More Meta on Monsters: A Response to the BSG Finale
Even with my Lenten restrictions on flist reading, I've managed to do catch up on a lot of people.I've found that doing less reading allows meto more writing--some on more thesis, and some meta.
I saw the Battlestar Galattica season finale, and my thoughts went right to my meta on monsters. Which is hardly surprising, because--as I note in that post--the category which I call "monstrous" is the same that jennyo calls "on the very outside edge of ambiguous." She places Laura Roslin and Rupert Giles in this category, and I added the Operative from Serenity. These are characters who knowingly do evil while willing good, because someone has to do the dirty work.
In the finale, we learned just how monstrous Roslin is willing to do. She was willing to steal the election, but--as Bill Adama tells her and us, wouldn't have been able to live with it.
Now I was happy that Roslin ultimately did not ultimately steal the election. I'm fascinated in Dawn and Giles as monsters, ubermensch with whom I vicariously identify through the will-to-power, but my relation to Roslin is different. I turn to her as a maternal character, as the President I'd like to have, and so like Jed Bartlett or Gina Davis' character from Commander-in-Chief (whatever happened to that show anyway?) I don't want to see her turn into a monster. A monstrous President strikes far too close to home, whereas a monstrous starship captain is far enough removed that I can enjoy the expression of the will-to-power. Or in BSG's case, a monstrous XO: Colonel Tigh is actually one of my favorite characters, because I can detest him even as I am attracted to him. (Not to mention that I, wrongly or rightly, tend to view this sort of "monstrosity" as a militaristic value.)
But it's important to note that if this had been one of my fics, Adama would have preserved Roslin's innocence by taking on the burden of what had to be done himself, the way that Giles saves Buffy's innocence by killing Ben. Instead, the turn away from the monstrous is complete and there is no deus ex machina to save the day: they will have to suffer for their principles. It'd be the equivalent of what would happen if Buffy refused to sacrifice Dawn in "The Gift" but didn't have the option of jumping herself. Which is a plotline I'd be interested in exploring: while I am interested in the monstrosity I give to Dawn and Giles, I'd also like to feel the ennoblement of the sort of moral courage that I feel that we especially need in these times, and that we sorely lack: the courage to stand by our moral principles even when the Huns--be they Cylons or dragons or Islamofascists--are at the gates.
I saw the Battlestar Galattica season finale, and my thoughts went right to my meta on monsters. Which is hardly surprising, because--as I note in that post--the category which I call "monstrous" is the same that jennyo calls "on the very outside edge of ambiguous." She places Laura Roslin and Rupert Giles in this category, and I added the Operative from Serenity. These are characters who knowingly do evil while willing good, because someone has to do the dirty work.
In the finale, we learned just how monstrous Roslin is willing to do. She was willing to steal the election, but--as Bill Adama tells her and us, wouldn't have been able to live with it.
Now I was happy that Roslin ultimately did not ultimately steal the election. I'm fascinated in Dawn and Giles as monsters, ubermensch with whom I vicariously identify through the will-to-power, but my relation to Roslin is different. I turn to her as a maternal character, as the President I'd like to have, and so like Jed Bartlett or Gina Davis' character from Commander-in-Chief (whatever happened to that show anyway?) I don't want to see her turn into a monster. A monstrous President strikes far too close to home, whereas a monstrous starship captain is far enough removed that I can enjoy the expression of the will-to-power. Or in BSG's case, a monstrous XO: Colonel Tigh is actually one of my favorite characters, because I can detest him even as I am attracted to him. (Not to mention that I, wrongly or rightly, tend to view this sort of "monstrosity" as a militaristic value.)
But it's important to note that if this had been one of my fics, Adama would have preserved Roslin's innocence by taking on the burden of what had to be done himself, the way that Giles saves Buffy's innocence by killing Ben. Instead, the turn away from the monstrous is complete and there is no deus ex machina to save the day: they will have to suffer for their principles. It'd be the equivalent of what would happen if Buffy refused to sacrifice Dawn in "The Gift" but didn't have the option of jumping herself. Which is a plotline I'd be interested in exploring: while I am interested in the monstrosity I give to Dawn and Giles, I'd also like to feel the ennoblement of the sort of moral courage that I feel that we especially need in these times, and that we sorely lack: the courage to stand by our moral principles even when the Huns--be they Cylons or dragons or Islamofascists--are at the gates.