#i still love Lexa the most tho don't come for me 😔

[butmakeitgayblog]

Okay so I tried watching TLFOAH and throughout the first episode I got this really crappy vibe (not from the performances) and it didn't match with the book. At all. I watched through to the end and walked away for a bit. It it hit me what the problem was. Male director. This series is not really from the point of view of any one woman or her experiences or her pain. It took the apologetic parts of the novel and centered them by making the suffering of the women especially Alice seem incidental. Nobody's fault. Generational trauma. Repetative. I know not everyone will share that opinion but the fact that they put a totally unnecessary sex scene in (none of it from Alice's point of view she's an object) nullified the whole story for me. Alice is a pretty object through the whole thing. She's an object to her grandmother. She's an object to the men around her. She's an object to herself. The series doesn't reckon with any of that, it just gives a patent "happy" ending. This really seems to be the trajectory of ADC's career too. Pretty object, patented storytelling. This story really could have benefited from a woman director who gets it what a shame.

I tell ya, I read this about 4 times, each time myself walking away for a but to kind of think it over, and I'm still just not coming up with the same conclusions you are. First and foremost, that line about her career? Totally unnecessary. It was tasteless, and I'm not sure if it was just rage bait or some personal bone you have to pick with women being unapologetically attractive, but frankly you can leave that shit at the door because I'm not gonna entertain it. She's an actress. Actresses by and large get paid to be pretty. If you don't like that, fair enough, but that's something you need to take up with Hollywood casting, not actresses trying to make a living. She's going to take the roles she likes (such as this one, which also happens to be the best role of hers to date), but also the ones she gets cast in. It's not like every actress has the luxury of turning down jobs no matter what your personal preferences are. You talk about being reductive and objectification in the rest of your message, yet really treaded the line on some sexist/misogynist sounding bullshit right there. Be better. That said, I'm not flat out saying you are wrong in regards to this show, but I don't think I got that impression of it at all.

I mean, it was stated from the start that the show is about generational trauma. It's about how victims of abuse can end up falling into and continuing cycles of abuse. I can't side by side compare to the book, but taking the show at face value, that's exactly what it did, so I'm not entirely sure what it is that you wanted from it.

Fundamentally, I'm not even sure what you're talking about the suffering being incidental and not painted as anyone's fault? It was. In her childhood years, it was Clem. In her adult years, it was June and Dylan. There was no ambiguity there. They were all shown as manipulative people who hurt those around them. June's motives may have been different, but she was still shown in a harsh light. In fact something I appreciated was that they didn't write Clem any sort of boo-hoo-woe-is-me sad boy backstory as a kind of way to write off or pseudo-excuse why he did what he did. He was just an abuser. He liked to hurt people, particularly the women in his life, plain and simple. He abused and took advantage of Candy, then June, then Agnes and his daughter, and there was no attempt to try and soften him to pull away from that fact.

Another thing that I appreciated was the fact that they didn't focus the show on the abuse itself, but rather the damage that's left it's in its wake, and the healing process that needs to be done. I don't think that approach lends itself to rendering the trauma itself incidental, but rather it shifts the focus from the violent acts themselves and more toward the victims left to pick up the pieces and move on with their lives. Too often in these cases people get so caught up in the story of the abuser and the whys and the whats and the white noise that comes with those high octane emotions. But the reality is that those scars last long after the dust has settled, and unfortunately by then usually nobody's really paying attention to the victims anymore because it all becomes about the sensationalism of the violence and the abuser. (*Cough* D3pp and Heard *cough* Tory and Meg *cough*)

That's what I think, in part, this show was trying to portray.

Now, switching gears here, while I had my own issues with the sex scene, I do somewhat have to push back on what you're saying here because while I could've lived without it, I do see what it was saying. I don't think Alice was being used as just a visual sexual object, but rather it was giving insight into where she was emotionally. Only, what? Days prior? A week or two at most? She had found out the man she loved - her childhood best friend mind you - had fallen in love with someone else. And that's after months of thinking he'd just left her behind, only to find out it was her own grandmother who had betrayed her and sent him away "for her own good". The girl was emotionally flailing and desperately searching for some sort of connection. She was desperate to find solace and comfort and thus, glommed on to whoever made her feel something that wasn't pain and betrayal.

That's a very understandable human emotion given the situation.

Enter Dylan, shithead extraordinaire, who she immediately thinks is hot. They have an instant attraction and he pursues her just as hard as she pursues him, and in the unstable emotional space she was in, it's entirely understandable that she'd latch on to someone like him. He makes her feel wanted and desirable, he's a fresh start and a way to leave behind her past. It would be so easy to fall into someone like him when you're already looking for a place to land to begin with.

However, really look at that sex scene.

Really evaluate it.

She's not even looking at him.

She's not holding him close or wrapping her legs around him, there's no prolonged eye contact or heavy kissing. Nothing that speaks of actual intimacy. She's disconnected from him and the moment. To me that is Alice's point of view.

You may take that as her being portrayed as just a sex object, but in my opinion it spoke volumes about what was actually going on with her internally, even if she herself was not entirely aware of it (although tbh I think she was.) Even the upside down camera shot leaves the viewer feeling off kilter, almost as though it's mirroring just how off balance and desperate she is, right along with how everything between them was from the start.

I don't think it's fair to reduce Alice down to just an object because at no time did I get that impression of her at at all. She is young woman who has had everything in her life ripped away from her over and over again. She's not stupid, just unsure of exactly who she is. She thinks she's a murderer, she thinks everyone who has ever loved her either hurt her, left her, or betrayed her. But even through that, she's cunning, and clever, she thinks on her feet and has a will to keep going. Just because she makes some bad decisions, that doesn't negate all those character traits.

And again, they don't soften Dylan as a character. I've actually had A Lot of conversations about the portrayal of Dylan and I think I've landed somewhere around: I didn't need to know much more about him. Would I have liked to maybe see more of the building blocks of their relationship? Yes. But in the same breath I think that might've only given them space to try and paint him in a more forgivable light when that did not need to happen. Because in the end this story isn't about the abusers. It's about the women who have to escape them. It's about the quiet after the storm and what they do to pick up the pieces. And I liked that they didn't try and make these women, Alice included, into these fake af perfect renditions of what we think victims should look or act like. Sometimes they're messy, sometimes they make bad choices, sometimes they're strong and resilient fighters who never turn back. Sometimes they do. One is not more worthy of sympathy or safety over another. They make their own choices and they're still allowed to be humans who are imperfect and none of that somehow diminishes what it is they go through even after the abuse is over.

And honestly I'm not sure of you and I watched the same finale. The whole point of June's letters and the Flowers burning down her statue that Clem made was about Alice and June and all the other women taking back their power and their stories from those who hurt them. It was point blank saying that not only is this June giving Alice back that power she had so mistakenly taken away as a family member who loved her and thought she was doing best but had gotten it so so wrong, but also it was her passing the torch on to Alice. Giving her the ability to literally burn Clem and Dylan, even June herself if Alice so chooses, out of her life and start over from the ashes (the Phoenix metaphor from the very beginning.) To start writing her own story.

I don't actually see that as a happy ending per se, but more a hopeful one. So very few times in life are we given the chance to wrap up our traumas and wounds in a pretty bow and have everything feel perfectly resolved. More often than not the people who hurt us don't ever have to answer for it. More often than not the worst people in this world don't suffer any sort of repercussions for their actions or are made to pay a price. What usually happens is we're left with the scars and the frayed edges of what we went through, and we do our best just to keep going, trying to make peace with it through the pain and injustice. I feel like that was a much more realistic - albiet whimsical for narrative purposes - ending than a lot of other options that I'm sure got tossed around the writer's room.

Now all that being said, yeah I think it would've been interesting to see a woman's directorial take on it. I'm not sure the changes they would've made but for the sake of it, it would've been interesting. Knowing what's been said though, I feel like this director cared a lot about the story as it was, not just what he wanted it to be, and added elements that I loved that weren't in the original script (such as the ending fire that tied up all the symbolism.) But also considering the author herself was hands-on through the entire process and the fact that the showrunner and producer was a woman (actually there were 6 women executive producers on this as well 3 women screenwritersand 2 women editors) worked closely with Holly, I think what got into the show was more or less what the author wanted. I don't think the director skewed what the overall message was, at least not in the author's eyes it seems. So while I may read the book down the line and adjust my views accordingly, for now I'm going to trust that Holly Ringland and Sarah Lambert had a very steady hand on the reins of this thing.