Großartige "Belle Chose" Review
Hier drüben:
"The Wife of Bath's Tale" is one of Chaucer’s most important tales dealing with the role of women in the Middle Ages. Alisoun has married five times (even widows remarrying was controversial at the time). She was proud of her control over her first three husbands, tortures her fourth, and then battles the fifth over control. She tells the tale of an Arthurian knight, whose punishment for raping is to wonder the country and find out what women really want. He discovers that the answer is control over their husbands.
“The Economics of Love” is a reference to a scholarly essay on “The Wife of Bath” by Mary Carruthers. She argues that for women in medieval times, wealth was required for independence, and that autonomy allows women to chose who they love. In essence, money can buy true love; it may be the crucial ingredient. The phrase also has the implication of prostitution, and indeed medieval culture (including the Church) talked of sex as the “marriage debt” of a woman. Sex was, to a considerable extent, an economic transaction.
The parallels of Chaucer's tale with the two story lines (and the larger issues of the Dollhouse itself) are rich. Some of this is made explicit in the discussions between Echo/Kiki and the professor. He pulls quotes from Alisoun where she argues that, via sexual dominance, she has the power. All of this takes on a richer meaning and ironic tone as the professor uses it to seduce a student, who’s really an active (lacking conscious control) he’s hired to play out his fantasy.
The two story lines also deal explicitly, though very briefly, with the topic of identity (another key concern of the series). After the paralytic drug start to wear off, one of the women Terry has enslaved tells another, “We have names; remember that. We’re human, not his toys.” It’s so heavy-handed as to be clumsy, but I can live with a little driving the point home—especially given the nuances of this episode.
Earlier, after Ballard asks Terry what those women mean to him, we cut to the professor discussing medieval concepts of identity: “They were, in a real sense, nobody. The authors of some of the most important medieval literature had no concept of self-identity, as we might understand it. We think of them as anonymous; they didn't think of themselves at all.” He says this with Pope Gregory VII’s final words on the chalk board: “I have loved justice and hated inequity: therefore I die in exile.”
This was a very surprising little moment. The complexity hinted at by that segment, especially in juxtaposition with Chaucer and the broader concepts, is astounding. Whedon is, to a large degree, an existentialist, a philosophy born of the age of reason and fueled by a modern sense of individualism. But could it be that he (and/or his writers) see how our modern individualism tends toward isolation and selfishness and works against his higher humanistic principles? Could it be that a more medieval sense of self and community (very different from our own) could help make one better able to love justice and hate inequity? Or, does standing up for justice create isolation and foster a different kind of individualism? The very idea of a different concept of self being introduced is revolutionary and something I never expected, even from Whedon and company. This is postmodernism in the best sense on display.
Link
"The Wife of Bath's Tale" is one of Chaucer’s most important tales dealing with the role of women in the Middle Ages. Alisoun has married five times (even widows remarrying was controversial at the time). She was proud of her control over her first three husbands, tortures her fourth, and then battles the fifth over control. She tells the tale of an Arthurian knight, whose punishment for raping is to wonder the country and find out what women really want. He discovers that the answer is control over their husbands.
“The Economics of Love” is a reference to a scholarly essay on “The Wife of Bath” by Mary Carruthers. She argues that for women in medieval times, wealth was required for independence, and that autonomy allows women to chose who they love. In essence, money can buy true love; it may be the crucial ingredient. The phrase also has the implication of prostitution, and indeed medieval culture (including the Church) talked of sex as the “marriage debt” of a woman. Sex was, to a considerable extent, an economic transaction.
The parallels of Chaucer's tale with the two story lines (and the larger issues of the Dollhouse itself) are rich. Some of this is made explicit in the discussions between Echo/Kiki and the professor. He pulls quotes from Alisoun where she argues that, via sexual dominance, she has the power. All of this takes on a richer meaning and ironic tone as the professor uses it to seduce a student, who’s really an active (lacking conscious control) he’s hired to play out his fantasy.
The two story lines also deal explicitly, though very briefly, with the topic of identity (another key concern of the series). After the paralytic drug start to wear off, one of the women Terry has enslaved tells another, “We have names; remember that. We’re human, not his toys.” It’s so heavy-handed as to be clumsy, but I can live with a little driving the point home—especially given the nuances of this episode.
Earlier, after Ballard asks Terry what those women mean to him, we cut to the professor discussing medieval concepts of identity: “They were, in a real sense, nobody. The authors of some of the most important medieval literature had no concept of self-identity, as we might understand it. We think of them as anonymous; they didn't think of themselves at all.” He says this with Pope Gregory VII’s final words on the chalk board: “I have loved justice and hated inequity: therefore I die in exile.”
This was a very surprising little moment. The complexity hinted at by that segment, especially in juxtaposition with Chaucer and the broader concepts, is astounding. Whedon is, to a large degree, an existentialist, a philosophy born of the age of reason and fueled by a modern sense of individualism. But could it be that he (and/or his writers) see how our modern individualism tends toward isolation and selfishness and works against his higher humanistic principles? Could it be that a more medieval sense of self and community (very different from our own) could help make one better able to love justice and hate inequity? Or, does standing up for justice create isolation and foster a different kind of individualism? The very idea of a different concept of self being introduced is revolutionary and something I never expected, even from Whedon and company. This is postmodernism in the best sense on display.
Link
wiesengrund - 13. Oktober, 23:42
