Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes, extremely. Especially given how layered the lesbian characters tend to be. OITNB gets lauded for its complex LGBT storylines and diversity, but it’s hard to praise them when there seems to be a deep gay male resentment written in there.
I have praised OITNB to people for its diversity, but I can’t do that in good conscience any more – not until they fix their gay male portrayal issue. They made a big deal of Piscatella being gay for no apparent reason. It wasn’t relevant to his storyline. All it did was serve as fuel for mockery. When the prisoners made tasteless comments, it was acceptable, simply because it was Piscatella and he abused them. But the dialogue needed to distinguish it from homophobia by making it clear that they were only trying to attack what they perceived as Piscatella’s weak point.
The opening of that flashback with Alison and her husband sitting at a diner, eating, and discussing various issues in their home life with quick wit was perfect. What better way to de-otherize Muslims than to show that they’re just like every other family unit in America? Then it went down the polyamorous route and it quickly turned into foreign territory.
Exactly. The unfortunate thing is that many viewers will come away thinking that polyamory is somehow common to all Muslims and this will reinforce the ‘otherness’ perception.
[adrotate group="5"]I don’t know if my comments about S5 were overly negative. It just feels like OITNB has slipped from its own high standard. Disappointment is the word that keeps coming to mind. So far, I haven’t read anyone else’s comments but yours RG, so I don’t know if the fandom feels similarly. But it’s a bad time to feel let down by Orange, especially as Sense8 was cancelled and Orphan Black is on its last season. Anyway, I’ll post a few more thoughts about Piscatella and Alison tomorrow.
–And this year we don’t have Sophia because of CBS’s “Doubt” which is a REAL shame given how quickly it was axed off network TV.
I missed Sophia, Sister and Healy. Cal too. And wasn’t Lolly going to make a reappearance?
–Linda from Purchasing. Did she really need a flashback? Or storyline?
Flashback, no. Storyline, yes. Linda’s careless attitude towards the prisoners was carefully built up in S4, and her ending up in prison was great karma.
–Where does S6 go from here?
I’ve been wondering how they’re going to handle everyone being split up. Also, will Leanne and Angie burning prisoner records have any significance? I presume that everything is digitalised, but there’s a small chance that some things aren’t. Finally, one thing that is almost certain is that the Alex/Kubra conflict will be revisited. This was confirmed when the video of Piscatella breaking Alex’s arm was posted online. It should be interesting as long as it’s significantly different from their storyline in S3.
OITNB S5 disappointed me. It’s hard to admit this. After S4, I was SO excited that I binged S5 over two days.
There are several storylines that are well thought out, consistent, and emotionally satisfying. There are some dangling stories that really need to be clipped for the sake of brevity, and then there are the storylines that appalled from a story perspective and from a cultural one.
Agreed. For me, S5 is the worst so far. It had a number of problems. Firstly, the prison mosaic they were going for didn’t work. SO many stories felt like pointless filler, and this included some of the backstories. Secondly, S5 piggybacked off the built up tension of S4 and felt like an endless series of payoffs. There was not enough suspense built up in this season itself. The ending fell completely flat and was neither suspenseful nor emotionally satisfying. Finally, I agree with the point of culturally problematic storylines.
Grade: C+
Positive thoughts
– Taystee was a hero this season.
– The way that Cindy, Alison and the other girls took care of Crazy Eyes even when she was being difficult was heartwarming. As tempting as it must have been, not once did they snap at her.
– Speaking of Crazy Eyes, it’s good to finally know that it’s autism that’s the issue. I suspected as much, but wasn’t sure.
– As awful as it sounds, I’ll admit it – it was satisfying to watch the guards being dehumanized. When I watched Stratman having a panic attack over his bathroom issues, I remembered Blanca having to stand on a table for two days. When I saw McCullough looking terrified, I remembered how she chose to protect Humps instead of Maritza. Caputo was the only exception. But I agree that it dragged on.
– Red/Blanca vs Piscatella was excellent. Funny, realistic and suspenseful. It was the only storyline that played out in a completely satisfying way from start to finish. Piscatella himself is a separate matter. But Red trying to take him down made a lot of sense and was completely in character.
– Both Gloria and Maria’s stories were great. It was interesting to watch the internal conflict of loyalty to prison mates against family play out.
– Fig and Caputo going at loggerheads was amusing to watch.
– Finally, Ouji’s impressions of Lorna, Nicky and Red were pure gold!
Ambivalent thoughts
– All that went down with Judy King was a mixed bag. It wasn’t bad, it just dragged on with a lot of to-ing and fro-ing and kind of fell flat in the end.
– Soso dealing with her grief was well done, it just got a tad boring at times. But there were some good conversations in there, and it was pleasing to see her return to her activist self towards the end.
– Same goes for Baxter and his guilt. Boring but highlighted how dreadfully bad our society is at dealing with intense feelings. Everyone told him to repress them and get on with it. And people wonder why mental illness is skyrocketing.
– Aleida on television was ok, although at her stupidity was more cringeworthy than humourous.
– Nicky and Lorna and Lorna’s pregnancy was all fine, but it didn’t spark my interest. I’m just glad Nicky/Lorna is over for good.
– Linda adapted to prison surprisingly well and earned my grudging respect. But like many other storylines, her relationship with Boo dragged on. In the end, it wasn’t even satisfying to see bottles being thrown at Linda. What I wanted was to see how her prison experience affected her life in the outside world. I hope we get this in S6.
– Humps’ demise was grisly, even for a psychopath like him.
Negative thoughts
– I did not like the Piper/Alex relationship at all. The house playing got boring. When Piper finally joined the riot and became interesting, Alex started being a witch. I have even greater reservations about the proposal. Personally, I hate it when ideas like “love is pain” are romantised. Piper and Alex frustrate me. I love that the main romance of the show is a same sex couple, but their relationship is so unhealthy that I just can’t jump on board. The healthiness scale crept upwards in S4, but now they’ve regressed again.
– Alex’s aloof and patronising attitude towards the riot angered me. It’s fine that she wanted to sit out, it was just her attitude. She was like, “People will die!” Then Piper correctly pointed out that no, MORE people would die. That about summed it up.
Also, Alex’s guilt over bloody Aden got really old. It was self defense – he was sent to kill her for heaven’s sake!! As for Lolly, she confessed to Healy. If Alex had owned up, they’d BOTH have gone down for it which would not have helped. I know that guilt is not rational, but it’s especially incongruous in Alex’s case. She was a drug importer for crying out loud! Did she think those drugs were going out into the world to create health and harmony?!
–Doggett. It’s interesting reading up thread and what we said about Penns last season, especially in regards to Coates. I *hated* this story line this year. HATED. Like, I can deal with a weak villain that doesn’t make a lot of sense (Piscatella) but what I can’t stand is a storyline like this one where a woman who was raped begins to have a serious relationship with her rapist, including physical and emotional intimacy, without having serious inner turmoil over this. What were the writers thinking? Especially with Doggett’s last scene of the season where she’s in his house waiting for him, full of domestic bliss. Is it because Boo moved on to Linda and Tucky felt rejected and so she sought out Coates for solace? I dunno but it did not please me at all.
– Agreed 100%. This was just awful, and even worse because it was on OITNB of all shows.
–Piscatella. Oof; what on earth. I thin S5 would have been so much better if Piscatella wasn’t just a villain for the sake of villainy and so that the show could have a real villain instead of a set of ideas, like in S4. The problem is that Piscatella’s villainy doesn’t make any sense. His one flashback doesn’t help me understand his misogyny or his deep hatred for all inmates given that his boyfriend was an inmate. He hates a very specific inmate, at a very different prison and it doesn’t really translate to his hatred for Red–hatred so extreme that he held her family in a locked room and tortured Red! Does anyone else think the show went a bit far here? I know it’s always towed the line between comedy and drama but this one struck me as jumping off the comedy cliff straight into HBO level drama.
– Agree with this also. OITNB already had a psychopath – Humps. We needed Piscatella to be more complex. It seemed like they were building up to his motivation, with all the demeaning comments about his car, his hobbies, his hair. But it went nowhere. His flashback simply confirmed that he was a psychopath.
I also find both the character and his storyline culturally problematic. OITNB has had two significant gay male characters so far. One was a adultering, embezzling politician and the other a misogynistic, abusive guard. Both hurt women with impunity and were given no sympathetic motivation. Does anyone else find this problematic?
Furthermore, some of the comments regarding Piscatella made me uncomfortable. For example, when Red told the girls about her plan, Alex said, “What, you’re on a gay witch hunt now?” And Piper replied, “No, didn’t you hear, only BOY gays.” Intentional or not, the implication here is that it’s ok to discriminate against gay males. I expected better from OITNB.
– Finally, there was Alison. It’s wonderful that the show has a Muslim character, complete with a hijab. All the dialogue about prejudice and whatnot is highly pertinent. So if the goal is to increase acceptance of Muslims, why on EARTH put your only Muslim character in a polyamorous marriage?!! As progressive as the OITNB audience is, I suspect polyamory is still too alien for most of them. The fact that it didn’t work out made it even worse. It made Alison look foolish in addition to being culturally unrelatable. They ended up destroying much of their good work with a flashback that was completely pointless.
Even though this discussion is over, I want to add one final thing – a link to Screwball’s essay about whether Rumple and Milah should have skipped town.
Should Rumple and Milah have moved to another village?
It needs to be in this thread because there is some thoughtful commentary on several of the issues brought up here.
You probably should not make this assumption as you don’t know me. Maybe I am looking at this from someone who grew up in poverty and fought their way out. Maybe I am looking at this from the point of view of someone who understands the struggles and the biases of small town living being in one of “those families”
Agreed, this assumption isn’t ideal. I made it because I was trying to make sense of some of the comments you and others made, which I couldn’t find any other explanation for. No offense intended.
Victor Frnakl has a outstanding book called “Man’s Search for Meaning” about the meaning of life under extreme circumstances that talks about this, finding the meaning of life under the most miserable conditions and understanding that we do have power even when we don’t think we do.
I haven’t read Frankl’s book, although I have heard of it. There are many books and techniques out there for coping with the difficulties of life and empowering oneself. But not everyone is educated with this information. Therefore, it is unfair to blame them when they fail to apply these principles in their own lives.
Since we’ve been talking in circles somewhat, I’m going to focus on depression for a bit. According to that DSM V quote, it can manifest as a response to a significant loss. In Milah’s case, she became a social outcast, which means she lost a significant amount of social support, so it fits with the definition. Let’s also look at her situation from the perspective of risk and protective factors.
A risk factor is defined as something that increases your likelihood of getting a disease or condition. A protective factor is the opposite. Each individual is different, so the there is variation, but below are some very common risk and protective factors. I’ve highlighted those that apply in Milah’s situation.
Risk factors
– Family history of mental illness
– Chronic physical or mental disorders
– Trauma
– Loss of a loved one
– Relationship stress
– Little or no social support
– Low socioeconomic status
– Being a member of the LGBTQ community
Protective factors
– A happy and stable childhood
– Close and positive relationships with family
– Supportive friends and community
– A sense of purpose
– Pursuing activities that give you joy
Looking at those lists, Milah has several confirmed risk factors and no confirmed protective factors. The lack of social support is a particularly big one. Not just lack, but ostracism in fact, as they were dishonoured. Have you watched or read ’13 Reasons Why’? It’s a nice illustration of the devastating impact being an outcast can have on the psyche. This Wikipedia article on social rejection is also a useful read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_rejection
As for behaviours, it’s difficult to say as we don’t see much of Milah. I believe there are signs (feeling that life is worthless, drinking, recklessness), but these are not conclusive. Also, you and others have stated that Milah doesn’t appear depressed. I presume what you meant is that her general demeanor doesn’t come across as particularly sad or lethargic. This is true. But I know from experience that this can be the case.
I used to sit next to this guy at work for many months. One day, he got promoted to a better job and left. Three weeks later, we learned that he’d committed suicide. Everyone was totally shocked. He’d always seemed fine – talking, getting animated about things he was interested in. At his funeral, I learned that he’d struggled with depression for a long time. I wondered afterwards if there were signs I’d missed. But even now, I can’t think of anything beyond the fact that he had insomnia. So the moral of the story is that depression symptoms can be impossible to spot unless you can observe someone in an up close and personal manner.
Milah is a minor character, so we’ll never know conclusively whether or not she had depression. Ultimately, what you conclude is up to you. But I hope that I’ve presented at least a reasonable case for why it might be so.
Ok, your post is long and I may have to respond to it in pieces, but here goes…
Again I am talking from a Western point of view but I disagree. Does your environment play in this role? Yes but ultimately it is the parents responsibility to be the best parent they can be. That does not mean they are perfect it means that they stick around, try hard, and use the tools that they have to give their child the best life they can.
But how can they be the best that they be if they are debilitated somehow by the environment? It can be either physical or mental. Let’s say a family’s water supply contains high levels of heavy metals. Over time, these may cause something like adrenal fatigue for a parent, until eventually, they cannot get out of bed to care for their child. Would you blame the parent for this? No, because the environment impaired their ability to function. How does this relate to Milah? I’m saying that her environment, especially being a social outcast, impaired her ability to be a good parent.
That Sounds Good. This is completely true and I have absolutely no problem with it. If you can’t change it you need to accept it, If you can change it you need to try to do so.
Huh! I’ve read this sort of philosophy in self help books. Personally, I find it preachy and ineffective. This is why I’d never dream of saying this to anyone. But I know that it works for some people, and you must be one of those people. Maybe it comes down to a difference in style.
Don’t get me wrong everyone in life needs a shoulder to cry on now and then, they need a sounding board, someone to vent to, someone to just listen. They also need to not wallow in their problems if they have the means to try and make them better, now I am not talking about major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, or any other psychological disorder which requires intense therapy. I am talking about problems in our lives that we have power over and can change. Even if Milah does not think she has any power in this situation, she does. She is in control of being the best mom to Bae and working hard so his life can be better than hers, she is in control of how she treats her husband in front of the people he tries to sell his cloth to so they can’t see their abuse reinforced by his wife, she is in control of her decisions to not drink and instead of take care of her child. Victor Frnakl has a outstanding book called “Man’s Search for Meaning” about the meaning of life under extreme circumstances that talks about this, finding the meaning of life under the most miserable conditions and understanding that we do have power even when we don’t think we do.
When I talked of options for Milah, I meant options for making herself less miserable. It’s true that she can be a good mother or wife or start eating with her non-dominant hand. But none of these options make her less miserable. It’s like something Milah needs on a deep, fundamental level is missing. Society imposes the belief on us that a child’s happiness is should be necessary and sufficient for a parent’s happiness. Many parents will tell you that this is not the case. It is necessary, definitely necessary. Most parents cannot be happy if their child is not. But it is not sufficient. This is a key difference. Plenty of people need a something extra in addition to their child’s happiness in order to be happy themselves. It does not make them bad parents or bad people, it is just how they are. What that something is – well, that is different for everyone. It doesn’t have to be grand, and usually isn’t. Some need a little quiet time to themselves each day. Some need a friend to talk to once in a while. Others might need to feel like they have a purpose beyond their home life. Rumple seems to be one of the ones for whom their child’s happiness IS actually sufficient. Which is great for Rumple, but it doesn’t mean Milah is at fault for not being the same way.
So, returning to Milah’s choices…to make herself less miserable, I can only see two options for her:
1) Running away
2) Suicide
My point here is that she is not as empowered as you seem to be implying. If these are the only two choices available to someone to alleviate their suffering, then I’d definitely call them a victim of circumstance.
No Doubt, but if you do CHOOSE to become a parent you need to go into knowing that the child is your responsibility. You are going to make mistakes, and parents are human but to say that you are should not be judged by how you parent is ridiculous. You are and you should understand that and want to be seen as a good parent. And that judgement is not women’s alone believe me men are judged just as much as woman are now days.
My point was that people should not be judged EXCLUSIVELY on their parenting.
It is never okay to hurt a child either emotionally or physically. Do I understand how this happens? Yes. Do I demonize these parents forever? Depends on what they did, the circumstances they were in, and what they did to try and fix it. This is what I will say, is when this happens to a child it leaves scares (always emotionally and sometimes physically) and that is not okay. A child does not get to choose their parents so it falls on the parents to be the best parent they can be.
I don’t recall anyone saying child suffering is acceptable. What I’m saying is, to legitimise a child’s suffering does not necessitate throwing their parent under a bus. This brings us to the question of accountability. Parents are most definitely responsible for their child’s well being, but I wouldn’t say they are exclusively responsible. Parents are humans functioning in a particular environment, and that environment will affect their level of performance. This is where society, government and culture come into play. All of these things will affect a child’s well being because parents, as human beings, cannot be expected to continually overcome huge odds in order to fulfill their role. I mean, you can have the expectation, but it will be unrealistic and most people will fall short. So, either you pass judgement on all of these people as bad parents, or you work on improving the environment to help parents and children alike.
Now let’s get back to the Milah/Rumple/Bae situation. First of all, I notice that you’re very hard on Milah for verbally abusing Rumple, but you have not said one critical word about Rumple’s desertion, which was a big deal and had a significant adverse impact on Milah. I’m all for holding people accountable, but that should apply to everyone. Why are you not more critical of Rumple? This is a Rumple/Milah thread after all. What he did affected not only Milah, but Bae too. Bae got branded as the son of a coward. Their whole family became outcasts. It probably impacted their already limited financial situation.
This is what I will say: Milah made poor choices that hurt her family. Rumple also made poor choices that hurt his family. Both were responsible in part for their family problems. Both were also victims of circumstance, as was Bae. I think these statements are far more accurate and fair than your comments, in which you go on about Milah’s faults to the exclusion of all other factors.
If it was hard on Milah it was also hard on Rumple and Bae, which she abandoned and abused. Now I am not saying that the circumstances she was in are her fault. Life happens and you have play with the hand your dealt with whether you like it or not. I am sure she is not happy that Rumple made the choice that he did, but he did and she can’t change that now. She needs to deal with the situation she is in and not make it any worse by letting the whole town know Hey Yeah we are not a united front, please continue to abuse the provider of my family, because I hate him just as much as you do.
I really do not like this. You seem to be saying, “Hey Milah! I don’t really understand how hard your life is, but I’m going to tell you that plenty of people have problems, so just deal with it. I know your husband made your family outcasts by making a decision without even consulting you, but you need to suck it up. You can’t change it now. So stop being mean to him and stop airing your dirty laundry in public! Swallow your anger, repress your frustration and get back to the business of being a good wife and mother.” I’m not going to elaborate on why I find this offensive. Instead, let’s change a few of the words around and see if you would be happy to dispense the same advice to a different character.
“Hey Rumple! Life happens and you have play with the hand your dealt with whether you like it or not. I am sure you are not happy that Milah made the choice that she did, but she did and you can’t change that now. You need to deal with the situation you are in and not make it any worse.”
Depression is a mental illness that can’t be treated by throwing away your present life for a new one.
This is not how depression works. Telling an individual that “you won’t feel better by throwing away your old life for a new one” might work on a robot, but not a human. Depression simply does not respond to that sort of logic.
If she had depression we should also seen signs of it with Hook and in the Underworld.
Not at all. Depression can come and go. She might not have had it at those times. Besides, signs of depression can be hard to spot and are not readily apparent in all contexts.
I agree we are probably not going to agree on this subject so maybe we should both just leave it here although you have given me things to think about and I hope I have done the same.
Probably not. I appreciate that you found it thought provoking. It’s been an intense discussion, and I didn’t expect to get as deeply involved as I did. I don’t expect anyone to like Milah. Nor do I expect her to be excused for her misdeeds. But I was triggered by some of the more outrageous comments that cast blame where it wasn’t warranted, completely dismissed the hardships of her lifestyle and essentially dehumanised her in a very harsh way. I found comments about her life such as
– It was actually fairly comfortable
– She had power over her own life and was in no way a victim
– I don’t care about her hardships, she deserved to die
insulting to underprivileged people who are in similar situations to Milah. I can’t help but suspect that Milah gets so little sympathy because her problems are a result of poverty which the vast majority of the audience don’t seem to relate to very well. This is why there is a gulf (and also double standard) in the judgments that are applied to Milah versus those applied to other characters.
OUAT generally relies on a kind of “common knowledge” (mostly based on pop culture tropes) to telegraph the details of EF’s social conditions – so it assumes we have a particular set of assumptions about medieval Europe, or feudal society, but the whole thing is kind of a mish-mashed construct, not a living breathing world.
The world building borders on the absurd. They didn’t even bother to give the different classes distinct speech patterns. It’s so bizarre to watch Ruby and Snow (a peasant and princess) talking to each other with the same accent, vocabulary and mannerisms. Also, the peasants come across as way too genteel. I can’t think of a single culture where there is virtually no difference in the speech and mannerisms between the ruling and working classes!
I’m not sure what I’m trying to get at — perhaps that actually trying to evaluate Milah’s state of being is a thankless task because OUAT’s worldbuilding itself offers very little by way of firm cultural coordinates. It’s whatever’s needed for that week’s plot.
True to an extent, but I still believe we get enough nuggets to support my points about Milah’s hardships and lifestyle. My depression claim is the most tenuous; I see evidence for it (“This isn’t living”, wanting to move, engaging in reckless behaviour such as drinking with pirates) but I know it’s far from conclusive. My reasoning is this: we know Milah used to care about Rumple and there’s enough evidence that she cares about her son. She apologises later to Rumple, and feels remorse about Bae. These things indicate caring and a conscience. Sure, there exist people who are simply narcissistic and selfish, but the sociopath/psychopath label doesn’t seem to quite fit Milah. In my experience, people who are capable of feelings and have a conscience need to be driven to breaking point to run away from their families. They may have depression, they may not, but basically they are in a place where the only thing more unthinkable than leaving is staying – it’s a dark place to be in. Slapping a label of ‘selfish’ on such people is just too shallow. It may be what OUAT expects us to do with Milah, but OUAT has always been unrealistic in terms of character motivation.
I get a bit twitchy when we try to apply our own conceptual categories (or diagnoses) to putatively different cultural or social milieus, whether we’re interpreting another society or historical period.
I believe it’s impossible to avoid doing this, at least to a certain extent. Fiction, at least emotionally satisfying fiction, always provides some sort of commentary on its audience’s world. The audience in turn, evaluates the work using a set of beliefs shaped by their own culture. We do this with OUAT all the time. Think of all those discussions we have about healthy relationships, toxic masculinity, empowered women etc. In all of these, we are “applying our own conceptual categories to putatively different cultural mileus”. We don’t have a full picture of how relationships work in the EF, nor about gender roles. But that doesn’t stop us from drawing conclusions about right or wrong, healthy or toxic. So this analysis of Milah is no different to any of those conversations. I see no problem in seeing her as representative of the underprivileged have-nots of our world.
Sure, the show’s incomplete world-building makes this type of analysis messy, but I believe it provides value. OUAT may be clunky as heck, but it provides the raw material for participants to provide all sorts of interesting insights about our own culture and society.
I’m going to post a more detailed response tomorrow, but I need to ask, which scene are you talking about here? I don’t remember watching this.
I re watched that scene also and we must see it in completely different contexts because what I saw was Bae sitting alone in the house and Rumple walking in with a basket of cloth like he just got home from work (market) and stating “Where is Mum, well she probably just lost track of time, grab your cloak, We’ll find her”
