[meta] seeing claire; writing claire
why I write claire littleton the way I write her
or
the claire/jack[/sawyer] probability
First, I can fully understand feeling that these pairings may be "unlike" the Claire we know on the show. It's a totally valid point of view and I appreciate knopflergroupie's willingness to discuss this with me. It's just not the way that I see Claire. And of course I am always open to friendly discussion. Hence, this post.
[As a matter of fact, my comment just kept growing and growing, which is actually how this turned into a full post.]
As for her youthful self, the "goth" Claire that we saw in Par Avion isn't the thing that inspired me to write this pairing [Claire/Jack] or the combination of Jack, Claire, and Sawyer. For that, I actually have no true explanation. My love for these relationships was almost certainly born through writing them. Plain and simple. Of course, there's a story behind "how it all came to be" but it's actually pretty silly and bears no real reflection on how I feel about these characters and why I often see them as inextricable.
[Though of course I could share it if you would like.]
Regarding Claire:
I can absolutely see how these pairings could come across as artificial because obviously canon plays a very small role in it. In terms of Claire's characterization especially. However, I personally feel that her characterization on the show is very much a failing on the part of the Lost writers. And as a result I feel like my interpretation of Claire is, in a way, a meta. Not intentionally, per se, but essentially it is a criticism of the show's inability to ever show Claire as strong as she could be. As strong as I believe that she was. As a matter of fact, I feel that the over-simplification of her character makes her seem more weak, and more "immature" than she very well should be -- dependent and insignificant to boot.
Before season six, with the exception of a few scenes, Claire seemed to be "going with the flow" of things - especially in terms of her relationship with Charlie. Throughout these early seasons, she showed glimpses of the darkness that I see in her, but ultimately her development was regularly squashed. In this last season she obviously showed more than a few glimpses, but even then it was played as "crazy" or "possessed" instead of a more natural progression of her character. [Which I believe would have been far more believable and fully understandable.]
I can't understand the reasons why the writers portrayed her the way they did, given all that she'd been through.
She's an artistic, superstitious woman who crash-landed on an island, who stood up to Jack when she knew something was wrong, who was kidnapped, lost her memories, who had a baby in the middle of the jungle, who was poisoned, who stood up to Charlie when he was acting like a douche [which was often, imo], who was eventually abandoned [multiple times over] by the only people left who were supposed to care about her, who was separated from her son, and who was left to fend for herself in the jungle for three long years. Now, if any one of those things, not to mention any combination of those things, isn't going to leave a broken, scarred, and dark soul behind, I don't know what is.
So for the writers to paint this woman who was bad-ass and strong, as crazy or possessed, just feels so undeniably wrong and way too "easy" to me. And even earlier in the series, to paint her as "totally okay" with Charlie bossing her around, after all she'd been through already? It kind of infuriated me. As far as the natural progression of things is concerned, none of that ever sat well with me.
Now, my having a different interpretation of Claire than most people doesn't necessarily say anything about these pairings, other than the fact that I think most people would find my vision of Claire a more likely participant in these types of relationships than the cut-and-dry show!version of Claire.
Additionally, my default POV is one of angst. And I have no real qualms about re-writing history or throwing canon to the wind, so I will sometimes pick a jumping off point, or sometimes just throw them in some marginally AU scenario, and run from there. And while I do have a non-traditional view on Claire, as I said above, I also see her as artistic, gentle, whimsical, open-minded, and hopeful. So along with the darkness, I often throw these elements in as well.
I'm really a firm believer that nothing is out-of-character if done in a way that is believable. Even if it's just a short drabble, I think that a writer can bring an element of "truth" to whatever it is that they're writing. While I realize that my view of Claire is not one that many can see or that many share, I do feel that it rings of some truth. Or at least I hope it does.
or
the claire/jack[/sawyer] probability
First, I can fully understand feeling that these pairings may be "unlike" the Claire we know on the show. It's a totally valid point of view and I appreciate knopflergroupie's willingness to discuss this with me. It's just not the way that I see Claire. And of course I am always open to friendly discussion. Hence, this post.
[As a matter of fact, my comment just kept growing and growing, which is actually how this turned into a full post.]
As for her youthful self, the "goth" Claire that we saw in Par Avion isn't the thing that inspired me to write this pairing [Claire/Jack] or the combination of Jack, Claire, and Sawyer. For that, I actually have no true explanation. My love for these relationships was almost certainly born through writing them. Plain and simple. Of course, there's a story behind "how it all came to be" but it's actually pretty silly and bears no real reflection on how I feel about these characters and why I often see them as inextricable.
[Though of course I could share it if you would like.]
Regarding Claire:
I can absolutely see how these pairings could come across as artificial because obviously canon plays a very small role in it. In terms of Claire's characterization especially. However, I personally feel that her characterization on the show is very much a failing on the part of the Lost writers. And as a result I feel like my interpretation of Claire is, in a way, a meta. Not intentionally, per se, but essentially it is a criticism of the show's inability to ever show Claire as strong as she could be. As strong as I believe that she was. As a matter of fact, I feel that the over-simplification of her character makes her seem more weak, and more "immature" than she very well should be -- dependent and insignificant to boot.
Before season six, with the exception of a few scenes, Claire seemed to be "going with the flow" of things - especially in terms of her relationship with Charlie. Throughout these early seasons, she showed glimpses of the darkness that I see in her, but ultimately her development was regularly squashed. In this last season she obviously showed more than a few glimpses, but even then it was played as "crazy" or "possessed" instead of a more natural progression of her character. [Which I believe would have been far more believable and fully understandable.]
I can't understand the reasons why the writers portrayed her the way they did, given all that she'd been through.
She's an artistic, superstitious woman who crash-landed on an island, who stood up to Jack when she knew something was wrong, who was kidnapped, lost her memories, who had a baby in the middle of the jungle, who was poisoned, who stood up to Charlie when he was acting like a douche [which was often, imo], who was eventually abandoned [multiple times over] by the only people left who were supposed to care about her, who was separated from her son, and who was left to fend for herself in the jungle for three long years. Now, if any one of those things, not to mention any combination of those things, isn't going to leave a broken, scarred, and dark soul behind, I don't know what is.
So for the writers to paint this woman who was bad-ass and strong, as crazy or possessed, just feels so undeniably wrong and way too "easy" to me. And even earlier in the series, to paint her as "totally okay" with Charlie bossing her around, after all she'd been through already? It kind of infuriated me. As far as the natural progression of things is concerned, none of that ever sat well with me.
Now, my having a different interpretation of Claire than most people doesn't necessarily say anything about these pairings, other than the fact that I think most people would find my vision of Claire a more likely participant in these types of relationships than the cut-and-dry show!version of Claire.
Additionally, my default POV is one of angst. And I have no real qualms about re-writing history or throwing canon to the wind, so I will sometimes pick a jumping off point, or sometimes just throw them in some marginally AU scenario, and run from there. And while I do have a non-traditional view on Claire, as I said above, I also see her as artistic, gentle, whimsical, open-minded, and hopeful. So along with the darkness, I often throw these elements in as well.
I'm really a firm believer that nothing is out-of-character if done in a way that is believable. Even if it's just a short drabble, I think that a writer can bring an element of "truth" to whatever it is that they're writing. While I realize that my view of Claire is not one that many can see or that many share, I do feel that it rings of some truth. Or at least I hope it does.