![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ljwritesI started posting this to the Amon/Tarrlok Thread, before realizing it really wasn't the place for it and would earn me a delete at best, a ban at worst. (Although I don't know why I keep going back to ASN. Morbid curiosity as to whether there really is a lethal dose of stupidity?)
One thing I couldn't stand about the Noatok and Tarrlok story, besides how they killed off the only two interesting characters, was the vile implication (also pointed out by![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
kith_koby) that bad people have bad children, and also that victims of abuse are basically unsalvageable and have no way out but to destroy themselves. Which is... a really great message to send viewers, some of whom may be or may have been abused children. No, I can't even be sarcastic about this. FUCK YOU, BRYKE. FUCK YOU WITH AN EXTRA-LARGE CHAINSAW.
This is another place where LoK falls far, far short of the morality and complexity of ATLA. In ATLA we saw how Zuko, a victim of terrible abuse and the child of, like, the most evil man in the world, rose above his suffering and turned it into a force for good. We also saw how the abuse destroyed Azula, too, for all she was a bystander. Because abuse isn't only about the direct victim, it sends a message to similarly situated family members like siblings:This could be you.
Even if Azula had a predilection for power and manipulation, which she arguably did, it would be silly to argue that Ozai's treatment of Zuko wasn't extra motivation for her to toe the line. In fact, Zuko is the first subject she brings up when she realizes she is just another tile in the game to her father--you can't treat me like Zuko! That wouldn't have been her immediate, visceral reaction unless Zuko were always in the back of her mind, the fear of ending up like her brother. Witnessing and constantly living in the shadow of abuse is another form of victimization, and its effects are all too evident in Azula's story.
So ATLA showed multiple aspects of the effects of parental mistreatment, how it affects the victim and the onlooker, how painful and destructive it is, but how there is always hope. It's ultimately a story that leaves doors open, affirms life and its possibilities while not flinching away from the tragedy and suffering.
Compare that to LoK (excuse me a second while I go outside and scream), where you again have two abused siblings--but show no hope, no new beginnings, just murder-suicide and that's it. This isn't even a real coming to terms with the effects of abuse, because the brothers' stories were developed so hurriedly that all we could get out of it was that they had an evil parent, a sucky childhood, and thus are sad and evil and death is the only way out.
For all people coo about how sad it is that these poor guys met such a horrible end, in fact the double death is a copout of massive proportions. It's not an engagement with the horrors of an abusive upbringing, it's artistic cowardice, a refusal to deal with the issues involved. The ending basically sweeps the victims under the rug, oops, now they're dead and how sad is that, they were damaged goods anyway. Now that we can mourn them from a safe distance without asking uncomfortable questions, let's get on with the real story of how the heroes got their fucking superpowers back by fiat.
I can't say this enough: Fuck the creators and their smug little world.
Ever notice just how easy it is to determine good and bad in Legend of Korra? So far all the children of ATLA's heroes are not only good guys themselves but also have some really plum jobs. Tenzin basically inherited spiritual leadership from his dad; Lin was doing her mother's old job until she resigned; Bumi is a commander in the military of the city his father built; Iroh II is a general at a really young age in the military of the city his grandfather built.
In the real world, nepotism is considered wrong. In the Avatar world, it's evidently a virtue. Was Republic City really founded on an ideal, or was it just a scam by the ATLA heroes to secure good jobs for their children and beyond? Because the ideal seems to have gone awfully sour, but the intergenerational job security is working out great.
In this context, I can't even see Yakone's actions in such a bad light. The guy was an abusive ass, but maybe he had the right idea that the city was in the grip of a hereditary aristocracy that would never give up its power willingly and so had to be taken over by whatever means necessary. Amon and Tarrlok in their different ways seem to have taken on that idea, which bit of irony and complexity is one of the few things about abuse this show got right even if it's terribly one-sided. Oh, but we can't possibly have self-made men taking power! They're all villains and must die.
(And lest you think we don't equate power with goodness, look at that word--"villain." The word comes from the Medieval Latin villanus, meaning "farmhand," which became the Old French and Anglo-French "villain," meaning "base or low-born rustic" or "peasant." The class-based pejorative degenerated into a moral pejorative because human beings are assholes who like to believe, for the sake of our own sanity and to avoid questioning our privilege, that suffering people deserve their suffering. At the other end of the spectrum is the word "noble," another equation of power with goodness. Good fiction questions and pushes back against this human proclivity. Bad fiction like Legend of Korra revels in it and indulges in such ugly justifications without question or self-awareness.)
Looking at it this way, the story of Legend of Korra could actually be the story of a powerful group of families holding onto their joint fiefdom and beating back anyone who would threaten their power. That's an interesting story, but unfortunately the creators don't seem to have the moral courage or artistic honesty to explore it. That one-sidedness is what makes LoK, at least in its first season, so hollow, because a meaningful story explores all the angles, goes into all the depths and complexities of its premises. Unless the other seasons are careful to take and deconstruct all the things the Book 1 narrative accepted without question, the subsequent Books will be just as empty as the first.
One thing I couldn't stand about the Noatok and Tarrlok story, besides how they killed off the only two interesting characters, was the vile implication (also pointed out by
kith_koby) that bad people have bad children, and also that victims of abuse are basically unsalvageable and have no way out but to destroy themselves. Which is... a really great message to send viewers, some of whom may be or may have been abused children. No, I can't even be sarcastic about this. FUCK YOU, BRYKE. FUCK YOU WITH AN EXTRA-LARGE CHAINSAW.This is another place where LoK falls far, far short of the morality and complexity of ATLA. In ATLA we saw how Zuko, a victim of terrible abuse and the child of, like, the most evil man in the world, rose above his suffering and turned it into a force for good. We also saw how the abuse destroyed Azula, too, for all she was a bystander. Because abuse isn't only about the direct victim, it sends a message to similarly situated family members like siblings:This could be you.
Even if Azula had a predilection for power and manipulation, which she arguably did, it would be silly to argue that Ozai's treatment of Zuko wasn't extra motivation for her to toe the line. In fact, Zuko is the first subject she brings up when she realizes she is just another tile in the game to her father--you can't treat me like Zuko! That wouldn't have been her immediate, visceral reaction unless Zuko were always in the back of her mind, the fear of ending up like her brother. Witnessing and constantly living in the shadow of abuse is another form of victimization, and its effects are all too evident in Azula's story.
So ATLA showed multiple aspects of the effects of parental mistreatment, how it affects the victim and the onlooker, how painful and destructive it is, but how there is always hope. It's ultimately a story that leaves doors open, affirms life and its possibilities while not flinching away from the tragedy and suffering.
Compare that to LoK (excuse me a second while I go outside and scream), where you again have two abused siblings--but show no hope, no new beginnings, just murder-suicide and that's it. This isn't even a real coming to terms with the effects of abuse, because the brothers' stories were developed so hurriedly that all we could get out of it was that they had an evil parent, a sucky childhood, and thus are sad and evil and death is the only way out.
For all people coo about how sad it is that these poor guys met such a horrible end, in fact the double death is a copout of massive proportions. It's not an engagement with the horrors of an abusive upbringing, it's artistic cowardice, a refusal to deal with the issues involved. The ending basically sweeps the victims under the rug, oops, now they're dead and how sad is that, they were damaged goods anyway. Now that we can mourn them from a safe distance without asking uncomfortable questions, let's get on with the real story of how the heroes got their fucking superpowers back by fiat.
I can't say this enough: Fuck the creators and their smug little world.
Ever notice just how easy it is to determine good and bad in Legend of Korra? So far all the children of ATLA's heroes are not only good guys themselves but also have some really plum jobs. Tenzin basically inherited spiritual leadership from his dad; Lin was doing her mother's old job until she resigned; Bumi is a commander in the military of the city his father built; Iroh II is a general at a really young age in the military of the city his grandfather built.
In the real world, nepotism is considered wrong. In the Avatar world, it's evidently a virtue. Was Republic City really founded on an ideal, or was it just a scam by the ATLA heroes to secure good jobs for their children and beyond? Because the ideal seems to have gone awfully sour, but the intergenerational job security is working out great.
In this context, I can't even see Yakone's actions in such a bad light. The guy was an abusive ass, but maybe he had the right idea that the city was in the grip of a hereditary aristocracy that would never give up its power willingly and so had to be taken over by whatever means necessary. Amon and Tarrlok in their different ways seem to have taken on that idea, which bit of irony and complexity is one of the few things about abuse this show got right even if it's terribly one-sided. Oh, but we can't possibly have self-made men taking power! They're all villains and must die.
(And lest you think we don't equate power with goodness, look at that word--"villain." The word comes from the Medieval Latin villanus, meaning "farmhand," which became the Old French and Anglo-French "villain," meaning "base or low-born rustic" or "peasant." The class-based pejorative degenerated into a moral pejorative because human beings are assholes who like to believe, for the sake of our own sanity and to avoid questioning our privilege, that suffering people deserve their suffering. At the other end of the spectrum is the word "noble," another equation of power with goodness. Good fiction questions and pushes back against this human proclivity. Bad fiction like Legend of Korra revels in it and indulges in such ugly justifications without question or self-awareness.)
Looking at it this way, the story of Legend of Korra could actually be the story of a powerful group of families holding onto their joint fiefdom and beating back anyone who would threaten their power. That's an interesting story, but unfortunately the creators don't seem to have the moral courage or artistic honesty to explore it. That one-sidedness is what makes LoK, at least in its first season, so hollow, because a meaningful story explores all the angles, goes into all the depths and complexities of its premises. Unless the other seasons are careful to take and deconstruct all the things the Book 1 narrative accepted without question, the subsequent Books will be just as empty as the first.
