Hello. It's Me. Again.

Maybe you're relieved to see this post.  Maybe you're irritated.  Excited?  Well, I'm back, in a way.

I needed time away from social media.  All in all, and initially as part of my church's annual January fast, I stepped away from all my personal social media accounts (I still maintained the church's sites).  In mid-February, I returned to Instagram.  About a week ago, I began commenting and liking n Facebook again, but I still haven't posted.  I haven't returned to Twitter or tumblr at all yet, save for posting from my Instagram account.

I have to say that I was shocked to learn that I didn't miss Facebook much at all.  Although my feed has come to be less about catching up with friends than it is about mudslinging, religious fervor, and cat pictures, it's still very addictive.  A great time-killer.  Likewise, though, it's a great way to avoid responsibility and face-to-face interaction with other human beings.  I realized that was not a healthy way to live, and found myself pointedly ignoring my phone for long stretches, or checking only e-mail or text messages.  

In some ways, I've emerged happier.  I don't get sucked into the abyss that is the comments section at the bottom of every Buzzfeed post. I don't mentally correct grammar or wonder what type of horrible education/recreational drug the comments were influenced by.  I don't waste time on finding out which celebrity my cat's personality most resembles (although, for the record, I think Freyja might be Adele).  

I've also been writing.  A lot.  I was entrusted with the huge honor of writing a program for my church's Good Friday service, which is something we haven't done in many, many years.  I wrote it, cast it, and we are currently in rehearsals for both the Good Friday service and the Easter Sunday service.  I'm incredibly proud of my actors, and more than a little shocked that my father agreed to play Caiaphas, the High Priest!

I've also, against my wishes, had to return to work full-time.  I do like my job - don't get me wrong, I really do - but leaving Ronen is not getting easier; it's getting harder.  Since January, he has been struggling - we all have - with separation anxiety and sadly, I get the worst of it.  He's displaying an over preference for Daddy lately, and I get ignored when I pick him up from my parents' house.  Daddy gets squeals of excitement, and I barely elicit a casual "Mum."  I know it's normal for his age (almost two, can you believe it?) but it's very difficult.

But the point of this post isn't really to tell you where I've been.  It's to tell you where I will be.  I'll be here, a bit.  I'll also be posting material on an online writing portfolio in the hopes of landing some freelance work (more information to follow).  I'm working on editing a collection of my church-friendly skits in the hopes of finding a publisher.  And I'm really hoping to work with some of the teenage girls in my church to put together a conference for tweens and teens about what it means to be a godly woman (hint: it's probably not what you think it is).

So I won't be online much.  I'll creep on Facebook here and there, and I'll still be blowing up IG with cat pictures and baby videos, but that's about it.  I'm not ready to slip out of the grip of social media altogether, but I've decided that I'm in charge.  Not my Facebook feed.  Not the links to those soul-sucking political articles.  I'll be using my accounts to my advantage - not the other way around.

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.

Magic Mirrors, Pretty Princesses, and Daddy Issues

When it comes to the hottest TV shows, I'm frequently late to the game.  I didn't start watching "The Office" until a few years after the series finale.  (I missed a LOT of co-workers' show-related jokes during that time.)  I didn't tune in to "Doctor Who" until well into Matt Smith's reign (although I did start with Nine).  For most of our marriage, Ross and I never had cable, but we consider the monthly commitment to Netflix well worth it.  We've found some gems on there ("Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries" is a well-written and witty favorite, plus a costume designer's paradise).

So, it's no surprise that I waited until a few seasons of "Once Upon a Time" were available to stream.  I knew I'd like the show; I've loved the idea of "fractured" fairy tales for almost as long as I've loved the Disney treatment of them.  I wanted to share some of my thoughts on the way the series is going.  So, with that in mind, I'm going to be courteous and state right now that there are most definitely SPOILERS ahead.  I've just finished watching the third season, so if anyone hasn't gotten there yet, please don't read ahead.  Likewise, if you're into the fourth or fifth season, please respect my desire to be surprised and don't include any spoilers in YOUR comments.  Thanks.

First, this being a Disney production, I think it's fabulous that the star couple on the show are Snow White and Prince Charming.  That was Disney's first animated feature, and so it's perfectly fitting that the pair should be the power couple (at least in the beginning) on the series.  

Image from Amazon.com.

While I often struggle with anachronisms in historical drama (yes, "feminist" screenplay writers, I'm talking to you, because many of the sassily-written females contemporary audiences so admire are as much a myth as the Golden Fleece, due to their respective status quos), I think it's appropriate in the context of this series.  First, fairy tales themselves have evolved with the times in which they were shared.  It's no surprise that many of the female characters are as heroic as the males, as daring, as brave, and as smart.  I love that this does not demean the male characters, either.  One challenge I've seen with certain aspects of modern feminism is that men have the be put down in some way for women to rise up.  I hate that.  Hate it beyond belief.  I'm so sick of seeing the nuclear family portrayed with a beautiful, brilliant wife and a dopey, clueless dad.  In OUAT, Snow White can rescue her prince without emasculating him.  For his part, Charming can accept that rescue and not perceive himself as "less of a man" because a woman saved his life.  Yes.  This.  So much this.  I also love that the strong female characters aren't simply written as "sassy".  We see that a lot in film and television.  We are told that a series features a "strong" female lead, but why is she strong?  Is she written in a respectful way in order to explore her many complexities?  Is she physically or emotionally powerful?  Is she manipulative?  Does she have some type of gift or talent?  Does she have to overcome unbelievable obstacles, or struggle with a troubled past?  Does she grow at all during the course of the series or movie?  Or is she "just" pretty and mouthy?  That alone a "strong female lead" does not make, in my opinion, but I think that's what we are often told by the entertainment industry. 

OUAT has some very interesting and strong female leads.  While Mary Margaret/Snow White's driving forces are love and hope, she is called upon to make very difficult decisions that question her very nature.  Most often, she makes the "correct", selfless choice.  Sometimes, she doesn't, and we are left to watch her as she struggles through the consequences of her actions.  We watch Emma go from a physically strong but emotionally conflicted - and often scared - woman to one who begins to allow herself to be vulnerable, to love, and to admit to her fears.  Regina/The Evil Queen, too, is given a backstory that explains, but does not excuse, her actions.  We learn that the darkest characters are still capable of love and sacrifice, and the kindest ones still possess the potential for great evil.  

I was also pleasantly surprised with the way some of the other characters evolved.  When Neal/Baelfire was introduced as an adult, I really expected him to be a "throwaway" character, good for a plot twist or two, then not much else.  I love, love, LOVE how he got the chance to redeem himself as a father and friend, but that it was still a process for him.  It wasn't that he burst onto the scene like a hero and saved the day.  He tried, and failed, and fumbled around for some time before he got things right.  So, of course he had to die. The role of the good guy on the show is played by Charming, the bad-guy-turned-good is already being fulfilled by Hook, and the good-guy-turned-bad-turned-good-turned-bad is Rumple/Mr.Gold, so that really left no place for Neal.  It would have been too perfect a happy ending to have him permanently reunite with his precocious son and the mother of his child.  Even Snow and Charming's happy ending is still riding out some bumps.  Sorry, Neal.  I had really, REALLY gotten to like you.

Ruby/Red fascinates me.  We don't see much of her in seasons 2 and 3, but I love how the concept of the female as an unpredictable force/monster is addressed and played out. When you add the color red, the wolf, the moon, it's a symbolism-laden tale.  Her story is a coming-of-age one, and it also is an interesting juxtaposition of the original fairy tale.  Talk about a woman embracing her destiny!

Belle is a personal enigma to me.  I find myself both loving her relationship with Gold and wanting her to end it.  Which would show more strength?  Loving and supporting a deeply flawed and volatile man, or giving that up for your own safety and emotional well-being?  Belle is the character I always end up with in those online quizzes, you know - Which Disney Princess Are You Most Like? and so on - so I feel I have something invested in this character.  Her love is both innocent and pure - perhaps even more so than Snow White and Prince Charming's, but it continues to blind her.  I'm interested to see where this leads her.

I have always loved the question "what happens after happily ever after?" and I think that. most times, we don't want to know.  We like the idea of riding off with a lover into the sunset, or a neatly-packaged conclusion.  But, even as we in the real world find our true loves, or welcome a long-awaited child, or accept that coveted promotion, there is still life to live after that.  And life comes with challenges, consequences, fear, disappointment, and loss - even for beloved fairy tale characters.

One thread that has been woven carefully and continually throughout the series has been abandonment - specifically, abandonment by one's father.  I think it's a bold step to address, and keep addressing, something so relevant to society today.  It's one thing I see in common with many people I know, regardless of their race, age, sexual orientation, or religion.  MANY of them lack fathers or healthy father figures.  MANY of them have been left or abused by the men in their lives - husbands, fathers - for different reasons.  I won't speculate on them here, but I love that the ultimate statement made by the series is that yes, you've been hurt, and yes, it was by someone who was also hurt, but you can still CHOOSE to be happy.  You can CHOOSE not to hurt another person, specifically, your own child.  In particular, I love that Neal was able to act out that choice before he died; he forgave his father (and grandfather) and physically laid down his life for his family.  

(There's a Bible study lurking around in there somewhere, but I'm not going to root it out right now.  Just don't be surprised if someday I release a devotional about finding God in fairy tales...)

Something that I both love and hate is the phrase and concept that "There's got to be another way."  I love that it reinforces the idea that hope is a living thing that stirs in our hearts, that forces us to search for decisions that don't hurt the ones we love, but as a plot device, it's trite.  In every other episode, a character in an awkward or dangerous situation is given "the only way" to escape or remedy it, but decides immediately that the price is too steep.  By the end of the episode, or within a few more, we learn that there IS another way, of course, and sometimes its consequences are harsher than the first option.  It's a bit tedious.  

I love that magic always comes with a price.  As a Christian, I suppose I COULD condemn the show entirely, and in fact all fairy tales, movies, books, and media that involve magic or fantasy in any way (buh-bye Star Wars, Doctor Who, and probably 75% of what I watch and read).  But I'm not going to do that.  I think that it can be very healthy to engage in make-believe, and since the biggest part of make-believe is being able to do what we normally cannot do, it's only natural that we like to imagine we can fly and perform feats with our minds and understand the language of animals.  The reason that desire exists within us at all is because God put it in our hearts to want the supernatural - the things that we cannot do with our own minds or hands.  I'm not going to travel down the OMG HARRY POTTER IS THE DEVIL road because I'm hoping that most Christians who choose to engage in that (now quite hackneyed) debate are looking at the whole picture and not just what they are told by social media and conservative sources.  I'm also not going to get into a flame war about that right now either.  But as I said above, "Magic comes with a price".  Even the things that blow our minds - conjuring fireballs out of nowhere, locking doors with spells, enchanting objects - come at a cost to the user.  Power of any kind comes at a price.  Whether it's the training we put into improving our bodies and minds, or it's the loss of privacy and increased scrutiny as we enter into the spotlight, power is never really free.

What a thought.

Anyway, I'm probably going to binge-watch the fourth season this weekend. Actually, I think I'm going to go pop some popcorn right now...