Starbuck can't be a woman!

[meganbmoore]

Which is basically what Ursula K. LeGuin spends a long time saying hereLeGuin isn't talking about Starbuck, actually, but about Helen Mirren playing Prospero. I...suspect most people here would have their interest amplified by this Prospero becoming Prospera, but LeGuin basically spends a long time saying it's an amazing and brilliant performance

Comments

[rosehiptea]

I'm not really familiar with The Tempest and I obviously haven't seen the film, so maybe I shouldn't even comment. But I still expected better of Ursula LeGuin than that. (Especially using "menopausal" as an insult -- what's up with that?)

[meganbmoore]

Yeah, it's just...I don't think any knowledge of the source material is needed to see the fail there?

[bookblather]

Um, can we talk about how women in Shakespeare's time were played by men, please? This to me just sounds like turnabout being fair play. Only awesomer, because it's Helen Mirren, yo.

[bookblather]

Though having seen the trailer now, I can see why you'd be "..." about Caliban. That's, um, heading for some unfortunate implications there, guys, but of course trailers always lie, so there's hope.

[meganbmoore]

TBH, when I first saw the trailer a while back, the genderswitch in Prospero didn't register beyond Helen Mirren being fabulous. Like, I noticed, but it didn't stand out as "huge major change!" But Caliban did. I...really hope that they won't go for the traditional interpretation of Caliban, who I think is already racially Othered enough without actually assigning him a race? But I don't know.

[potatoko]

I think this film looks to be about highlighting the evil of prospera and her sense of entitlement. Drawing a direct parallel between her treatment of Caliban (and Ariel too, I presume) and actual slavery is . . . well, it's one way to do it. Well, Caliban is my favourite character anyway. "and then in dreaming/The clouds methought would open and show riches/Ready to drop upon me, that when I waked/I cried to dream again." *sigh*

I'll hold of judgement till I've seen it.

[chomiji]

I think what she's saying (and I did actually go read her entire entry before trying to suss out what I felt about this) is that the relationships with the other characters (and in particular, the magician's relationship with Miranda) don't work for her.

It's worth actually checking out what she said and also reading some of the comments (from, for example, author Jo Walton).

[meganbmoore]

I did read the whole thing, several parts more than once, and I think some of the comments address what she's trying to say better than she does, but her actual post is...very gendered, and she doesn't seem to be able to get past "Prospero can't be a woman!" enough to actually explain why she has problems with it beyond simply the gender of the performer.

[chomiji]

megan, I know you did.

This is one of those things that I should have just pretended I never saw. I hate arguing.

But in some ways, this seems to be Rorschach-blot-ish. Different people are carrying away different bits of it. As the 50+-yr-old mother of a young adult daughter, the part that struck a chord was "this means the character is Miranda's mother, not her father," and yeah, those things (relationships, assumptions, power balances) are different in most cases, even in families where the parents both work, both control the finances, etc. Prospero's manipulations and overbearing decisions for what he thinks will be best for his daughter are a different flavor than what a mother (even a Dark Queen mother like anti-mom in "Mirrormask") would. They're paternal, not maternal, and yes, those are different things.

But I'm a generation younger than LeGuin and at least a generation older than a lot of people who are likely to be reading that blog entry on the Intartubes. (I was forcibly reminded of this the other day when yuki-

[meganbmoore]

Whoops, my first bit there came across as defensive when it wasn't meant to, sorry.

And, well, your presentation of the argument makes sense (though, from a deconstructive aspect, the flip in how we view the parent based on gender of the parent can highlight the biases in how we perceive/accept certain actions, though of course that isn't the only factor) but you explain it better in a few sentences than she did in the entire thing.

I think the generational aspect is also important, though, yes. (Is the post you're referring to the J.D. Salinger one? Because while I don't quite agree regarding Great Gatsby in certain respects-though I'd have to reread it to make an argument either way-i thought it was pretty spot on.)

[sisterjune]

What upsets me is that I would not have expected this argument from Leguin, I was under the impression she was a forward thinking feminist? Pretty messed up. But Helen Mirren is still awesome and thats what matters. I will try not to dwell on yet another author I liked disappointing me hardcore. Although I feel this is not nearly as bad as the Gaiman thing, and to think I respected him once. pfft.

[meganbmoore]

The discussion above regarding generational gaps might explain a lot regarding the feminist bit. The Gaiman thing was...well. We won't go there again. *cringes*

[etrangere]

What Gaiman thing? :(

why are they all getting eaten by the brain-eat? :/

[meganbmoore]

I'd have to look up the particulars, but the essentials were that he said "Graveyard Book" couldn't be set in the US because there weren't any graves more than a few centuries old. People respond "uhm...First Nations folks?" and he issued a half-hearted apology that was, IIRC, more dismissive than anything else. "I'm sorry you're offended" as opposed to "I'm sorry I offended you."

[rymenhild]

...Ursula LeGuin. SERIOUSLY?

She's genuinely arguing that The Tempest loses its essential nature if a woman is playing Prospero. She really is. Ursula Kroeber LeGuin.

*cries*