Inara: more bad ass than she seems?
POSTED BY: Bytemite
UPDATED: Saturday, August 15, 2009 18:37
VIEWED: 17936
PAGE 8 of 11
See, all I'm trying to do is come up with different scenarios and question my own assumptions, and right now I'm asking myself "how would a companion or the guild deal with various situations?"
My views of the 'verse are still very fluid, and it could be in a couple of weeks or so you'll hear me saying, no, I was wrong, that was a dumb idea.
But I do think there HAVE to be practicing companions who are mothers. I mean, isn't that part of the feminist movement, demands for maternity considerations from employers? If the guild is as liberated about women's rights as it seems like most of us think it is, then doesn't that HAVE to be a consideration?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
But I do think there HAVE to be practicing companions who are mothers. I mean, isn't that part of the feminist movement, demands for maternity considerations from employers? If the guild is as liberated about women's rights as it seems like most of us think it is, then doesn't that HAVE to be a consideration?
I really really really REALLY agree with that. I also don't think it's that difficult to achieve. Take a year off for pregnancy and short maternity leave... why would that necessarily kill a career? Maybe have fewer clients, work with a Companion daycare or move out of the House (like Inara did) and hire a nanny. I'm sure just like relationships are merely "complicated", not expressly forbidden (how emancipated would that be, really?), having a baby would be something to work around but not at all impossible.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, exactly. The guild has to be very careful about it, so much that many people outside the guild have the mistaken idea that the guild doesn't allow relationships (as in a scene deleted from War Stories). The guild may have to keep married couples a secret, to protect them from jealous clients.
I might even go so far to say that it can be so complicated and sometimes guild rules so difficult to navigate that maybe a lot of companions do decide to retire to settle down. But I don't think it's impossible to be both a practicing companion and a mother/father. Or a wife/husband.
Which, just to illustrate how I can change my opinion on what I think of things in a short amount of time, is just about the opposite point of view I had when talked to GillianRose about this about a month or so ago!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I posted direct quotes. Wish it was all written up somewhere!
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I've loaned out my firefly DVDs (Yes! Finally able to fulfill part of my duties as a newbie browncoat!) so I don't have access to the commentary.
Quote:
As for the Contracts and nuptials involving children, in my view the companion will always get custody. It will have to be one of the conditions for the guild to approve at all. And it'll also keep the client in question behaved. AND it has to be the companion's choice.
OK, with the caveat that nothing in canon suggests that the Guild provides the service of "live-in moms", I do see this as something to explore in a fanfic. But I think there are pretty basic issues you need to deal with to make it work.
First, the Guild would only allow such a contract with pretty serious protections for both Companion and child. If you do as you say and give custody to the Companion, then it's suddenly a lot less attractive to the client. Your idea that men who can't find a mother to their heirs otherwise - why would they commit so much time and money to a child that can be taken from them at any time? It's a fundamental problem in the business model. How does the Guild sell this service, and why would men buy into it?
So maybe the client gets joint custody, but he must legally commit to providing support and long term care should anything happen to him and/or the Companion. So that, legally, he really is a dad, and even if he turns asshole he still has to pay alimony. But in this case there would be no need for an orphanage. The child would be provided for.
That's where I see the problem (well, other the changed nature of the Guild if they really did provide a "quality wombs for hire" service.) Your earlier posts suggested rather a bustling orphanage, so that abandoned or orphaned children are systematic. But why would it be so common if the Guild exerts it's considerable power to keep the Companion - and her child - protected and empowered?
There must be a way to make it work, but I don't see it at the moment.
And really, the wombs for hire thing really does bug me. Not because of personal disagreement with the principle, but because it doesn't fit what I know of the Guild.
Quote:LOL! Oh, you've got some gumption! To say you see the scene better than the person who actually wrote the script - with Joss's guidance. Good luck with that!
In regards to the Bar... I understand what Jane intended, but I disagree with her that brawling is an inevitability of people at Mal's socio-economic level. So long as Inara feels safe, I think she can, and does, fit into Mal's world. That's what I take away from that scene. It's not what Jane intended, but I think it's a more accurate interpretation.
Um... so, what's this about "brawling is an inevitability of people at Mal's socio-economic level"? That has nothing to do with anything Jane said, or anything I've said. Kinda coming out of nowhere with that.
Inara doesn't fit. She doesn't fit before the fight starts, and she doesn't fit after. It's not about the fighting.
Quote:I think you might be getting a bit shifty. I believe Inara admires Mal for the lengths he goes to for the sake of his crew - she admires his noble side. This is very different from what you've said, that she admires his thieving because she finds thieving a thrill.
And I'm not saying that it's ALL that she admires about Mal, I think I've talked elsewhere on what I think is the real specific attraction between them. But there is SOME admiration there for his being a noble thief. Sometimes.
So, which is it?
Quote:Again I think you're changing from what you said before. You said she "enjoyed being
Basically I think she can be both a caretaker AND a rebel. I don't think one prohibits the other. Maybe my definition of rebel includes a little bit of stretching, or maybe that was just a poor word choice. But mischievous and playful, as well as loving and nurturing, I see both of those in her.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
But I do think there HAVE to be practicing companions who are mothers. I mean, isn't that part of the feminist movement, demands for maternity considerations from employers? If the guild is as liberated about women's rights as it seems like most of us think it is, then doesn't that HAVE to be a consideration?
I really really really REALLY agree with that. I also don't think it's that difficult to achieve. Take a year off for pregnancy and short maternity leave... why would that necessarily kill a career? Maybe have fewer clients, work with a Companion daycare or move out of the House (like Inara did) and hire a nanny. I'm sure just like relationships are merely "complicated", not expressly forbidden (how emancipated would that be, really?), having a baby would be something to work around but not at all impossible.
I agree as well - that there must be a policy for Companions to have children. (I do think this is a far cry from child-bearing as service to clients, though!)
In fact, this is an issue I've been pondering for some time for my own fic, which is likely why I'm so damned opinionated. I've got my own system quite well defined, and it's hard to make my brain stretch! I will try harder.
But I can't say any more about my theories, for fear of spoiling my fic. Hmm, maybe I ought to work on it so I can FINALLY finish posting. Really - I've been working on the same damned plot line for over 3 years. Yikes!
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't really think I've shifted... If I seem to have, it's because you talking this over with me has refined more what I think, or that I've had to try to better describe what I mean.
I came in this thread with some vague ideas that I wanted to talk about and explore, and I've gotten that back in spades. :) And I have to thank everyone who's participated for that, because I think this is a good - and hopefully fun - bit of characterization to talk about.
Quote:
And really, the wombs for hire thing really does bug me. Not because of personal disagreement with the principle, but because it doesn't fit what I know of the Guild.
I do know what you mean. It's disturbing, and I've admitted that myself. Yet with the Guild, we're already getting into a bit of prickly business JUST with the hiring out sex to rich people.
The thing that I have trouble with the Guild... I see it as both a religious organization, with hierodules and worship of sexual union, powers of creation, and affirming of life and etc. But I ALSO see it as a commercial enterprise offering some important services, legally, to an upper-class. So I asked myself, what other important services might upper-class posturing as nobility require that something like the Guild might provide? And the obvious one is a huge concern about heirs, and I have serious doubts that petri-dishes would be involved, because I also see the guild as having a naturalistic side.
Like I said, the only way this could EVER happen is if the companion WANTED to have children with the client in question.
I don't know if dual custody would necessarily have to be the case for the offer to be attractive. If the person is JUST looking for heirs eligible to inherit their property, keep the family name going, they might not be interested in custody, it might be enough just to have heirs. Perhaps alimony would be paid, something to support the child through school and later establishing a living, but I think the guild would be taking on too much risk if children went to live with their client parent in the event of a companion's death. That seems like something that could set up abuse, and the guild would be interested in protecting the children of it's companions. Maybe the client could visit the children, but they would remain wards of the guild, and continue to stay in a guild orphanage/daycare. That is, if the other parent wanted contact at all.
Quote:
LOL! Oh, you've got some gumption! To say you see the scene better than the person who actually wrote the script - with Joss's guidance. Good luck with that!
Um... so, what's this about "brawling is an inevitability of people at Mal's socio-economic level"? That has nothing to do with anything Jane said, or anything I've said. Kinda coming out of nowhere with that.
Inara doesn't fit. She doesn't fit before the fight starts, and she doesn't fit after. It's not about the fighting.
I know... That sounded really arrogant, and I was wincing as I wrote it. But though I like the scene and how it was directed, I just don't like that INTERPRETATION of that scene. I don't think that interpretation is true to real life.
When I see that scene.... Yes, Inara stands out. She's beautiful, wearing her red two piece with the skirt, and she had that almost matching drink. She's classy, she's elegant, and her surroundings are... not.
But she would stand out ANYWHERE I think, really. So what I focus on, before the fight, is how relaxed she is. To me, she feels confident. At home, almost. Certainly more so than she was on Atherton's arm, smiling fake greetings at all the other people attending the party, and being quietly horrified by his creepy flirtation.
So until the fight starts in the bar, I do see her as fitting in. She wouldn't be the first pretty woman to go to a bar. It's not like people are staring at her (though maybe they did at first, see previous paragraph). It's not like, after she's there, that she is so out of place that it seems wrong for her to be there.
When the brawl starts, that's when s
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Read again what I wrote - I pointedly said that my own opinion of right/wrong is NOT the basis of my doubts. It's a matter of story-telling. I believe the "womb for hire" scenario doesn't fit the Guild. It would be an inconsistent characterization of the organization.
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I do know what you mean. It's disturbing, and I've admitted that myself. Yet with the Guild, we're already getting into a bit of prickly business JUST with the hiring out sex to rich people.
As for providing heirs as a service - even today people can go buy eggs and sperm with a full medical history of the donors. In 500 years any wealthy man will be able to purchase a fully DNA mapped egg, or possibly even an embryo with a women to carry it to term for him, and that would cheaper and simpler and more dependable than hiring a Companion.
And perhaps baby-making is a side business of the Guild, but I see absolutely no reason why they'd combine this with Companion services. It's just not good business. It puts them in a very difficult position as far as protecting their Companions and also protecting themselves, legally.
Again, it's also far outside anything we've seen of the organization in canon material.
Quote:Of course. That goes without saying. But that doesn't remove all the other complications. As much as Companions are "empowered" and "free", their behavior is also quite limited in some ways. Someone posted a contract of Inara's that had all kinds of limits on working Companions. It's not like a Companion says: "But I want to do THIS!" and they are automatically allowed.
Like I said, the only way this could EVER happen is if the companion WANTED to have children with the client in question.
Quote:You think there's a steady market of men willing to spend lots of money just to know they have a baby out there somewhere? They can achieve that pretty cheaply and with much less fuss at a local bar...
I don't know if dual custody would necessarily have to be the case for the offer to be attractive. If the person is JUST looking for heirs eligible to inherit their property, keep the family name going, they might not be interested in custody, it might be enough just to have heirs.
Quote:The Guild would trust the client to impregnate a Companion and form the long-time bond of parentage with her, but don't trust leaving a child alone with him? Such a Guild would be incredibly irresponsible.
Perhaps alimony would be paid, something to support the child through school and later establishing a living, but I think the guild would be taking on too much risk if children went to live with their client parent in the event of a companion's death. That seems like something that could set up abuse, and the guild would be interested in protecting the children of it's companions.
Quote:Jane didn't direct it, she wrote it. The interpretation in the commentary is her own, of her writing. She openly states that the scene has a point, and she says what the point is.
I know... That sounded really arrogant, and I was wincing as I wrote it. But though I like the scene and how it was directed, I just don't like that INTERPRETATION of that scene.
By all means, continue to see it your way, but you ought to be aware that it wasn't the way it was written!
Quote:Yes she would, and she would take steps to be comfortable, to mix socially, etc., in any environment whether trashy or high-class. Because that is what she does. She is a trained socialite. Which makes it all the more evident that there's no reason to come out of the Shindig scene saying: she MUST have been born and raised in that environment because she looks so relaxed in it!
But she would stand out ANYWHERE I think, really.
That was your original point. It still makes no sense to me!
Quote:
I think I may have to reread what I said. ^_^' I think what's happening here, though, is a misunderstanding about what I mean when I say I think Inara likes being "bad" sometimes and what I mean by Inara'NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're probably right about the guild and legal issues and children/heirs with clients. It's just a what-if I'm toying with.
I think, if this were something that happens, that the draw for a client to get a companion would be, like I said, the pedigree, and the... Hands on experience.
Quote:
Yes she would, and she would take steps to be comfortable, to mix socially, etc., in any environment whether trashy or high-class. Because that is what she does. She is a trained socialite. Which makes it all the more evident that there's no reason to come out of the Shindig scene saying: she MUST have been born and raised in that environment because she looks so relaxed in it!
That was your original point. It still makes no sense to me!
But you were saying how she doesn't fit in, and pointed out how she was deliberately dressed to draw the eye and be the only colour in the scene.
I kind of think maybe she did that on purpose. :) >_> I mean, just how often does Mal invite Inara along with him on an outing like that? It clearly wasn't business. It wasn't a DATE, no, neither of them would go for that, at that point, but there's kind of an ambiguity there.
I suppose I'm making an assumption, that if she did not at least have some experience in a bar like that, that she would be uncomfortable, even before the fight broke out. The patronage was kind of rough looking. But to me she seemed comfortable, and non-judgmental of the other people there. And it's the part where she's non-judgmental that makes me think maybe there's more there than just some brushing with that culture. Criminals and ruffians and "untouchables" so to speak are usually only understood and tolerated by people near them on the socio-economic scale.
Quote:
What I'm debating is when you said she might "enjoy some of the thrill and adventure of the crew's law-breaking", and "She likes breaking rules. Thinks it's thrilling."
I still haven't heard of any example when Inara enjoyed breaking rules just for the sake of breaking rules.
What about if she ever got involved with Mal? >_> <_<
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The fact that she's socially capable and open to new situations doesn't mean she has personal experience in them, or that she fits. She simply does not fit in that bar. No way anyone said: "Oh her? Yeah. She might have been in here last week, not sure. She's just like all the rest of these women."
Originally posted by Bytemite:
But you were saying how she doesn't fit in, and pointed out how she was deliberately dressed to draw the eye and be the only colour in the scene.
Quote:I think she's just being herself. That's how she dresses. That's what she drinks. She could make the attempt of dressing down and drinking rotgut just so she'd blend, but then she wouldn't be herself, and then she'd be uncomfortable.
I kind of think maybe she did that on purpose.
Quote:Hmm... interesting point. I doubt it was a date, given the state of their relationship, but one does wonder how she happened to go along... Probably just bored. Or maybe Mal thought having her there would impress the contact.
I mean, just how often does Mal invite Inara along with him on an outing like that? It clearly wasn't business. It wasn't a DATE, no, neither of them would go for that, at that point, but there's kind of an ambiguity there.
Quote:I think that's just her nature. Doesn't matter if she has personal experience with any class of people or type of establishment, she's one of those rare people who will look for what's common and what's positive, rather than standing in a place of judgment. I think that's part of her role as care-taker and mother figure. She's incredibly accepting, and not just across social lines.
I suppose I'm making an assumption, that if she did not at least have some experience in a bar like that, that she would be uncomfortable, even before the fight broke out. The patronage was kind of rough looking. But to me she seemed comfortable, and non-judgmental of the other people there.
She is trained to make a wide variety of people comfortable around her. That would not be possible if she wasn't damned good at being comfortable with herself, no matter her situation.
Quote:She would do that because she's drawn to him for him, and not because: "Hey, here's a bad guy I can get with just to piss off dad!" You know?
What about if she ever got involved with Mal? >_> <_<
I feel like I'm having a hard expressing this, but there's a difference between being open to breaking the rules when you have a good reason to do it, and breaking the rules for no reason other than breaking the rules. I think Inara is the first. You have stated the second. If that's not what you meant, just say so!
As to the child-bearing: I was just out running errands thinking about it, and I got it to work for me. Woo-hoo! I'll write up another post with my theories.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OK: what made it work was the idea of child-bearing being a separate part of the Guild. I see a whole different branch where women join later in life (btw I really want the Guild to have males in all roles as well as females, but I'm going to ignore that option for now) Like maybe women can't join this branch until they're 18, because they're committing to something long-term and pretty challenging, emotionally speaking. They have a few years training--a very different kind of training than regular Companions, but let me get back to that later.
So, a client comes in wanting a child, one who's of good "stock", well-educated, and socially skilled. Ready to take over the family business or follow Daddy into Parliament. (No reason the client can't be a woman, but for simplicity I'll go with a male.) This branch of the Guild takes a looong time matching the client with one of these... um... Compani-Nannies. CN's. It's not as simple as what Inara does - there is a pretty intense period of making sure the parties get along. Maybe a trial live-in period and time with psychological evaluators.
Then the CN gets pregnant. There's different options in the contract, there could be sex involved, it could be test tube. Whatever the client chooses and the CN accepts. But this young woman is not trained to be a sex goddess who's good at parties. She's trained to handle pregnancy, to nurse a baby, to educate him/her. She's a surrogate/wet-nurse/nanny/governess all in one. Her life for the term of the contract is all about this child, about giving him/her all the skills the client wants in his offspring.
The "term of contract" is, say, 12 years. Or whatever. When the child turns some contracted age the CN has completed her responsibilities, is paid richly, and can choose to contract again or to pursue her own way. And she'd probably do pretty well, considering she's in her mid 30s, has a lot of cash, some very useful skills, and probably quite a few contacts from her time with the client and his child.
I intentionally say "his" child, because I think it would work best--practically and dramatically--if the client was the primary custodian of the child. He can end the contract at any time and raise the child on his own, though he would have to pay the CN for the full term of contract. But, to be a bit crass, the child is what the client bought. He owns it. The services of the CN he can end at any time. (Remember - it's not about whether I like this in principle. I don't. But I think it works as a story.)
Of course, there would be ways that the CN can protect the child if the man was a monster, but that's no different than any other parent/child situation. We trust that a parent is ok until we have evidence otherwise, then we take action. And the regular law would cover this. I don't think this issue needs further pursuing.
Where was I? Oh - At the end of the term of contract, the CN can stay on if all parties want that, though new terms and payment would need to be negotiated. More likely, they part with fond wishes, stay in touch in the future, but the CN goes on with her life separately. She has no legal rights to the child or the client. Just like a governess.
What I like about this is that it does make sense practically--the client, the CN, the child, and the Guild all benefit from the transaction. More importantly, it makes sense dramatically. It appeals to my story-telling sense. The role of the CN would be very similar to that of the Companion. While with clients, Companions can seem to have this amazing, deep connection. They and their client are lovers. But, no matter how Inara protests that what she does is deep and meaningful, it is at heart a business transaction. The time runs out, the client goes his way, and Inara goes to her next client.
The CN would have that same strange dichotomy. She seems part of the family, a mother. But there is always the understanding that when the time ends and the clock dings, so to speak, she will move on. She is part of the family, but not really. Just like Inara is a
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME