SFC

Brawny.  Beastly.  Brave.  Powerful.  Demanding.  Vigorous.  Competent.  Robust.  Fierce. Determined.  Aggressive.  Authoritative.  Forceful.  Triumphant.

Do any of the above words describe your favorite female character?  Maybe all of them?  What if none of the words describe her?  Is she still strong?

Readers, viewers and gamers - especially females - are almost assaulted with the phrase "strong female lead" (SFL).  It's even a Netflix category, at least in my account: "Period Dramas with a Strong Female Lead" or something like that.  Directors, producers and screenwriters are raked over the coals if their works don't feature enough "strong female leads".  People everywhere have "rediscovered" the Bechdel test and are applying it not only to new films but old favorites.  If you've never heard of this test, read the comic below.  It was originally written by an America cartoonist Allison Bechdel, waaaaaay back in 1985:

Image from wikipedia.org.

SFC #1: Diplomatic, intelligent, passionate,
self-sacrificial, determined.  Can handle firearms.
Image from starwars.com.

The thing is, a movie can still be "good" without passing the test.  It can even have an SFC without passing the test.  Two of my all-time favorite trilogies, the original "Star Wars" series and "Lord of the Rings", actually fail this test. However, they contain some of the most amazing, powerful, BA female characters in the realm of sci-fi/fantasy: Princess Leia, Arwen, Galadriel, and Eowyn.  I'd be hard-pressed to find someone who didn't consider these ladies strong characters.

But - wait a minute.

SCL #2: Wise, commanding, compassionate, noble.
 Likes coffee.  A lot.
Image from fanpop.com

What makes a character - in particular a female character - strong?  I mentioned this in my last post, specifically in regards to some of the characters in Once Upon a Time, but I didn't really explore it a lot.  I mean, who defines strength?  The words I used to open this post are all considered synonyms of "strong", but I don't know if they are all necessary for an SFC.  What makes an SFC?  What qualities does she have?  What qualities would make a female character weak?  Does it depend on her environment, the setting of the movie or book?  I don't think a lot of people would consider the lead characters in movies from the 30s, 40s, and 50s to be "modern" SFCs.  Maybe Scarlett O'Hara.  Maybe Cleopatra.  Maybe Gilda.  Are these women SFCs in our time period, or during their own, or not at all?  Can a woman who just wants to be loved be considered an SFC?  Could a stay-at-home-mom or chicken-roasting housewife be an SFC?  Why or why not?

SFC#3: Fierce, loyal, brave, devoted,
skilled.  Unlucky in love (at first.)
 Image from lotr.wikia.com.

We lay the contemporary definition of feminism on so thick when we adapt fairy tales and historical fiction and non-fiction that I think it's hard for us to see a lot of female leads from the past as "strong" by today's standards.  If they're not speaking up for themselves, or smashing the patriarchy, then they're meek and weak and awful role models.  Yes, that's a generalization, but let's see...everyone knows the Lizzie Bennett is the heroine of Pride and Prejudice, right?  She thinks for herself and expresses her own opinion and still ends up with the right guy in the end.  Swoon.  Her older sister, Jane, is gentle and soft-spoken, long-suffering and forgiving.  She struggles with the loss of her beloved, but chooses to carry on with her life.  Is she weak?  We would probably consider her to be, yes, because she doesn't actively fight for what she wants.  But when we remember the society in which she lives, we need to view her differently.  She truly wants to make her parents happy, and knows that all four of her not-always-obedient sisters have the potential to break her parents' hearts, embarrass the family, and bring lasting shame on their name.  To choose your family's reputation over your own happiness seems ludicrous to us today, but when her family's future was on the line, Jane was willing to quietly wade through sadness and disappointment in order to spare them embarrassment or worse.  Self-sacrifice can be a sign of strength.  We see Lizzie as strong, but some of that strength came from a selfish, proud place.  She didn't think twice about embarrassing other people, as long as she had the chance to speak her mind (we see Austen's Emma Woodhouse struggling with the same attitude).  

SFC #4: Confident, talented, devoted,
 loving.  Retains sense of humor despite danger.
 Image from comicrelated.com

Jessica Jones is the latest SFC to burst onto the Marvel/Netflix scene.  As her story unfurls, we learn that she is physically extremely strong - "gifted" - but deeply emotionally damaged due to severe sexual and mental abuse.  She has been diagnosed with PTSD and self-medicates with alcohol.  In my opinion, it would be more a show of strength to ask for help rather than to shut one's friends out of one's life - so I don't see her, at least early on - the same way I see Princess Leia, who, when we meet her, has already made sacrifice after sacrifice for the cause of peace, having found something to believe in.  Apples and oranges, maybe, but it's something to consider.  What kind of strong is the SFC?  Does she grow in strength as her story is told?  Does her kind of strength change?

  

I haven't watched Scandal, but from what I've read and heard about Olivia Pope, it's unlikely

SFC #5: Powerful, fearless, gifted, courageous.  Actually capable of
physically smashing the patriarchy.  Image from wordandfilm.com.

that I personally would admire her. From what I gather, she's dangerously manipulative, influential, and selfish.  (Please, fans of the show, correct me if I'm wrong!) I can't deny that she is a strong character, but it's interesting that "strong" doesn't necessarily mean "likable", "virtuous", or even "at least vaguely morally upright". 

It looks like I'm uncovering more questions than I have answers.  What do you think?  What makes a female character "strong"? How does her femininity, her sexuality, or anything else play into it?  Who are the SFCs that you admire?  Are there female characters you admire that you would not consider "strong"?  Why do you admire them?  If you can compare them to male characters with similar paths or personalities, what do you see?  How much of the SFC's environment contributes to your perception of her strength?

Does this feel like a Literary Analysis essay test yet?

Yes?  Then my work here is done.  Think on these things, friends.

The Why of 'Who'

For 17 years, I have desperately wanted to be British. 

I picked up the dialect as a child while watching Mary Poppins.  For Dress-Up Day in seventh-grade, I chose to be Queen Elizabeth I (my mom had a heck of a time with the costume, but she eventually figured out how to make a ruff collar).  I was reading classic British literature when my peers were still gasping over Goosebumps mysteries.  I had already fashioned my opinions about Shakespeare, Dickens, Austen and Bronte years before my college courses prompted me to write about them.

But, alas, somehow I was born an American citizen, with a mongrel heritage mix of Italian, Belgian, German, Romanian, Slovakian, Yugoslavian, Granish, Czech, Polish, and half a dozen other eastern European nationalities thrown in for good measure (and excellent culinary skills).  I'm short, and pale, and a little overweight.  I'm a reader before almost anything else, and content to travel on adventures inside my head or on paper fare more than in actuality.  I am, you could say, more a Hobbit than anything else.

I am actually in no way resentful of my citizenship.  Trust me - I know there are far, far worse places I could have grown up.  I have received a good education and all kinds of other perks by being an American.  But, I admit, high quality entertainment has not been among them.  Not really.  Not for a long time.

My husband and I have not had cable since we were married nearly three years ago.  We've adapted quite well.  We use Netflix for the certain progams we like - though perhaps I should say programmes, because they're mostly British.  And mostly Doctor Who.

I was very reluctant to watch my first episode.  I know myself; I have an addictive personality (which explains the fourth cup of coffee in my hand as we speak) and I'm a Geek Girl through and through and, as mentioned above, I am a rabid anglophile.  Of course I would like Doctor Who.  Of course it would devour up all my free time, some of my work time, and a considerable amount of my subconscious as well.  After seeing so many references to it on Pinterest (my other "hold-out" hobby), I figured I should probably take a look. 

My favorite Doctor!

It took about, oh, 7 seconds after his appearance for Nine to become My Doctor.  I am pretty sure I watched four episodes that night.  My husband was working late and I was bored; I figured I'd give it a go after holding out so long.  I got all the way through the first season before I finally confessed that I had been watching a science fiction series without him.  He hopped on board right away and Ten became His Doctor.  He now walks around the house doing his very best David Tennant impression - which is not very believable since he's bald.  Charming, but not believable.

So, what it is about Doctor Who that is so appealing to us?  I'm sure that entertainment magazines and internet chat rooms have already spend countless hours poring over this question, but I am going to answer it from my viewpoint: the rare (almost extinct, I imagine!) Conservative Geek Girl Viewpoint.

It's strange that so many Christians in my life would fall passionately in love with a series that doesn't question the existence of God so much as flat-out deny it.  Or why we would so earnestly admire actors and writers who are confirmed atheists.  In fact, why are we - as people who accept that the divine hand of God created the heavens and earth, that his son Jesus died for our sins, and that that Holy Spirit dwells within all believers - such huge science fiction fans?

I think it's because we believe in a higher power that we're fans.  Science fiction teaches us that there is so much beyond our realm of comprehension that someone needs to come guide us along, show us the ropes, and encourage us.  That someone could be The Doctor...or a starship captain...or a mysterious wizard...

...Or God himself.

Science fiction teaches us, more than any other genre, that human beings are capable of great, amazing things - as well as horrible mistakes and acts of impressive evil.  That our minds are like fuses - once blown, a mass of conflict and challenges.  That our hearts have the capacity for love beyond time and beyond measure.  Beyond the constraints of logic.

The Bible teaches that, too.

"With God, all things are possible" sounds to me like the best sci-fi premise a person can imagine.  "All things."  As Christians, we usually reserve this comforting verse to encourage those who desire healing.  Or employment.  Or maybe help in finding a spouse or starting a family.  But, my goodness, how incredibly narrow-minded of us!  The One who made the stars can surely navigate them!

Who is to say that God - the real God, the Father, a member of the trinity and the Author and Finisher of our faith - can not exist in the same world as spaceships, lunar landings and forbidden planets?  I say that he must exist there!   That is not where I was headed today, yet it brings me back to the discussion of why we so adore Doctor Who. 



Everyone else's favorite Doctor
(but, yes, I love him, too!)

I think what we love so much about it - beyond the deliciously camp effects, the charming actors, the incredibly clever script, the devious plot twists and emotional resonance - is the churning compassion that makes up the greatest portion of the Doctor's thought process.  Although we continue to uncover his past scrap by scrap, we repeatedly see his deep, intrinsic love for others, and compassion that leads him frequently to sacrifice himself or what he cares about for the good of others.  He sees all life as precious - and proves it by offering mercy to his enemies and encouragement to his allies.  There is so  great a well of selfless love in him - and it is not innate.  It was born of grief, loss, and pain.  Yet such things did not twist him into a hermit or a miser.  They unplugged a well of nearly endless empathy and celebration that gushes out of him to the point of nearly drowning those he most treasures.  There is no criticism in him, only curiosity.  Admiration.  Love beyond the physical. 

How can we not love a character like that?  How can we not infinitely prefer him to "our" own media models of self-seeking housewives, airheaded co-eds, crooked father figures and doped-up high schoolers?  How can we not see just a glimpse of Christ's infinite compassion pouring out of this demi-god of a man?  Even if the writers and creators don't believe in a higher power at all, they have managed to build for us a man more Biblically Christ-like in many ways than the "Christ" we worship in our churches today.

There, that was bold.  I said it.

The Christ of scriptures was passionate, joyful, excited about everything.  He adored his friends - his "companions", you might say.  He was a teacher.  He desired his followers and friends to understand things on a deeper level.  Sometimes He was mysterious.  There was a lot about Him that others simply couldn't comprehend; the vastness of His mission was too huge for them.  He had an infintely strong sense of justice and yet showed mercy.   And, okay, yeah, I guess you could even say He "regenerated", if you want to go that far.

I think it's interesting that in our "Christian" nation, we don't have those kinds of heroes on television.  But in "atheist" Britain, they do.

Don't get me started on Sherlock.  That's a whole 'nother can of worms.  Awesome worms.  British worms.  But long-winded worms, nonetheless, and I have things to do today.