for a fine revenge to take
AV Club reviewed Three Men and Adena today in the Homicide recaps. I still can't watch it very often, but I highly, highly recommend anyone who is interested in phenomenal television to watch it as soon as they can get their hands on it, because it is one of the most amazing and brutal hours of television ever filmed, if not the most amazing.
Over on Mark Watches Avatar, he asked what scenes people immediately think of when thinking of the show, and while I don't post over there (I am shy and don't like unfamiliar places), I've been thinking about what my answer would be. It's funny, because I would say Sokka is my favorite without hesitation, but the first three scenes I thought of all involved Zuko:
1. His reunion with Iroh in the finale. *cries*
2. His confrontation with Ozai in "The Day of Black Sun"
3. the epic agni kai between him and Azula in the finale, with him jumping in front of lightning for Katara, and then Katara chaining Azula. I found that fight so much more compelling than the one between Aang and Ozai, possibly because of the music, which makes me cry, and also how beautifully animated it is, and how terrible I feel for Azula even though I wanted her to lose. I especially liked that neither Zuko nor Katara looked triumphant afterward, that they were shaken by how broken Azula was.
Number 4 would be the end of Iroh's tale in "Tales of Ba Sing Se." Which can make me cry just in talking about it. *sniffle*
In the discussion of "The Southern Raiders" yesterday, I was almost tempted to post, because someone mentioned how Batman kills the Joker in the first Tim Burton movie, and the poster was like, "Nobody complained about that!" and I actually thought about opening up a comment box and being like, "Have you ever spoken to someone who is actually a fan of the comics?" because wow, Batman fans will go on at length about how that totally disregards one of the central tenets of Batman's character, which is that he doesn't kill, not even the Joker. Which, you all know how I feel about that! (by which I mean, it absolutely is a central tenet of his character! but not one I necessarily agree with! Though I'm going to go on about it at length again beneath the cut!)
But I still think Katara did the right thing by not killing Yon Rha. Because being alive was more of a punishment for that guy than being dead would have been, and also because he was clearly no longer a threat to anyone except the plants in his garden. And also, she's a fifteen year old girl who shouldn't have to carry that around, despite her rage and guilt over not being able to save her mother from him when she was, what? 6 years old? I don't at all have a problem with her not forgiving him, which I also think was realistic, and too much to expect from her at this age and time, but I was glad she didn't kill him. (I liked that she forgave Zuko, though, obviously.)
I still don't know how I feel about her using bloodbending on the wrong guy though, or, rather, I feel horrified by it, that she did it at all, let alone to the wrong guy, but I don't know how I feel about how the show underplays it. I mean, Zuko looks disturbed, which, given the family he grew up in, says a lot about how horrifying bloodbending is, if you needed more than the fact that it exists.
And I'm still thinking about the contention that there was some gendered storytelling going on there, that had it been Sokka or Zuko, they'd have been allowed by the narrative to kill him without being told it was the wrong thing to do. (And I think clearly it is the wrong thing to do, because he is not threatening their lives or anyone else's at that point; I just wonder if it had been Sokka if we'd have found him still at the helm of the Southern Raiders and possibly in the act of killing more innocent moms in front of their kids, thus justifying his death more easily.) Because the show is mostly good at not doing that kind of gendering, so I don't know. I mean, we saw Kyoshi indirectly kill Chin the Conqueror, and now I'm wondering how they would have handled it if it had been Suki, who was trained as a warrior and might have a different moral outlook on killing the enemy.
On the other hand, I still feel like Aang's solution with Ozai is kind of a cop out, or, rather, a passing of the buck. I thought Iroh was right that the new firelord couldn't come to power as a fratricide or a patricide (not to mention a regicide), not and claim to be ushering in a new era of peace and harmony, and it is a show aimed at 7 year olds (and that kind of nuance is impressive in a show aimed at that age group, I think), so I figured Aang would find a way.
But the thing is, as long as his father is alive, Zuko is always going to have to deal with people supporting Ozai (and Azula, but I hold out hope for Azula's eventual rehabilitation) and claiming he's the rightful firelord (despite his lack of bending ability anymore) and also, as with Batman, I feel like saving your own morality at the expense of saving the world makes you kind of a shitty hero. I mean, you're willing to sacrifice your life but not your moral purity? What even is that? I also had this problem with Buffy in "The Gift," how Giles kills Ben so she doesn't have to and is all, "Buffy is a hero but I'm not!" Which, no, Giles, you're the kind of hero I want, the kind who will finish the job and save the world and then have to live with himself and the weight of his actions afterwards. It's easier to be a hero when you don't have to make those hard choices, where they always end up okay and in line with your personal morality.
And I feel like I'm not really saying this well, because it's not like I advocate killing bad guys except that sometimes in fiction, I totally do. Like, to bring it back to Batman, sometimes I hope he feels every single death the Joker causes, because by not killing him (or allowing Jason or whoever to kill him, though huh, iirc, I don't think he would have stopped Jim Gordon right after Sarah Essen was killed in NML, and I don't think he would have blamed Dick for killing him in whatever that storyline was, where they thought he'd just killed Tim and possibly he was taunting Dick about Jason's death? am I conflating those two things?), knowing what he is and what he's done and how the justice system as configured in that universe can't contain him or rehabilitate him, I feel like he bears some responsibility. I mean, he'd put down a rabid dog to keep it from infecting people, right? I'm not sure the Joker, at least, bears any more consideration than that. Possibly less. I'd at least feel bad for the dog. (I mean, in the real world, as someone who tries to be a basically decent person, I don't actually approve of the death penalty for anyone, even if I understand the visceral appeal of it, and I don't approve of vigilantism, and I can't believe I'm actually disclaiming this in a post about the morality of killing proven genocidal maniacs in fictional universes.)
To get back to AtLA, Aang is a 12yo kid, so he absolutely shouldn't have to kill anyone, and I wish energy-bending had been set up earlier (though I didn't mind the lionturtle, as we'd seen them at least as early as "The Library" and that ep was referenced as early as "The Siege of the North") because it is an ingenious solution ("The Guru" would have been a good time for it, I guess, or maybe in conjunction with the explanation of how Ty Lee chi-blocks), but I really felt like Aang's past lives were giving him good sound advice on how to deal with the situation, despite, again, it compromising him. I think in a show aimed at an older audience, that would have been given more consideration. Though really, as with Yon Rha, taking Ozai's bending away and making him live like that is more of a punishment than killing him would ever be. So I'm not sure it actually is a more humane option, though possibly it's a more just one. I don't know.
Obviously, I have a lot of conflicting feelings about these things! I think Frank Pembleton could tell me what I should believe, though, and I would trust him.
***
This entry at DW: http://musesfool.dreamwidth.org/344776.html.
people have commented there.
Over on Mark Watches Avatar, he asked what scenes people immediately think of when thinking of the show, and while I don't post over there (I am shy and don't like unfamiliar places), I've been thinking about what my answer would be. It's funny, because I would say Sokka is my favorite without hesitation, but the first three scenes I thought of all involved Zuko:
1. His reunion with Iroh in the finale. *cries*
2. His confrontation with Ozai in "The Day of Black Sun"
3. the epic agni kai between him and Azula in the finale, with him jumping in front of lightning for Katara, and then Katara chaining Azula. I found that fight so much more compelling than the one between Aang and Ozai, possibly because of the music, which makes me cry, and also how beautifully animated it is, and how terrible I feel for Azula even though I wanted her to lose. I especially liked that neither Zuko nor Katara looked triumphant afterward, that they were shaken by how broken Azula was.
Number 4 would be the end of Iroh's tale in "Tales of Ba Sing Se." Which can make me cry just in talking about it. *sniffle*
In the discussion of "The Southern Raiders" yesterday, I was almost tempted to post, because someone mentioned how Batman kills the Joker in the first Tim Burton movie, and the poster was like, "Nobody complained about that!" and I actually thought about opening up a comment box and being like, "Have you ever spoken to someone who is actually a fan of the comics?" because wow, Batman fans will go on at length about how that totally disregards one of the central tenets of Batman's character, which is that he doesn't kill, not even the Joker. Which, you all know how I feel about that! (by which I mean, it absolutely is a central tenet of his character! but not one I necessarily agree with! Though I'm going to go on about it at length again beneath the cut!)
But I still think Katara did the right thing by not killing Yon Rha. Because being alive was more of a punishment for that guy than being dead would have been, and also because he was clearly no longer a threat to anyone except the plants in his garden. And also, she's a fifteen year old girl who shouldn't have to carry that around, despite her rage and guilt over not being able to save her mother from him when she was, what? 6 years old? I don't at all have a problem with her not forgiving him, which I also think was realistic, and too much to expect from her at this age and time, but I was glad she didn't kill him. (I liked that she forgave Zuko, though, obviously.)
I still don't know how I feel about her using bloodbending on the wrong guy though, or, rather, I feel horrified by it, that she did it at all, let alone to the wrong guy, but I don't know how I feel about how the show underplays it. I mean, Zuko looks disturbed, which, given the family he grew up in, says a lot about how horrifying bloodbending is, if you needed more than the fact that it exists.
And I'm still thinking about the contention that there was some gendered storytelling going on there, that had it been Sokka or Zuko, they'd have been allowed by the narrative to kill him without being told it was the wrong thing to do. (And I think clearly it is the wrong thing to do, because he is not threatening their lives or anyone else's at that point; I just wonder if it had been Sokka if we'd have found him still at the helm of the Southern Raiders and possibly in the act of killing more innocent moms in front of their kids, thus justifying his death more easily.) Because the show is mostly good at not doing that kind of gendering, so I don't know. I mean, we saw Kyoshi indirectly kill Chin the Conqueror, and now I'm wondering how they would have handled it if it had been Suki, who was trained as a warrior and might have a different moral outlook on killing the enemy.
On the other hand, I still feel like Aang's solution with Ozai is kind of a cop out, or, rather, a passing of the buck. I thought Iroh was right that the new firelord couldn't come to power as a fratricide or a patricide (not to mention a regicide), not and claim to be ushering in a new era of peace and harmony, and it is a show aimed at 7 year olds (and that kind of nuance is impressive in a show aimed at that age group, I think), so I figured Aang would find a way.
But the thing is, as long as his father is alive, Zuko is always going to have to deal with people supporting Ozai (and Azula, but I hold out hope for Azula's eventual rehabilitation) and claiming he's the rightful firelord (despite his lack of bending ability anymore) and also, as with Batman, I feel like saving your own morality at the expense of saving the world makes you kind of a shitty hero. I mean, you're willing to sacrifice your life but not your moral purity? What even is that? I also had this problem with Buffy in "The Gift," how Giles kills Ben so she doesn't have to and is all, "Buffy is a hero but I'm not!" Which, no, Giles, you're the kind of hero I want, the kind who will finish the job and save the world and then have to live with himself and the weight of his actions afterwards. It's easier to be a hero when you don't have to make those hard choices, where they always end up okay and in line with your personal morality.
And I feel like I'm not really saying this well, because it's not like I advocate killing bad guys except that sometimes in fiction, I totally do. Like, to bring it back to Batman, sometimes I hope he feels every single death the Joker causes, because by not killing him (or allowing Jason or whoever to kill him, though huh, iirc, I don't think he would have stopped Jim Gordon right after Sarah Essen was killed in NML, and I don't think he would have blamed Dick for killing him in whatever that storyline was, where they thought he'd just killed Tim and possibly he was taunting Dick about Jason's death? am I conflating those two things?), knowing what he is and what he's done and how the justice system as configured in that universe can't contain him or rehabilitate him, I feel like he bears some responsibility. I mean, he'd put down a rabid dog to keep it from infecting people, right? I'm not sure the Joker, at least, bears any more consideration than that. Possibly less. I'd at least feel bad for the dog. (I mean, in the real world, as someone who tries to be a basically decent person, I don't actually approve of the death penalty for anyone, even if I understand the visceral appeal of it, and I don't approve of vigilantism, and I can't believe I'm actually disclaiming this in a post about the morality of killing proven genocidal maniacs in fictional universes.)
To get back to AtLA, Aang is a 12yo kid, so he absolutely shouldn't have to kill anyone, and I wish energy-bending had been set up earlier (though I didn't mind the lionturtle, as we'd seen them at least as early as "The Library" and that ep was referenced as early as "The Siege of the North") because it is an ingenious solution ("The Guru" would have been a good time for it, I guess, or maybe in conjunction with the explanation of how Ty Lee chi-blocks), but I really felt like Aang's past lives were giving him good sound advice on how to deal with the situation, despite, again, it compromising him. I think in a show aimed at an older audience, that would have been given more consideration. Though really, as with Yon Rha, taking Ozai's bending away and making him live like that is more of a punishment than killing him would ever be. So I'm not sure it actually is a more humane option, though possibly it's a more just one. I don't know.
Obviously, I have a lot of conflicting feelings about these things! I think Frank Pembleton could tell me what I should believe, though, and I would trust him.
***
This entry at DW: http://musesfool.dreamwidth.org/344776.html.
people have commented there.