In the Hunt: Unauthorized Essays on Supernatural (Anthology, TBR in March)
This is a collection of essays that covers the first three seasons of the series. I will restate my disclaimer from when I started season 3 so that I would have seen all the material covered in the book, which is that I used to be a fan of Supernatural but no longer am, largely due to issues regarding the show and gender. As such, I read the book with an established critical bias regarding the subject matter.
My central problem with this collection is that most essays are completely devoid of any critical analysis. In fact, it took me just over a week to read roughly the first half, as most essays were defenses and praises of the show and characters with almost no acknowledgement of the possibility of flaws. I have never encountered a perfect piece of fiction, and believe that anything claiming to analyze or examine something-fiction or otherwise-should address the flaws as well as the positive aspects. Therefore, roughly 120 pages of nothing but praises of something that I view as being extremely flawed bored me.
This is a personal problem. If you think the show is flawed but want to see people talk about the better aspects, or if you think too big a deal is made out of things, I doubts this will be a problem for you.
As for the essays that interested me, there were two regarding the Trickster and his role and one about the colt that I found interesting, as well as several regarding the approach to folkore in the show, including modern influence on folklore, and then one on blue collar demonhunting. There were also two regarding the Impala that I wanted to like, but between them, it basically went “the Impala is home and mother and here’s how it’s a symbol of manly bonding.” Which, really, is something of a statement about how a lot of fiction tends to handle female presence, and the two essays had very valid points, but ended up depressing me a bit.
Regarding essays on gender…well, I’ve already posted my thought on Jacob Clifton’s “Spreading Disaster: Gender in the Supernatural Universe.” We will not speak of it again. (Ok, I’m sure we will. Just not now.) Much better is Mary Borsellino’s “Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Jo the Monster Killer: Supernatural’s Excluded Heroines.” While Borsellino’s stance and opinion is pretty clear, the essay itself does not rely on those opinions for the most part, and instead directly addresses how women are portrayed and given (or not given) agency in the show, especially in terms of the argument of Supernatural being a reaction to Buffy’s perceived emasculation of the horror genre. The title of Carol Poole’s “Who Threw Momma on the Ceiling? Analyzing Supernatural’s Primal Scene of Trauma filled me with dread, but was actually quite good, with a focus on why women who normally wouldn’t would watch a show whose first episode begins with a blonde woman pinned to a ceiling and bursting into flames, and ends with the same happening to another blonde woman. Actually, I’m glad I read it, as that was something I wondered about back when I still really liked the show.
One essay that I suspect many readers will be interested in is Emily Turner’s “Scary Just Got Sexy: Trangression in Supernatural and It’s Fanfiction.” It’s essentially an explanation of fanfic in layman’s terms, with a focus on Supernatural and especially Wincest. Sadly, I’m not a huge fan of Wincest or fanfic, so a lot of it was lost on me.
In general, I think the collection’s individual success will depend on how much you like the show, and how favorable/critical you think fanwork collections should be. And now I shall resume being broken up with the show until it figures out how to keep a non-evil vagina around for more than a few episodes without killing it.