.

D. 'Greatest Rack'

I said Zoe, but Kayless is also a good pick. I have to disagree That Weird Girl. This sounds like an echo of faint feminist spin, but there's no media image here. I know because everyone from my home town had the same keenness for particular girls, and with no TV, magazines, or media of any kind outside of a daily print newspaper, which never devulged such things as fashion tips, it happened anyway. No one every came in and said "these girls are hot." So, men do like the bossoms, and that's clearly a genetic trend and there are genetic reasons for it. But that said, I tend to have a fondness for River. Kaylee is also quite attractive. Inara would be attractive if she weren't such a b~+^h. Zoe has the romantic flame of a stone wall. But I'm still going with Zoe for rack. Mebe I got to ogle some more pictures.

E. 'Creating Reavers'

Yeah, this is a clear indication that Joss is saying that we created Bin Laden. I don't think that's true, myself, but I can see that we are fueling the fire. Re: The 'we created Bin Laden' conspiracy theory, Bin Laden used the CIA to gain some advantages, but he was already set on his path to be a terrorist, that part's not our fault. But sure, this is the message.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by thatweirdgirl:
Traditionally, humans have valued athleticism and form. Lithe and agile people, women included, were more able to survive and compete. I think men (and women) prefer the smaller, more average sized breast. B, I think is popular.

I'm with ya there, TWG.
Muscle over fatty deposits, for sure.

All muscle-y like Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
B. 'gattaca et al'

Yeah, this is an obvious message of the show, utopia is evil, because to achieve it you have to subvert human will. It's one of the blatantly anti-socialist messages which abound here. And yeah, this is blatantly anti-socialist, not just a natural extension of the show's libertarian bent.

I agree with your comments here, however, it is funny how the Corporate World Order seems to want to bend and subvert human will in service to the bottom line, almost like a Corporcialism if you ask me.

Chrisisall, remember, I coined it...

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:34 AM

Chris,

Not need to coin it, it's been coined a long time ago as Corporatism, which is a kind of Socialism.

The thing is, if I understand it correctly, and I get attacked a lot for this, but as I understand it Socialism is a kind of collectivism which seeks to better the human condition through the top-down application of a utopian ideal of society "focusing on the general welfare rather than individuality, on co-operation rather than competition."

Under that there are many forms. Some seem relatively innocuous such as the Greens, some are downright appalling such as the Nazis (National Socialists.) Some breakdown into subcategories, like Communism becomes Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism and Trotskyism.

Benito Mussolini called his version "Corporatism." (ie., he coined it)

Todays corporatists are not very different if at all from Mussolini. They seek the merger of corporation and state to give them not only govt. control over industry, but also a 'safe space' for their command structures.

Govt. can be a tricky place to have you power structure if your an ideologue, because there may be people in govt. who are not you. Esp. when there are elections that you can lose.

Picture this: If I'm Bill Clinton, and the army corps of engineers is a key part of my nation building plan, so I appoint a yesman to the post. But then what would happen if I suddenly lost an election to an outsider? Suddenly my yesman might be yanked out and replaced by Mr. Outsider's pick. Not good for my grand plan. So, I remove the army corps of engineers from the task and replace it with Halliburton. Now I know my good friend Dick Cheney and the people who follow him will always be in charge, even if I should lose to Mr. Outsider.

This isn't the only reason to have a corporatist society as part of your great new world order plan, but it's a big one.

Another reason you might want to go the corporatist route is you might live in a society where imposing martial law and nationalizing the industry just isn't practical. By marrying you corporation and state, you can dole out enormous govt. contracts and pass legislation unevenly slanted in favor of your own pet company, the corporate branch of your union, so as to help it slaughter the competition.

Other societies have used this model before, besides Mussolini's Italy, including Nazi Germany and present day Communist China, which has govt. friendly corporations that get enormous contracts and laws passed which set things overwhelming in their favor.

Though Clinton started this, he has really been outclassed by Bush, who knows know shame. Sadly, now the United States has to be added to the list of societies that follow this model.

This isn't why I call Cheney et al neo-socialists, but it's one of the signs that they haven't changed their stripes since they were calling themselves 'Trotsky Socialists.' Back in those days Max told Dick and Bill about this great plan of corporatism and how it fit into the grand scheme.

Finally, corporations aren't good, and they're nto evil, they're just one way for people to organize. If those people are evil, the result will be bad. Fortunately, most people are good, and corporations tend to lend themselves in a better overall direction than govts.

I support the free market and I think corporations are generally a good way to enact that, but there's is nothing 'free market' about monopolies or corporatism. Just as someone could be very religious and a strong supporter of the idea of churches, and still not support the crusades or the inquisition, because they threaten other religions, and also people, I feel these approached to corporations endanger other corporations and also people.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, January 15, 2006 2:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Though Clinton started this, he has really been outclassed by Bush

So...the Alliance will have a statue of Bush AND Mao at their HQ?

Chrisisall

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 16, 2006 1:22 AM

Well, possibly, but also in the way science fiction does, they may have one staue of Bao. Or possibly Mush.

CHRISISALL

Monday, January 16, 2006 1:27 AM

lol, you so silly...

Straight man Chrisisall

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE