DVD Commentary: "For the Kingdom of Heaven" (Part 2)

Aug 17, 2006 07:33

ETA: Okay, I think the formatting on both of these is fixed now.
Commentary Part 2 )

Leave a comment

Comments 10

tellitslant August 17 2006, 15:17:18 UTC
This was a fascinating read. I picked up on many but not all of Hank's allusions, and going through this really emphasised them and their impact. I enjoyed this almost as much as reading the story itself!

Reply

c_elisa August 17 2006, 23:39:00 UTC
Thank you!

Reply


penknife August 17 2006, 18:27:43 UTC
Thanks so much for doing this! It's a fascinating read.

The title could be from any of several verses in the Bible, but I had in mind Matthew 19:12: "there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake" -- a Hank's-eye view of what it means to take the cure for religious reasons.

That's the reference I figured you were making.

When I was writing it, I kept thinking of it as my story about mutant rage. In the whole story, Hank's never not angry.

One of the things I liked so much about this story is that it's such an angry story, and yet it never makes the issues or the people involved simple. And Mystique does over-simplify things -- past a certain point, there are her people and there's the enemy, and all other shades of gray are meaningless. Hank can't ever take refuge in that kind of certainty.

I find it hard to disagree with Hank here. I think I ... *makes helpless handwavy motions* It's such a devil's bargain -- helping to bring the cure into the world will mean having to turn around ( ... )

Reply

c_elisa August 18 2006, 08:59:31 UTC
Hank can't ever take refuge in that kind of certainty.

He can't, and he has a lot in common with Charles that way -- my pre-X3, probably-Jossed movie Charles, at least.

Where's the line between "disabled" and "different"? Where's the line between "disabled by your differences" and "disabled by a society that isn't set up to deal with your differences"? I never know where I want to put those lines, you know?

Yeah, there's no bright line, that's what makes it so hard. I couldn't do what Hank does and actually become involved in the research, even in a non-participatory, conscientious-objector way; I'd hate myself too much. But I'm too freaked out by the idea of having lobster claws to really wish someone would burn down the lab, either.

I can never think of pterosaurs now without thinking of your Charles and Erik.

It's probably a good thing Victor's television isn't stuck on them.

I can't quite bring myself to like her, either in this scene or in the story as a whole -- her lack of empathy for Hank's pain and for his point of ( ... )

Reply


ion_bond August 18 2006, 03:45:23 UTC
(And I read Part 2 after all.)

I enjoyed this commentary in part because of the extent to which your compassion for the characters you write comes through. Of course Hank deserves a Nobel, and I think a part of the reason he and Rao are sympathetic when they're behaving badly is because you've thought about the background factor.

This story is so very good, morally complex and character-rich, and we're lucky to get a glimpse at your process.

This is something Hank believes very deeply: the diversity of mutants is an expression of God's creativity. He'd like to believe it's an expression of God's love, but sometimes it seems more like God's sick sense of humor. And yet, curing mutations is like burning the maunscripts of previously unknown books of the Bible.

Mmm. I love that.

Reply

c_elisa August 18 2006, 09:41:44 UTC
Thank you. I do try to have some compassion for all my characters, even walk-ons, although I can't quite get there with Dr. Clark. If you can withstand a full-strength blast of Beast charm, I don't even want to know you.

That passage about burning manuscripts (and it would help if I hadn't mistyped "manuscripts") is something that I feel too, but it seems to make more sense if I translate it into Hank's religious worldview than if I try to say it in my own terms.

Reply


youngest_one August 20 2006, 07:25:34 UTC
Coming in late, but I have to say that this was fascinating. I'd missed so many of the references and allusions, and how they influenced the story. I also tended to sympathise more with Hank than Rao in this, because it seemed to me that he had a self awareness which she lacked. I think she really wanted to understand Hank and Victor's motivations, but just couldn't grasp them. If that makes any sense.

Also, it's a good excuse to read the whole story over again.

Reply


st_aurafina August 21 2006, 04:32:28 UTC
This was a fantastic read - I got so much out of it!

It was great to have a source for the literary allusions that I didn't know (which was a lot, sadly.)

I can see Dr Rao in a more sympathetic light now, which makes the story even less black and white for me. I'm like penknife though - I just can't like her, even if I have more respect for her.

This commentary makes a great companion piece to the original story. Thank you so much for putting it up.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up