![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
I was just fucking witcha...
Well, no, I wasn't, but apologies if my last post went a bit rambly and weird. Most you have never seen me rambly and weird, though in fact, dealing with people onna OG has made me go rambly and weird before in the past, but it was always about Rose. Must remind myself not to carry my righteous anger over from there to here, because it make NO sense out of context. Sorry, LOL!
Anyway, I kind of promised to explain what the righteous anger was about, so I'll do that now. As an aside, I AM planning on polling to see how widespread the interpretation of Ianto as just the teaboy/Jack's sextoy is, but it's not even really the fact that it is or isn't widespread that bothers me, it's the fact that the writing has even ALLOWED ROOM for that interpretation to exist that gets on my nerves.
So why does it bother me so much? Well, again, it's a question of characterisation. See, to me, interpreting the relationship as Jack using Ianto as a sextoy has a lot of implications for both characters, and it's why I say I don't think it's doing them any favours. The reason I got angry about it isn't because I'm so hugely defensive about Ianto, it's actually down to a few telling statements, statements that I HAVE heard elsewhere in other contexts, about JACK, not Ianto. And all that comes back to a discussion I've had here and elsewhere a few times, about Jack, and whether or not he is still, at this point in the narrative, the omnisexual slut type that he was perceived to be around the time of The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. The fact that the relationship between Jack and Ianto is open to the sextoy interpretation, in my mind, also immediately implies that it is possible for viewers to perceive Jack as THE SORT OF GUY WHO WOULD DO THAT. Harrassment, of a subordinate. Because that's what that boils down to. The thing that got me so riled up wasn't the fact that people think Ianto is the sort of guy that would allow himself to be used as a sextoy (I think that's a plausible reading if you view the show in a certain way, and I think, given the fact that Ianto hasn't really had a major storyline since Cyberwoman, barring the Jackanto story itself, it's understandable that some people might view him that way), it was the attitude of the posters in question, and of people I have spoken to elsewhere, of "Oh, that's just the kind of guy Jack is." Because, really? No. If the storytelling has allowed room for the interpretation of Jack, the leading man, as the sort of guy who would use one of his employees for sex, given all the fucked up power dynamics that that implies, then the character of Jack, with regards to his sexual/romantic leanings in any case, has not been properly put to paper.
And that angers me greatly, yeah. Because Jack, in everyone's big grandiose words is supposed to be this whole new kind of hero for the 21st century. Someone with a progressive and liberal attitude towards sex and sexuality. Someone like you and me (I would hope), who doesn't like to label people and thinks everyone should be free to explore whatever facets of life turn them on. Someone who will serve as an example to that small faction of 15-year-old boys who are squicked by teh ghey, and maybe open their minds a bit. And allowing room for people to see Jack as a guy who just puts it about a bit, who comes on to one colleague, is rebuffed and moves on to the next, really FUCKS THAT UP for me. That's why I was angry.
Am I making sense yet or am I still rambling? The hormones haven't worn off yet, I can never quite tell lately.
Anyway, I kind of promised to explain what the righteous anger was about, so I'll do that now. As an aside, I AM planning on polling to see how widespread the interpretation of Ianto as just the teaboy/Jack's sextoy is, but it's not even really the fact that it is or isn't widespread that bothers me, it's the fact that the writing has even ALLOWED ROOM for that interpretation to exist that gets on my nerves.
So why does it bother me so much? Well, again, it's a question of characterisation. See, to me, interpreting the relationship as Jack using Ianto as a sextoy has a lot of implications for both characters, and it's why I say I don't think it's doing them any favours. The reason I got angry about it isn't because I'm so hugely defensive about Ianto, it's actually down to a few telling statements, statements that I HAVE heard elsewhere in other contexts, about JACK, not Ianto. And all that comes back to a discussion I've had here and elsewhere a few times, about Jack, and whether or not he is still, at this point in the narrative, the omnisexual slut type that he was perceived to be around the time of The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. The fact that the relationship between Jack and Ianto is open to the sextoy interpretation, in my mind, also immediately implies that it is possible for viewers to perceive Jack as THE SORT OF GUY WHO WOULD DO THAT. Harrassment, of a subordinate. Because that's what that boils down to. The thing that got me so riled up wasn't the fact that people think Ianto is the sort of guy that would allow himself to be used as a sextoy (I think that's a plausible reading if you view the show in a certain way, and I think, given the fact that Ianto hasn't really had a major storyline since Cyberwoman, barring the Jackanto story itself, it's understandable that some people might view him that way), it was the attitude of the posters in question, and of people I have spoken to elsewhere, of "Oh, that's just the kind of guy Jack is." Because, really? No. If the storytelling has allowed room for the interpretation of Jack, the leading man, as the sort of guy who would use one of his employees for sex, given all the fucked up power dynamics that that implies, then the character of Jack, with regards to his sexual/romantic leanings in any case, has not been properly put to paper.
And that angers me greatly, yeah. Because Jack, in everyone's big grandiose words is supposed to be this whole new kind of hero for the 21st century. Someone with a progressive and liberal attitude towards sex and sexuality. Someone like you and me (I would hope), who doesn't like to label people and thinks everyone should be free to explore whatever facets of life turn them on. Someone who will serve as an example to that small faction of 15-year-old boys who are squicked by teh ghey, and maybe open their minds a bit. And allowing room for people to see Jack as a guy who just puts it about a bit, who comes on to one colleague, is rebuffed and moves on to the next, really FUCKS THAT UP for me. That's why I was angry.
Am I making sense yet or am I still rambling? The hormones haven't worn off yet, I can never quite tell lately.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2008-05-13 04:02 pm (UTC)(link)I think that a lot of the relationship is played out in subtext. The chemistry between them has been palpable from the start and there has been a lot of lovely body language moments, really something in each episode. As for Jack, he has a smile that he only uses for Ianto. His body language relaxes when he is alone with him. Also he can't take his eyes of him, and does often gaze in quite a dreamy way. While I love a bit of porn, and nice snogs, I think declarations and too much happy coupledom tend to be the death of a relationship in drama.
In KKBB Jack makes it clear that he has been thinking about Ianto and taking it further while away, that whole scene is lovely, and full of subtext. I almost feel that the Jack/Gwen dynamic is problematic due to the performances, much as I hate to say it, the problem with the engagement ring scene is an overlay of histrionics, I think it is easy to read too much into it that isn't necessarily there. It is a Chibnall ep, and he has made it clear that he sees the relationship between Jack/Ianto as romantic ( he said so quite clearly in the Fragments confidential).
I'm glad they don't have a bible. It has allowed Ianto to be developed, it has allowed Rhys to be developed, the writers have responded to onscreen chemistry and dynamics. One of the things I hate about a lot of those US dramas with the bibles is that you end up with pairings that have absolutely zero on screen chemistry.
no subject
Absolutely. I'm not campaigning for huge declarations of coupledom, all the things you say are true, and they're things I've seen, I just don't think they've been quite apparent ENOUGH to the audience as a whole.
an overlay of histrionics
LOL. Wordy McWordyword. It scares me that with the team as it stands, we're going to have more Jack/Gwen scenes rather than less, because the way John and Eve play off each other, it's just... eww. No. Bad OTT stuff.