|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 1, 2005 19:36:20 GMT -5
Wow! I never cease to be amazed by the eloquence and insight of the posters on this board. This discussion is not only deeply analytical, but it's also diverse AND civil!! How often does that happen online?!
Like many who've already posted, television has played a healing role, among many others -- mindless diversion included, in my life. At a time when I was recovering from a traumatic event and didn't even feel I had a context or language to apply to it, I found both (quite unexpectedly) on television.
I'm not sure if that has anything to do with the enjoyment I get out of analyzing LOCI. But I do know it's not the only reason I enjoy analyzing the various episodes. Sharing thoughts, impressions and interpretations with the posters on this board is an added dimension of fun. I always learn from what others have to say about the shows, and enjoy getting an idea of the wide variety of impressions different viewers come away with. Maybe what I'm saying is that, yes, I believe that for a lot of viewers, myself included, LOCI has been more than just entertainment. But the fact that it's also entertainment is fantastic.
goreneames, I sometimes read the Uni board, but don't post there. From what I've read, there is much less interest in the down-to-the-bone kind of discourse that often goes on here. Not that that's a bad thing (as Seinfeld might say), it's just different. Anyway, after reading your post, I stopped by the Universal Board and read the Death Roe thread. I can understand how, not being familiar with Sirenna's posting style/history, her post may have come across as insulting, particularly coming in the midst of a vigorous discussion about DEATH ROE (over there) and another vigorous discussion of SHIBBOLETH (over here). However, I appreciate the fact that you apologized to Sirenna. I also appreciate the insights you've shared on this board.
|
|
|
Post by goreneames on Apr 1, 2005 20:20:00 GMT -5
Metella,
You're quite right that I have little experience posting on boards with Sirenna, but am hopeful that will change. Also, I didn't mean to suggest that I don't watch television for diversion, I do. I just don't have enough interest in those programs to want to post about them on message boards.
LOCIfan,
Thanks for the kind words, and thanks especially for offering them to me today!
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Apr 1, 2005 23:58:31 GMT -5
I thank everyone for their posts and civility, and especially Techguy and Observer for their honesty and guts.
I enjoy analyzing and speculating on things such as LOCI--indeed, for me it's a form of entertainment. And I believe it's possible for something to be both entertaining and art. The dancing of Fred Astaire, or the musicals of Stephen Sondheim, for example, I believe are forms of art that are entertaining but also signs that humans do have a touch of the divine about them.
I don't think that LOCI is great art, but it is a very well-made television program that has moments of greatness in it, most clearly in Mr. D'Onofrio's performance. It's possible to enjoy this program on many levels--as a police procedural, as a whydunnit, as a psychological thriller. I also like to think of it as an examination of the life of a troubled but gifted man who's attempting to bring order to a chaotic world.
I mentioned the musicals of Stephen Sondheim earlier in this post. I'm a great fan of Mr. Sondheim's work, and have frequently encountered critics of his work who say they dislike what they see as his turning the musical away from pure entertainment to a more serious form. Usually they're referring to the musicals of Rodgers and Hammerstein when they become nostalgic for this "entertaining" show. But Rodgers and Hammerstein's shows are full of dark moments. Laurie, the heroine of OKLAHOMA!, is on the brink of sexual awakening and terrified of it; CAROUSEL is the story of an abusive relationship; SOUTH PACIFIC is about racism, etc. Yes, one can enjoy these shows for their glorious songs. I believe one can enjoy them even more for their intelligence and courage.
I think the same can be applied to LOCI. Yes, the show can be enjoyed for its puzzles, for D'Onofrio's stylish performance. But I think it's far more enjoyable and enlightening to delve deeper.
Two bits and then some, and perhaps more ruminations later.
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by Metella on Apr 2, 2005 6:21:08 GMT -5
goreneames: good point about watching some stuff and being entertained/enjoying it; but not caring enough to post about it - like my closet Judge Judy fix that I feed when I can; who tells each time they eat nasty candy? but it is fun once in a while to sneak in some extra candy.
|
|
|
Post by Sirenna on Apr 3, 2005 15:53:16 GMT -5
Graciousness, insight and courage are certainly hallmarks of this board because of all of you. I'm so glad I found this creative space!
TV cannot heal us. All the posts so far have said so. Yes, it can change us, enlighten us, turn us into creative, imaginative beings. (Creativity is high on my list of what makes up the magic of being human.) But you've all, without exception, said you need other outlets to be healed.
What prompted my frustration was, in part, around Beatrice as a sympathetic character. Whether she is or not is not my bone of contention. Everyone is entitled to have their own relationship with her. It was the posts saying, in effect, that she should have been drawn sympathetically and, particularly what attributes would have made her more likeable. The assertion was that because she blackmailed her father, because the majority of posters (although I'd surmise not the majority of general viewers) found her unlikeable that this somehow translated into an insensitivity on LO:ci's part in how to portray victims and victims of abuse, even going so far as to call it a stereotypical, gratuitous use of the issue.
What TV does is allow us to escape, intellectually and, most profoundly, emotionally. In and of itself this is therapeutic because it gives us a few stress free minutes, like uninterrupted sleep does.
But the only way we can enjoy this is if what we see on TV is what we want to see, only if it re-inforces our ideal of how we want to see ourselves. Physcian, heal thyself can be misguided.
If what we see is in anyway challenging to our psyche, in other words if an abused person, watches the abuse of Beatrice and is appalled, then it is simply like re-living the nightmare over again but this time with the betrayal of not being able to rely on the one sure thing: that the show would give us comfort. This is where TV can potentially harm us.
|
|
|
Post by goreneames on Apr 3, 2005 23:28:16 GMT -5
TV cannot heal us. All the posts so far have said so. Yes, it can change us, enlighten us, turn us into creative, imaginative beings. (Creativity is high on my list of what makes up the magic of being human.) But you've all, without exception, said you need other outlets to be healed. Recognizing that television can change us is, to me, tantamount to recognizing that television has the capacity to heal. Change is the essence of healing, even when the change is entirely internal (such as changing the manner in which an individual views an event or others or him/herself). A sympathetic character need not be likeable. Beatrice could've been the devil incarnate and, if well drawn, I'd have been happy. If a character's actions and motivations make psychological sense so that I, as someone coming at the character from the outside, can understand and empathize with him or her - regardless of whether or not I end up liking the character - I'm happy. An example of this is Tagman from "Want". I found him grossly UNlikeable, but I could empathize with him because I understood his actions. The mere fact of victimization doesn't render one "good" or "bad". My problem with Beatrice was that the story didn’t provide me with the information I needed in order to understand her behavior. She’s presented as immature, regressed and unemotional about her husband’s death. Then turns on a dime into a kind of giddy, illogical, sadist. Goren doesn't shed light on the pathological dynamic of her relationship with her father or how her husband fit into that dynamic. Her portrayal was cartoonish and ridiculous. It was sloppy writing.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 4, 2005 10:33:10 GMT -5
Healing comes in so many different forms, and what one person may find healing, another may not.
I don't see much difference in the idea that television can heal than in the notion that a book or theater experience or even an overheard snippet of a stranger's conversation can be healing. Not for everyone and not at all times. But when an experience speaks to a person, and the meaning the person finds in the experience is healing, then it IS healing. It's in the eye of the beholder. Individuals are infinitely diverse and resilient. And our ability to perceive experiences in multiple ways and for multiple purposes is part of our creativity.
|
|
|
Post by Observer2 on Apr 4, 2005 13:08:40 GMT -5
Graciousness, insight and courage are certainly hallmarks of this board because of all of you. I'm so glad I found this creative space! I agree. I’m touched and honored to be in the company of the people who have shared so deeply on this thread. Thank you all. Sirenna, I think we may just have such different takes on some of these things that what I say doesn’t communicate clearly to you at all. I didn’t write about what attributes Beatrice “should” have had, or what ones would have made her more “likeable.” As far as I’m concerned, her behavior was all understandable – to someone who already had a good understanding of the effects of incest. I never said Beatrice should have been portrayed in a more “sympathetic” way. But, since a large number of people among the general public already find incest victims who don’t report or leave by their early teens incomprehensible, and even complicit, I *am* saying that if the writers chose to use an incest victim as a plot device, there should have been some context given to make her behavior seem more comprehensible, and less complicit, to the average viewer. Looking at your other points, it seems that my sense of the value of television in general is somewhat different than yours. Nothing heals us by itself – not TV, not support groups, not prayer, not therapy – even courage and determination can’t do it without outside support. Healing – from whatever form of trauma – is generally a complex process that involves many different factors. So yeah, in a literal sense, nothing “heals us.” But what several of us on this thread are saying is that, given certain levels of writing, directing and acting, television sometimes can – and does – play a surprisingly large and powerful role in the healing process. While I agree that the escape function of television is useful, as others on this thread have also mentioned, I don’t think that’s the only value of television – and I certainly don’t think that television is only helpful when it shows us “...what we want to see, only if it re-inforces our ideal of how we want to see ourselves.” Nor do I think it’s harmful when it shows us something different or more challenging than that. As to your last point, it’s true that an abused person watching abuse reenacted can be triggered into flashbacks. But there was little in the Death Roe episode that would have been likely to have that effect – certainly nothing that had that kind of effect on me. You seem to think that I was “appalled” because watching that episode was “simply like re-living the nightmare over again but this time with the betrayal of not being able to rely on the one sure thing: that the show would give us comfort.”That was not the case. In fact, watching the episode, I did find comfort in the reactions of the detectives. But even if I hadn’t (as I often don’t on other shows that deal with sexual abuse and/or incest) it would not have done me any harm. I do not avoid television that is “challenging to our psyche” -- either in positive or in negative ways. Shows that are challenging are often ones that I learn from. What bothered me about Death Roe was not my own reaction to it, but the fact that incest was dealt with in the script in a dismissive way, and the incest victim was portrayed in ways that – because they were not explained or given context by Goren – were likely to reinforce negative attitudes towards incest victims that are already common in the general public (except when the victim is a very small child). But in this, and in our general attitudes about the potential values of television, I guess you and I will just have to agree to disagree.
|
|
amnesic
Silver Shield Investigator
Posts: 66
|
Post by amnesic on Apr 4, 2005 13:42:08 GMT -5
i think i need someone to explain to me what is meant by the term "healing". and is it as subjective as it sounds!
|
|
|
Post by janetcatbird on Apr 5, 2005 0:10:18 GMT -5
To those of you who have posted your own personal stories, please know that I am amazed and in awe of your courage and honesty. I am honored to know and interact with you.
There's been some personal mess in my life for the past couple years that I know I need to work through. So while I don't think I've been healed yet--whatever the definition, I have to work through a good deal of pain and anxiety that is interfering with a healthy life--I have at least come to recognize the situation. I even have a pretty good idea of what it is that's making me feel so lousy, I just don't know how to fix it.
That said, my feeling is that different things hit different people different ways. Each person has their own unique wiring and buttons (for lack of a better phrase) to get pushed. For me, I haven't found a way to overcome my problems, but various media "entertainments" have given me that jaw-dropping freeze of "Oh my god, that's me. That's what I'm going through". Mainly I just recognize myself and my emotional status, even if external circumstances for characters are completely different. And for me, that is a major step, because while I'm not a control freak, I get very unsettled when I don't know what is going on. So, the recognition, while not necessarily a sense of control, is bittersweet in that "Well, now I know what the problem is," is more settling and manageable and, in a weird sense, more reassuring than "What the hell is wrong with me?!?!"
Television has had a few episodes that made me think, but it has not had the influence that other people described here. A few movies entailed self-awareness, but nothing that changed my life. For me, personally, it's music and books. I read one novel last year that kicked me in the stomach--I literally was in a daze the entire week after I read it. And that triggered the worst wave of all, a period I am just now getting over of isolation and despondancy. Music, I guess because it works all of your brain at once. While I typically am verbally oriented and I focus on lyrics, there are a few tunes and melodies that I just want to scream out at the top of my lungs, because they tug beyond the rational onto gut instinct and emotions. As Van Buren said in "Aftershock" of the Mothership: "We each seek absolution in our own ways".
|
|
|
Post by domenicaflor on Apr 16, 2005 20:56:30 GMT -5
I would like to thank the membership yet again (never enough thank-yous) for being so committed to open and intelligent discourse about important topics. I happened to be wandering around the NBC Law and Order websites and found an article on the SVU site with an online interview with Christopher Meloni and Mariska Hargitay. Of particular note, I wanted to copy a portion from Hargitay's responses which I think addresses this thread very well: ****** (To Mariska Hargitay...) You are also a rape crisis counselor in real life. Have you given input on the show's procedural aspects? In this episode ("Doubt") we show what the victim and the suspect go through after the crime, as far as gathering evidence, the rape kit and everything. We took this show to another level. I made (executive producer) Neal take a tour of the rape treatment center. Because once I became a counselor I could say, "No, this isn't how we do it." So to have this show educate the way it does is great. To possibly have rape victims watching and thinking, "If you guys are talking about [rape], then it's okay. The shame is off me." That's huge. What type of fans do you have? My fans aren't people who say, "Oh, you're so pretty", they are people who say, "You changed my life" and "You give me strength." And it makes you step up. You have to step up. It's not about me anymore, it's about them. I have a job to do. ********* Full Interview: www.nbc.com/nbc/Law_&_Order:_Special_Victims_Unit/interview_cast_p1.shtmlD.
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Apr 16, 2005 23:31:54 GMT -5
I've never read an interview with Ms. Hargarity (you think I'd learn to spell her name) in which she appeared anything other than bright, concerned, and utterly without ego. I like this woman.
Or it could be she has really great PR people.
Patcat
|
|