The Companions Guild - hurrah!!

POSTED BY: AgentRouka
UPDATED: Thursday, March 15, 2007 02:35
VIEWED: 13767
PAGE 2 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

AGENTROUKA

Saturday, March 10, 2007 5:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SpaceAnJL:
Me again.

Me again, too. With more "beating", I guess.

Quote:

My point is that a very large organization has the potential to be turned to dodgy ends. Not everyone will be bad. In fact, I think the concept is a very fine one. But you have to realise that any group of people will contain the whole spectrum of folks, from the benevolent to the barking.

And I never said that this can't be possible. In fact, I said very clearly that there could be evil lurking within the Guild.

But if there is, I just don't see it as an institutional aspect of it, but rather an abberration working secretly somewhere, not an accepted part at any even the top level.

Quote:

All I was asking, is that people see beyond the black and white assumptions. I mean, on the other side of the coin, we have a whole frontier of planets filled with witch-burners and criminals.

We have been given a pretty comprehensive view of good and evil on the rim worlds, but we have not gotten the same thing for the Core.

Everything we have seen of the Core on the show that is not evil or at least rotten, is actually on board Serenity now: Inara, Simon, River.

Everything else has been depicted as pretty worthless: the Tam parents are bad, the hospital security staff is bad, the Alliance is bad (or at least we get no perspective other than Mal's commentary about even the reasonable things they do)...

The show hasn't given us a balanced view, yet, either, so black and white assumptions right now are really only pointed at the Core, and often as such at the Guild. I'm asking for the same thing you are: less black and white condemnation.

Quote:

Just, I don't think a group of gentle and benevolent therapists would maintain any degree of independence in a cutthroat world unless they had a certain iron beneath the velvet.

But there are perfectly legitimate ways of being strong and maintaining that strength, without resorting to measures that could be considered dark or deplorable.

I'm trying to imagine what the point would even be. What would be the underlying motive for the Guild, to be evil? At the moment, they appear to have everything they could want: recognition, money, lots of members.

You like bringing up the Catholic church, but that one is a completely different animal. What corrupted the early Christianity into a political organisation was the fact that religious behavior and politics were not separate in ancient rome. They were nearly identical. Why did they kill martyrs in the circuses? Because they refused to worship the emperor, which was one of the pillars that unified the very large and diverse empire. Making ever growing Christianity the state religion, that's what turned it into the oppressive political aparatus that the Catholic church became.

Where is the parallel to the Guild, which isn't even a spiritual organisation in its purpose? It's essentially nothing but a large, private union for a specific profession. Government regulated by laws, but not goverment run.

NBZ

Saturday, March 10, 2007 9:26 PM

The guild is a business.

It looks after it's own interests.

If it's inerests can be managed in a legitimate way, then it will use them.

But we have to consider that the alliance is not strong no the rim, where atleast some Companions work.

I do not see why they have to be good. (I know no one is arguing is has to be good, but clarifying where I stand..)

But if we do imagine that overall it is good, then still there is the fact that companions that contract with top government officials will know a aweful lot about the innards of how the allied government works.

That is a powerful position to hold.

For the guild to be established and respected, it must have been around for a while.

It is a business,not some utopic company.

(I have not even commented on the work the Guild does.)

It is not a matter of being good or evil, but of business.

IBM, Microsoft, Coca Cola, McDonalds... all big businesses. all pretty much legal. All have business practices/history some would argue to be extremely shady.

Forbidding members to contact those who have left? a bit draconian if you ask me. I would not assume naivety.

If I had shares in a company not trying to maximise it's profits, I would be pissed.

2X2

Monday, March 12, 2007 12:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by nbz:
Tim Minear and Morena Baccarin (or both) let it out of the bag.
Maybe she did not get it from the guild?

There's a slight discrepency between what appears in the suppposed screenplay written by Tim, what Morena said at SFX last year.

If we want to assume that the screenplay that's out there is somewhat reliable, then the vial contained a substance that did not kill Inara, only those who had sex with her, in which case it wouldn't be a suicide/murder drug, just a murdering drug. :o)

Morena said she thought it was a drug that killed those you had sex with and/or you, but she wasn't 100% sure of the exact details, just something along those general lines.

I like to hope that it was the former, and that Inara wouldn't have died from using it.

It's interesting to wonder whether or not it came from the Guild! If it did, it could be a special case, given to Inara when she left the Core, as life is much rougher on the 'Rim, and a Companion may not be safe or respected just because of who/what she is ???

Or as has been suggested, it could have been something that Inara picked up for herself, her own safety measure, which I find very interesting to think about.

2X2

Monday, March 12, 2007 1:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by nbz:
But we have to consider that the alliance is not strong no the rim, where atleast some Companions work.

Just curious, but was there every any actual evidence in the show or movie that there *are* other Companions on the 'rim?

One must think there are, or Inara would never have a moment's rest... just wish we'd had a chance to see more Companions, even just to get an idea of their overall numbers. Nandi stated that there were 40 women at House Madrassa on Sihnon, but we have no idea how many houses there are, on how many planets... it's something I'd like to know.

Quote:
Forbidding members to contact those who have left? a bit draconian if you ask me.

This does seem to be one of the bigger sticking points for many people...

From that Guild-as-buisness standpoint, the Guild would have invested a lot of time, effort, and money into the training of a Companion, all of which they would expect to get some return on once the Companion was practicing and paying dues and whatnot. But Nandi packed up and left, and the Guild's investment was completely lost with no hope of a return, thus, the Shunning - the punishment would have to be severe, or else what's to stop potentially any girl (or boy) the Guild takes in and trains from doing the same thing, and setting up her own rival Guild even? To protect its members, the Guild needs to protect itself.

Personally, I get the impression that Nandi was ordered shunned because she packed up and left the Guild completely... presumably not every trainee becomes a Companion, one would think that those not cut out for the life of a Companion would be filtered to other areas within the Guild - support staff and whatnot - so that the Guild would still be getting something out of what they put in. But by leaving the Guild entirely, Nandi 'stole' her training without repaying her debt, and thus was cut off entirely for her choice.

Anyway, that's just my take on things :o)

2X2

Monday, March 12, 2007 1:26 PM

Wheee! Guild talk!

I love the idea of a Guild that is not evil.

I think the main reason people so often like to put the Guild into that oppressive, evil role is that it's just so easy to do so - it's what we expect these days. We're a society that no longer automatically *trusts* - we don't trust the government, we don't trust the media, we don't trust big business - and I think that distrust has become our natural, knee-jerk reaction, so... giant Guild with power and influence throughout the galaxy? Must be bad.

It's almost anti-instinctual to see the Guild as something other than a big evil organization, but very refreshing!

NBZ

Monday, March 12, 2007 1:47 PM

Quote:
Just curious, but was there every any actual evidence in the show or movie that there *are* other Companions on the 'rim?

There was only but a suggestion.

"I should have done this weeks ago"
"But then I wouldn't have been here"

From War Stories.

Personally I do not care about wether it is good or not. I see it as a business, not necessarily evil, but not utopic either.

If it goes the extra mile to protect its member is that evil or the right thing to do? If it yields its influence to protect itself and its members, is that evil, or is it what needed to be done?

It is not a case of good or evil. No evil person is evil for the sake of being evil. it is a simplificatio that does not fit the firefly 'verse.

We have to remember that in the Pilot, the crew were saved because the alliance tried to save some lives.

The money robbed at the start of the BDM. It was wages for a month's work. We saw how poor that area was. Was Mal being evil to force them to more or less starve for a month? To cover their costs would those people have to participate in slavery?

Is Mal evil?

Even Blue Sun is not a "Wolfram & Hart". it is not a Big Bad, but a corporation. It helps some people, steps on others depending on where it's business priorities lie.

The whole verse is set in a grey void where nothing is necessarily good or evil. Acts are ambigious.

Back to the topic, I am not too bothered with how people portray the Guild. Good or bad.

The issue I have is where if the Guild has shady practices, fic writers generally make Inara olivious to them. (or they make her "evil", which goes against the character...)

She is not naive.

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 12, 2007 3:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by nbz:
The issue I have is where if the Guild has shady practices, fic writers generally make Inara olivious to them. (or they make her "evil", which goes against the character...)

She is not naive.

But neither is she ever portrayed as condoning bad things. She's generally the first to be on Mal's case about ethically questionable behavior, knowing full well that it gets her on his bad side. She's ready to give up her place on Serenity for the safety of two complete strangers in the pilot.

That just doesn't jive with the idea of her knowing that something untoward and presumably harmful to other people is going on in the Guild - and then just going away while it happens and still talking about the Guild with such pride in her voice whenever the Guild laws come up.

Inara may turn her back on romantic love (Mal) but she doesn't tend to turn her back to injustice being done. It's out of character.

NBZ

Monday, March 12, 2007 4:06 PM

At the same time she talks about indenture as it is an acceptable practice, even if it is to a law official trying to save Mal and Zoe.

At a minimum this shows that the Guild allows Companions to have indentured servants.

I do not consider indenture/slavery a good thing. It does not matter if the 'verse at large also finds it acceptable. It is still a negative strike.

Inara does not have indentured servants, but it would be accepable in the eyes of the Guild for her to do so. She knows that. She probably knows other companions who do have indentured servants.

This is never discussed as a way to show it is no longer an issue. It is accepted by many and legal, even if not moral.

Mal on the other hand does not hold to such notions, as shown in his petty thievery in Shindig. His justification (to himself) is that they are slavers.

Quote:
She's ready to give up her place on Serenity for the safety of two complete strangers in the pilot.

Now that is an interesting thing. Her position is not that they should not be killed, which is a reasonable request, but one of them not be left behind.

This leads to conspiracy theory time. Why is she onboard Serenity? Why did she threaten to leave unless Mal not only kept them alive, but onboard?

Why does she get a guilty look when Mal says it's none of her business?

Secondly from the crew, the only one whop really understand the Danger (with a capital D) are Mal, Jayne and Zoe (and river, but who'd believe her?). The rest are oblivious even as far as half way through the BDM.

And then there is her offer to help fence the lassiter. She also has contacts. in the criminal realm.

My point is that she is not naive. She understands the world she lives in. She knows she cannot have everything her way.

I do not see Inara as evil. At one point she even argues against Mal for trying to sell to the poor. But to say it is a simple matter of being good, it is all in the grey. Just like the rest of the 'verse.

The overall political situation is only ever hinted at, never fully delved into. Almost everyone in the verse is covered in grey where morals come into it. Part of why I like the 'verse.

(Apologies if my post is sounding a little harsh. I gotta fire this off quickly, then shoot off. No time for niceties right now.)

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 12, 2007 4:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by nbz:
At the same time she talks about indenture as it is an acceptable practice, even if it is to a law official trying to save Mal and Zoe.

At a minimum this shows that the Guild allows Companions to have indentured servants.

I do not consider indenture/slavery a good thing. It does not matter if the 'verse at large also finds it acceptable. It is still a negative strike.

True, like the shunning, it's not the best practice, but it probably is just a case of the Guild not forbidding its members what is perfectly legal.

I agree that it's a moral compromise, but on the other hand, we could start a discussion about the exact nature of indentured servitude as opposed to slavery and the many facets of that. (Indentured servitude being, apparently, time-limited and an imposed punishment for something.)

But it's still a difference between going along with morally questionable established institutions in society and actively participating in subverting the official values of a society.

Quote:

Quote:
She's ready to give up her place on Serenity for the safety of two complete strangers in the pilot.

Now that is an interesting thing. Her position is not that they should not be killed, which is a reasonable request, but one of them not be left behind.

As Inara says, leaving them behind would be akin to killing them. "Those two wouldn't survive a day on Whitefall anyway. If you throw them off, I'm leaving, too." So it's really abandonment and death she is arguing against and willing to blackmail Mal about.

Quote:

This leads to conspiracy theory time. Why is she onboard Serenity? Why did she threaten to leave unless Mal not only kept them alive, but onboard?

I guess, if you're into conspiracy theories, you'll see things there that others don't. :) To me it was all very self-explanatory, but then.. any situation can be questioned in this way.

Quote:
Why does she get a guilty look when Mal says it's none of her business?

I never considered the look to be guilty, but rather one of embarrassment and disappointment when her public attempt at emotional blackmail failed.

Quote:

Secondly from the crew, the only one whop really understand the Danger (with a capital D) are Mal, Jayne and Zoe (and river, but who'd believe her?). The rest are oblivious even as far as half way through the BDM.

I'm confused, what danger are you talking about?

Quote:
And then there is her offer to help fence the lassiter. She also has contacts. in the criminal realm.

She's also on Serenity, among the naughty men. *G*

Inara's certainly not the most Alliance-loyal, law-abiding person there ever was. I guess, like Mal, she makes a difference between morality and legality, just that their ideas of what is moral are a bit apart in certain areas.

Mal considers preventative murder fine, Inara doesn't. Mal gets huffy about Companioning, Inara doesn't. Etc.

Quote:

My point is that she is not naive. She understands the world she lives in. She knows she cannot have everything her way.

Certainly, but there's also the option of choosing not to partake, and I could easily see Inara leaving the Guild on account of her personal principles, should she be aware something she found fundamentally questionable, as you imply.

Quote:

(Apologies if my post is sounding a little harsh. I gotta fire this off quickly, then shoot off. No time for niceties right now.)

No apologies needed, I thought was fine. :)

ALLIETHORN7

Monday, March 12, 2007 9:27 PM

Well...
EVIL is a relative term- to whoever is outside lookin' in, mind. Most folks wouldn't venture to call THEMSELVES evil, simply 'cause everyone wants to believe that they're the hero.
Myself, I'm a cynical bastard- I tend to look at most things in the worst of lights. Sometimes, I'll lighten up and give 'em a good outlook. Othertimes- well, yeah.
Truth is, the Guild is secretive. In my humble experience, secretive folks usualy have a particular reason as ta WHY they're secretive. And, therefore, they're a big, fat target, in my sights.
Maybe I'm wrong- yeah, probably. I have a disturbin' talent for being wrong about most folks. Still, the Guild is close to the Alliance- all worlds of NOT GOOD, ya?

-Danny

Our Idols lay in Ruins,
We'd have Saved them if we could,
But we still chose to Worship,
The places where our Idols STOOD!!!!!
THRICE RULES!!!!!!!!!

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE