(Meta) Power and Moral Certainty - Buffy in late Season 8

[stormwreath]

In the light of the latest revelations about Buffy in Season 9, I've been re-visiting my thoughts about the end of Season 8, and specifically the Retreat arc and when Buffy was Chosen by the Twilight prophecy to be the creatrix of a new universe. This led me to thoughts about power, parenthood, and Buffy's moral certainty - specifically that

Comments

[stormwreath]

It seems to me that "cultural appropriation" is usually touted as a bad thing when it's a small oppressed group lamenting that it has nothing to call its own, not even its stories or artefacts. Which is bad, yes; but surely it's the oppression that's the bad thing? The appropriation is merely a symptom. Or when cultural elements are used in a mocking or inappropriate or disrespectful fashion; but again, the problem there isn't cultural appropriation, it's racism.

And set against that, I do believe strongly that ideas and stories are the common heritage of all humanity. They shouldn't be restricted to people who have a particular skin colour or speak a particular language or give their children a certain set of names. That only serves to stifle creativity and progress.

I mean, can you imagine a world where the only people allowed to write stories about vampires were Irish people living in London? :)

I'm also in favour of fanfiction and vidding, even though they could be criticised on exactly the same grounds as cultural appropriation. You're taking "other people's ideas" that you "don't have a right to", after all.

[ceciliaj]

Okay, I hear what you're saying. I was just making sure I was not missing sarcasm, which sometimes I do, being Harmony-like :).

Anyway! I would say that cultural appropriation can be more than a symptom, and can be an enactment of oppression, but I don't think that it always is. For example, blackface denies creative opportunities, and thus the money and credit that go with them, to black actors.

Fanfiction and vidding are entirely different, because they are performed by people with little power who make no money and receive only symbolic credit for their labor. There are borderline examples of course, but I think that appropriation from the dominant culture by people subjected to it is always just fine :).

But you know, in the U.S. especially, I have met many people who absolutely romanticize Tibetan Buddhism (here subtly fictionalized to the "Bon" ur-religion) without actually realizing that there is a serious, ongoing political struggle based on its very existence and people's right to practice it. So, it's not Jane Espenson's job to teach us all a lesson about global politics, and I have hope that if people read the arc, and become genuinely interested, they will do research and rethink their place in the world. Ignorance not being a crime, you know, but being a shame in a world full of such interesting ideas :).

[stormwreath]

For example, blackface denies creative opportunities, and thus the money and credit that go with them, to black actors.

Do you mean actors 'blacking up' to appear as a different race? I agree about the problem, but to me blackface is a result of racism ("We have no black actors so one of the white ones will have to paint their face"), not a cause of it ("We have blackfaced white actors, so we don't need actual black people"). Though granted, once the idea is established as possible it can be a self-reinforcing spiral.

Fanfiction and vidding are entirely different, because they are performed by people with little power who make no money and receive only symbolic credit for their labor.

Although unless your name is J K Rowling or Stephenie Meyer, authors and screenwriters aren't exactly paid lavishly for their creative works either. Nor do they have much power.

And my preferred solution to privilege is always going to be "empower the unprivileged" rather than "disempower the privileged" where that's possible. :p

I thought Bon was the actual pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet (with syncretic Buddhist additions over the years), not fictional? It has its own Wikipedia page and everything. But certainly, I for one would never have researched that if I hadn't read Jane's story drawing on ideas from Bon andTibetan culture. I wouldn't even have known that Tibet has rainforests if not for Georges Jeanty's art...

[ceciliaj]

I guess I interpreted Bon in the story more as referring to the abstract set of pre-Buddhist practices than the more specific reference, because it takes its own direction so strongly/contains inventions. But it's worth reexamining how that is set up and works :).

I like your idea of empowering the unprivileged rather than disempowering the privileged, although it's an area where I'm a bit ambivalent as a general principle. So, right now, in the U.S., the corporation needs to be disempowered, because the economic inequality can't otherwise even be addressed, let alone resolved. But that's an egregious example.

Anyway, of course you're right that the non-Rowlings and Meyers among professional authors do not typically belong to the 1%, it's still worth looking at the mid-range authors who do make a living writing and, say, teaching the occasional creative writing course, as having more power to dictate the dominant stories we tell ourselves than those who are audience members through and through. But you know, blah blah blah, not what your post is about :).