Tumgik
#see also; more morbidly: the age of the child protagonist
carnation-damnation · 8 months
Text
Man for a game that required you to read between the lines and force you to parse through bits and pieces of lore in order to get the full story some Undertale fans sure love to reject canon because it isn't shoved directly in their faces
8 notes · View notes
ouchmaster6000 · 5 years
Note
RE that zim/anpanman post - while Anpanman doesn't get as dark in tone, Baikinman regularly tries to kill people and has done things like tear pages out of an anthropomorphic book and make food-based characters spoil and rot. Not as gruesome as doing it to "real people" characters but that's not the point really; the idea behind it is still there, so Japanese kids are just very accustomed to an alien being that sadistic within the context of their series
First of all, I should point out I agree that Japanese kids are probably used to seeing more intense stuff on TV than american ones. Alot of shows like Yu-Gi-Oh, One Piece, Digimon and even Pokemon occasionally are known for having stuff edited out of the english dub. A pretty decent number of shonen series just flat out get marketed to an older audience in the states (stuff for kids in japan being aimed at middle schoolers here, stuff for teens being aimed at adults etc.)
Hell, I’m fairly certain Dragon Ball Z and Tenchi Muyo probably would have been marketed to adults in the US if it came out today too (Former for the violence, latter for the sexual stuff) and only got away with as much they did because they were on cable, and the idea that kids anime could appeal to adults simply hadn’t occurred to most western producers at that point.
I just…. Dont really think Anpanman is a good example of this? I also dont agree with the original poster’s Zim comparison. Granted, I suppose I probably should watch the show, but from everything I have seen of it, such as discussions on Bogleech’s website, it doesn’t seem that much edgier than standard kids show? Definitely a bit weirder and more violent than most preschool shows in the states, but overall, I doesn’t sound like Baikinman is much worse the your average kids cartoon villain.
I mean for starters, its pretty standard in kids media for killing and mutilating for non-human characters to be allowed, especially if said characters don’t have blood or flesh.
The obvious example is robots. Star Wars, Transformers, Doctor Who, Superman, Green Lantern, Teen Titans, Xiaolin Showdown, Age of Ultron,  - There are way too many shows, comics and movies to list that eithor aimed at kids or families, that have robots and cyborgs being torn apart in ways that would be pretty graphic if it happened to humans or animals.
Digimon is a related example - The only reason the franchise is allowed to have as much death as it does is because 99% of the fatalities happen to digital lifeforms that dissolve into pixels upon death.
Hell one of my favorite movies as a child was the original Toy Story, and all the scenes where Sid was mutilating and blowing up his toys would have gotten a hard R rating if he was doing it to people. I’ve heard a lot of people compare Sid to Dr. Frankenstein, but with toys, but at least Dr. Frankenstein used parts that were already dead (as opposed to tearing/cutting apart still living people) and put them together in a shape roughly resembling a human. Really, Sid’s toys are less Frankenstein and more human centipede.
I also remember Fosters Home for Imaginary friends having a similar reoccuring theme of “food friends” meeting a worse fate than Anpanman. This included half eaten, traumatized anthropomorphic food dreamed up by kids in stuck in fat camp, or a talking pizza dreamed up by the bully character and eaten and killed just seconds after being “born”
So, although obviously dark comedy, Baikinman doing those things isn’t really anything new for childrens media. Neither, is trying to kill someone, since a lot of cartoon villains have made serious attempts to kill people, they just never succeed.
But Zim successfully mutilating and removing the organs and body parts of human children is definitely not normal for a kids show.
Another issue I took with Revretch’s post was that she wasn’t just talking about Zim the character, she seemed to me to be claiming that “Invader Zim” the TV series wouldn’t be seen as edgy just because the main character is similar to Baikenman… but thats not really how it works? You can’t necessarily tell the tone of a show, just from the nature of its protagnist.
Like, by that logic, Courage the Cowardly Dog should be one of the most light hearted and kid friendly shows out there, but in actuality the world he inhabits is much, much darker, scarier and more surreal than Courage himself is.
Its true that, though the writers/network let Zim do much worse stuff on screen, there are plenty of other childrens cartoon characters whose personality is pretty similar to Zim, or whom are a lot creepier and more threatening. Mojo Jojo and HIM from the powerpuff girls are good examples of both of these, respectively. 
In fact, Powerpuff Girls, Xiaolin Showdown, Codename: Kids Next Door, Danny Phantom and plenty of other childrens cartoons all have both villains that are similar to Zim, and villains that are considerably more evil, creepy or serious than Zim ever was, but the tone of these shows, overall, is a relatively more optimistic one, where the main protagonists have more or less happy lives and good always triumphs over evil in the end.
Hell, even Gravity Falls, with its use of creepy horror imagery, occasional forays into adult humor, and having one of the most infamous big bads in childrens animation (and easily my favorite from the last 10 years) remains a fairly optimistic show at its core, about family and summer adventures.
This is not the case with Invader Zim, which is a show where humans as a species are portrayed as so comically stupid and mean spirited that, even if Zim somehow successfully killed or enslaved them all, it probably wouldn’t come across as a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
A show where the Irkens are depicted both commiting genocide, and electrocuting a disobedient slave on screen, and whose society is such a dystopia they are forced to udergo intense military training from birth and generally assigned roles for life based on genetics.
A show where the elementary skool is portrayed as a collection of all the absolute worst aspects of public school, both in terms of how its run, and how the kids treat each other, exaggerated to an absurd degree.
A show where a reoccurring joke character is a homeless man, who got taken advantage by a fast food chain, paid in free pizza and a room in the back of a resturant, became morbidly obese (Yes, this is Bloaty’s canon origin story) and was last seen in the original show sobbing uncontrollably because he hates his life.
Also, although this was obviously changed significantly in the comics and the Enter the Florpus special, in regards to what was portrayed in the original show, its really not difficult to make the argument Dib’s own dad and sister don’t give a shit whether or not he lives or dies.
Of course, this was all done for very dark laughs, as well as to create a setting that was just the right balance of humor and nihilism that the viewer could choose to either root for, laugh at or sympathize with either Zim or Dib without really worrying about the actual moral implications of either sides goals.
I’m not saying Zim is the edgiest show out there, comedic or otherwise. With stuff like Warhammer, Berserk, Venture Bros, Metalocalypse and all manner of gritty 90s anihero comics, Zims pretty light hearted and goofy in comparison.
But for childrens animation? Aside from some of the 90’s “grossout” cartoons like Ren & Stimpy and Cow & Chicken (which varied a lot in quality, imo) I can’t really think of any others that come close (Maaaaybe Billy & Mandy, but I think its too tonally inconsistant, with a lot of episodes being pretty standard cartoon slapstick.)
Wow, I sure did type a lot. Sorry about that. But Invader Zim is one of my all time favorite shows, and fictional villains one of my favorite topics, so I feel like I have a lot to say about them.
7 notes · View notes
justthefangirl · 8 years
Text
The Muskgrave Problem: How Season 4 is A Return to Sherlock’s Gothic Orgins, or A Defense for Season 4
This discourse/meta/analysis or whatever you want to call it will contain spoilers for Season 4. So, if you haven’t seen it yet, I suggest going to PBS.org or the official site for BBC’s streaming (or wherever you can find it honestly) and giving it a watch. Once you’re ready, click the read more below.
Before I go into the main meat of my argument, I’m going to get some things out of the way that have little to do with the Gothic themes in this season. The following are just my opinions, and if you’d rather get right to the heart of the matter, skip, by all means. But let’s address the other elephant in the room: Mary.
I was initially excited about Mary Morstan because in Doyle’s original works, she was an enjoyable figure. She was clever enough that Holmes admired her and was tolerant of her presence in his and his flatmate’s life, but brave enough that Watson completely fell in love with her. And while this worked for a Victorian society, in today’s culture, someone that good at making two previously homo-romantically charged characters suddenly accepting of her (and wanting her) is a bit  on the 'Mary-Sue’ side of writing. Moffett and Gatiss (Mofftiss from this point on) saw this, thus they created someone who would be morally gray for the audience: someone we could come to like and find intriguing, but making them just dark enough that we would be able to forgive our boys for indiscretions (Sherlock’s drug relapse, John cheating, etc). Was it executed well? Not to me. I hated the ‘secret assassin’ angle, and I will never accept it. Hopefully someday someone can fully give Ms. Morstan the roles she deserves.
 NOW! On to the matter at hand. You see, my friends, after The Six Thatchers, and the adaptation piece that we all expect in this series, it became clear that Mofftiss wanted to return to the Holmes stories’ Gothic origins, and they hit everything on the head perfectly. How? Well, let us consider that there is a checklist in nearly every Gothic novel or story that must be hit in order to be considered part of that genre. That list includes, but is not limited to:
1.      An isolated setting where the protagonists are kept away from society.
2.      An antagonist who is mentally unstable, yet also morbidly alluring.
3.      Family secrets (aka the Mad-woman in the attic),
4.      Taboo obsession (usually sexual; incest, homosexuality, open sexuality, etc).
When you hold this list up to the full scope of the show, the Euros story-line, the meat of the season from the tail-end of Season 3 on to this season, ticks everything off.
First, the isolated setting. Moftiss gives us two for the price of one by starting us off in Sherrinford, the island prison built for Euros Holmes. Like the titular Ortranto in The Castle of Ortranto, and Castle Dracula in Dracula, we have this massive fortress, as Mycroft calls it, situated far from any other society and outside contact. It is filled with rooms and corridors that seem designed not only to contain but confuse people, especially after Euros gains control of the facility and turns it into her own little maze of horrors. This is perfectly in keeping with the labrynthian castles and fortresses found in Gothic novels, which keep our protagonists away from help or other forms of society, and completely at the mercy of those who run/own the property, thus inciting terror upon them as well as the audience (be it reader or viewer). The second location is Muskgrave Hall, which falls into the same category as Wuthering Heights in Wuthering Heights, Thornfield Hall in Jane Eyre, and Allerdale Hall in Crimson Peak; a country-side manor that is ruined and falling apart, surrounded by the memories of the dead (or in the case of Muskgrave, fake grave-stones to simulate the dead. The Holmeses seem to like their Gothic decorations, hm?). The story actually begins and ends here, since Euros is the one who started Sherlock’s long fear of ‘sentiment’ and his belief that ‘alone protects me’ by murdering his first best friend, Victor Trevor, here, as well as attempts to murder his friend/lover John Watson here. Euros’ obsession with her little brother begins and ends here (more on that later). Could we have done with one isolated place? Sure. But many other Gothics, such as The Italian and Zofloya often change locations while still keeping the feeling of isolation and dread going, and so too did Moftiss, to great effect.
Next is Euros. Ah, Euros Holmes. She ticks off the next three items on the Gothic list, and she does them all with flourish. Not only is she the family secret (naturally) due to her insanity, but she’s also a strangely alluring, wicked character, much like Moriarty. How? Some, I’ve seen, criticize her ability to control people as ‘magic’, but the truth is, many Gothic antagonists are able to manipulate people to their whims even though they are clearly disturbed or evil. Look at Rosario/Matilda in The Monk, Zofloya of Zofloya. They convince their victims that what they’re doing is sound even though these two characters are literal embodiments of The Devil. Consider Doran Grey in The Portrait of Dorian Grey, as he justifies his life of hedonism and self-indulgence; you know it is wrong, but you can’t help but want to actually listen to them. When one adds in Euros’ standing as a genius and the myriad of mental disorders she suffers from, she stands up perfectly to the task as a Gothic antagonist.
So, with her skills, Euros could create her own cult, honestly, but instead she uses her genius to attack Sherlock. Why? Well, that is where we can tick off the last subject: the taboo. Traditionally, this subject is reserved for sexual based taboos in Gothics, such as Ambrosio’s desire for his (admittedly unknown to him) sister in The Monk, King Manford’s desire for his daughter-in-law in The Castle of Ortranto, and Lucille Sharpe’s love for her brother in Crimson Peak, but also can encompass homosexual/homosocial desire, as it does in Frankenstein. But here Moftiss shies away from the sexual side of that obsession, but that doesn’t make it any less obvious that Euros loves her little brother to obsession because they are so much alike. Being a year apart in age, with similar levels of genius (though hers is superior), she obviously had more in common with him, had a deeper attachment. They could practically have been twins, given what the audience is shown. But due to her natural detachment from empathy, and her other mental disorders (so many to mention they require their own meta, and I’ll leave that to others), she was unable to form that same attachment to anyone else. That makes her different from Sherlock, who clearly could and did form other loves and friendships. For the Gothic antagonist, anyone who stands between them and the object of their obsession must be eliminated. That is why she killed Victor Trevor, and why she wanted to know about Moriarty, why she spied on, and then tried to kill John. They all stood between her and Sherlock, her ‘favorite’ brother.
But, you may ask, why involve John? Why did she try to lure him into an affair? Part of her observation on Sherlock, really. To see why he liked Watson so much. Just as she didn’t know why Sherlock seemed to prefer Victor to her as a child, she wanted to know what made John Watson interesting. Hence how she learned about his moral code; when he wouldn’t cross the threshold from text-affair to an actual one, she learned he had a moral standard—a weakness. And, again, in Gothic antagonist fashion, she used it.
So, then, we come to the traps. The Game. Why do we have them? Some have said that Euros’s games are too much like the Saw films, but, I say, one they’re missing that Saw is also quite Gothic (another discourse for another time) and two that Euros had to create this over-the-top game. Not for her own ego, or to prove she was clever, but because of, again, her obsession with Sherlock. As a child she wanted to give him puzzles, and when he wanted to be a pirate, she wanted to be one, too. She has only ever wanted to ‘play’ with Sherlock. So, when Sherlock became a detective, after she saw the sort of ‘games’ he liked now, she adapted so she could play too. First she tried playing as the victim, as seen when she pretended to be Culverton Smith’s daughter. She presented herself in a way that would get her noticed (a female John Watson; clearly she’s read the blog), and followed him as he deduced what happened. She then swapped that role out for that of the mastermind—the ultimate game, the only way she could see of being with her brother. When those did not work, she went back to the beginning; she took him home to make him come to her room and spend time with her. That is the depth of Euros’ obsession for Sherlock, and it is beautifully, masterfully Gothic.
I know many are dissatisfied with this season, but I found it to be a delight. After the disappointments at the end of Season 3 and the stutter of the first episode of 4, having this return to the Detective Novel’s Gothic origin was a delight for me. Mofftiss clearly did their homework in order to tick off the tallies they did on this story line and, while I admit they could have done more if they’d had the chance for a 5th season to drag it out a bit, I’m glad they did what they did, and with how they did it. There are in fact many more Gothic tropes that were done by this season, and while I’d love to list them all fully, that would take ages. Right now, I’m going to stop here, and enjoy what, for me, was a satisfying season.
 TLDR; Season 4 was a return to the Gothic roots of the Detective genre, and deserves a little more credit than most are giving it.
� ��%�
9 notes · View notes