Film Review: Spiderman - Into the Spiderverse

           Rare but precious are the times when I sit down to enjoy a story and midway through realize it's a story I've been needing to hear. 

         My latest viewing of Spiderman - Into the Spiderverse would be one of those times.

         Those that know me probably know that I've been going through a lot of changes in my life lately -- learning how to get car insurance, moving into my own apartment, trying to deepen my Christian existence, etc. 

          Hot tip: No matter what anyone may have told you in the past, those things are pretty intimidating. And especially more so for someone like me, who's main talent is overthinking everything into existential crises. Every day questions pop into my head like:

          "What if I can't pay the rent?"

          "What if I lose my job?"

          "What if my interests and dreams are all meaningless?"

          "What if I let everyone -- including myself -- down?"

          So it was a startling but comforting realization when I was trying to explain the whole premise of Into the Spiderverse to a friend and it came down to: 'Miles Morales [the main character] is a young man who is trying to find where he wants to go in life, but is intimidated by the responsibilities and expectations placed upon him. And then he becomes the next Spiderman.'

          And if you know anything about Spiderman, you know that with great power comes great responsibility.

          But what happens if your powers just aren't enough?

(All copyrights belong to Sony, MARVEL, etc. I don't get any money from this.)

Overview: Getting into the Web-head's Head

        We've been through dozens of Spiderman renditions throughout the years, but for myself, I find that the ones that linger the longest are the ones that don't necessarily focus on the Spiderman, but on the humanity of being Spiderman.

         To really do this with style, the filmmakers made the decision to heighten Miles' problems by comparing him with several other male authority figures and a pair of kids who are much more successful than himself.

         First there's his dad, a straight-laced, successful police officer, who pushes Miles to test himself and become a better man. 

         Then there's his Uncle Aaron, the epitome of cool, who takes him out at night to express his artistic nature by spray-painting subway tunnels and gives him advice on how to impress the girls at his new school.

         After this, due to a super-villain's reality-shifting machine complication, we meet the rest of the spider-gang, and through this start looking at Miles' situation through the lenses of their masks, and we can see their problems -- For example, one Spiderman explores the idea of an adult who has failed and disappointed people, and now has no idea what to do anymore. Another Spiderman explores the concepts of grief and survivor's guilt, and whether or not it's better to get close to people when your life is so dangerous.

       Oh, yeah, this is a kids' movie.

(All copyrights belong to Sony and MARVEL, etc.)
(Do not try at home.)

       And then there's the villain.

      Normally I'd say that if a villain isn't connected with the hero in some way, they won't work out, but in this case the Kingpin is a very compelling antagonist, as he embodies everything that Miles is not. He's in control, he has a vision for the future, he's confident, he's powerful, and most of all, he isn't scared. He can do whatever he wants. But that doesn't always lead to fulfillment.

Fair Warnings

     For the most part, this is a rather family-friendly film. There's the standard amount of superhero punching, kicking, and animated violence. However, there are two scenes portraying car accidents, one scene of a character being shot (no blood is shown) and two characters are supposedly crushed to death (neither of which are shown on-screen, but we can sense the result.) There's also a sprinkling of profanity, though mostly from the Kingpin and his gang, so you could take that as a reflection of their immorality (like ye classic novels of old.)

      Also, more as a general health warning, there are several sequences which include rapid flashing lights and colors, so if you have epilepsy, use caution.

Conclusion

       The classic adage goes: "With great power comes great responsibility."

           But nobody ever really talks about the alternative, "With great potential comes great adversity."

           Growing up is rough. It seems like everyone else has it down while you're messing up at every turn. And sometimes you actually are. But you'll never know what you can do until you try. It's a leap of faith.

           Consider this movie a hug to all those going through change.

           Plus, y'know, it's got more Stan Lee Easter eggs than any other MARVEL movie AND has some pretty cool twist villains, so if that's not going to convince you to watch it, I don't know what else would...

We read ANOTHER Amish romance (Part 1)

     Question: 

             If we were so disappointed in the last Beverly Lewis Amish romance we read, why are we reading another?

      Answer: 

               1. We're looking to see if the last one was just a fluke -- the obligatory bad stretch for authors -- or if there are consistent patterns in her writing. 

               2. It makes us so much more confident in our own writing.

      And no, Seasons of Grace was not a fluke. In fact, it was fairly good compared to this.

The Parting

    Nellie-mae Fisher is a young Amish woman in the 1960s. Her younger sister drowned earlier that year and the entire family is badly shaken because of it. But Nellie's grief competes for the spotlight with Caleb Yoder and his "admiring gaze". 

     However, Caleb -- a 'free-thinking' young man -- must make sure that Fisher family has no dark secrets in their past to appease his father before his attraction to Nellie becomes too serious.

     Meanwhile, in the midst of grief, Nellie's father, Reuben, discovers the truth of salvation and begins to question the traditions of their community.

The Characters 

     Oh, where to begin...

     There are honestly enough terrible characters to be their own blog post...

     We are introduced to Nellie-mae through a first-person prologue which begins with her asserting that her baking is far better than her mother's in every way. 

      That's basically all you need to know to about her personality.

      This attitude continues throughout the book, with Nellie condemning her sisters for being gossips, envious, weak-willed, and stout while she is clearly too good to fall prey to such vices. She's the perfect Amish woman -- hardworking and traditional, no matter how much she may pine for forbidden guitars to be brought to the youth gatherings.

      Also, every bit of her pettiness and self-centeredness is obviously fine because the other characters deserve it. Her older sister often leaves her waiting, so why not take the long route for an errand specifically to make said sister late for work?

      At least her characterization is consistent, as horrible as it may be.

      Caleb is a manipulative creep with the backbone of a pool noodle. Moving on.

      Nellie's elder sisters, Rhoda and Nan, are portrayed as jerks because they don't spend time with Nellie -- though, considering her personality, who could blame them?

      However, this is not to say they are without flaws. 

      Nan is snide and likes to spread discord among the family.

      Rhoda, well.... Rhoda's personality really gets fleshed out in the second book. Let's say that in this book, her terrible, shameful personality flaws are 'works for Englishers' and 'fat'. (Excuse me a moment as I go on a tangent about this. Considering the setting of this story, I can understand how working for 'Englishers' would be seen as not-so-great, but the way her physicality is addressed is just plain cruel. Don't get me wrong, obesity is very unhealthy, but it seems to be the style of these books that anyone not distinctly slender or lean is immediately 'plump', or 'ample', or "like a pumpkin about to roll off." Yeah. Obviously that will have no impact on young women of stocky build who read this. None at all.)

      I would talk about Suzy (the younger sister who drowned) but her character is only fully appreciable with the plot-twist development that happens near the end. 

     Nellie's older brother, Ephram, is an ice-blooded scum king. He and Nan are almost completely alike, except for the added bonus that he doesn't refer to his wife by name (using instead 'her', 'she', or 'woman') and oversees all her visits to make sure the conversation stays within his parameters of 'suitable for well-behaved Amish women.'

     Nellie's mother, Betsy, is exceedingly codependent on her children and has a rather creepy fascination with her granddaughter who resembles Suzy.

     Nellie's dad, Reuben, is unquestionably the best person in the entire family. His care for his family goes beyond just the physical needs, and he eagerly seeks to understand the Scriptures as well as he can and deepen his relationship with God (much to the disbelief and fury of their local bishop.)

     And then we have the subplot of Rosanna.

     Rosanna is Nellie-mae's dear friend (tells you a lot about her already.) She and her husband have not been able to have any children of their own, and this in turn has made her very discouraged. Now, I would sympathize with her except for what happens next. Her cousin Kate comes to her and cheerfully tells her that she's going to give her her next baby (with the context that she and her husband rarely agree about anything, but he readily agreed to this.)

(Property of Nickelodeon, not used for profit.)

   Then throughout the book Kate starts wavering about her promise, and Rosanna complains that it's so inconvenient and wonders what's wrong with her. Obviously she's never been a mother before, since she doesn't grasp the basic concept that a mother might maybe be emotionally attached to her children.

   Though Kate's caveat that they might keep the baby "if it's a boy" doesn't make me that sympathetic towards her either.

Alternative Title: The Worst Community on Earth

    I really hope that Amish society has changed since the 1960s.

    Problem is, researching it is nearly impossible. 

    I need to see if my local library's open yet...

    So in my review of 'Seasons of Grace' I mentioned that the community presented was rather cultish. Well, this community - of Honeybrook, Pennsylvania - makes it look like Sesame Street nextdoor to Panem.

    Honeybrook boasts a variety of attractions, including (but not limited to)

         - Churches where the sermons are only preached in High German, which nobody but the elders understand, so you've just got to listen close and you'll miraculously begin to understand what the words mean.

         - Be advised, you are only allowed to read Scriptures sanctioned by the local bishop, and we openly discourage meeting together to study and discuss the Scriptures independently, as such would be rebellion against our ministers, who are "divinely ordained" by drawing lots.

         - Social activities like laughing about animals literally being worked to death.

         - Courting traditions, which involve the young woman sneaking out of her house without telling anyone where she's going, who she'll be with, or how long she'll be gone, to go and wait for her beau out in the woods - ALONE. AT NIGHT. Once he arrives, they'll drive all over the county together, and maybe (if they're the more risque type) go find a covered bridge to do some necking in (Beverly's words, not mine.)

         - Embraced sexism! "God made boys to be tough and hardworking, and girls -- well, they were supposed to be soft and sweet and mighty submissive." (We would also hope that if any first-time mothers visit, their firstborn is a boy, because that's how it always ought to be.)

         Yup.

    Summary

    You know those nightmares where something horrible is happening and you know it's a dream, but when you wake up you're hit with the realization that it could be real?

    This book is like one of those.

    I could go into a whole tangent about how dangerous the romanticization of the Amish lifestyle is in general, but this... this would require deep study just to know how far that tangent would have to go. Maybe some other time.

    Due to overlapping circumstances, our reading schedule is sort of on hold right now, but our church library should be opening (hopefully) by mid-July, so we'll see what happens then.

    I hope a meteor strikes the town and only Reuben escapes. 

    That'd be so nice.

Movie Review: Tron Legacy

     Okay, to be upfront: I don't typically like reboots/remakes. Most of the time they're worse than the original, and are only useful as paperweights or cash-grabs (Disney's 2019 Aladdin is an exception, but I'll talk about that later.) 

     But I was willing to give Tron Legacy a try. The first one was pretty okay, maybe a 7/10 for me, so how much worse could the sequel be?

    Well... it's complicated.

Overview

     27 years after the events of the first film, Kevin Flynn has disappeared. Nobody knows why he would or why he could, especially not his son, Sam. 

    Then one day Sam finds out a message was sent from his dad's office in the abandoned arcade. He goes down there to see what he can find and is accidentally teleported onto the Grid. But this virtual world is very different from the paradise his father told him about in bedtime stories. The users are hated -- as they are said to enslave programs -- and a program by the name of Clu has risen up to be the overlord of a 'perfected' society. But Clu doesn't know where Kevin Flynn is either. So he's very happy when Sam is conscripted into the arena games. What better bait could he have asked for?

Story and Characters

    From the premise, I was a bit more invested in this film than the original (I'm sorry, Original fans, forgive me.)

    Part of the reason is probably because I really like stories with a lot of family dynamics and emotional growth, but the other part is basically because the protagonist's goal was a lot more consistent and impacted nearly every decision he made. 

    To be blunt, in the original film Flynn's goal developed from 'Prove I made the program,' to 'Survive the game,' which ended with him just getting the proof he wanted in the end. Sam's goal always stays fairly within the ballpark of 'Get dad back,' even as he's trying to survive, because what's the point of going back to the normal world if he can't have his father with him?

    However, his character arc seems a bit stilted in the end, as the ultimate decision of change isn't made by him, but forced upon him.

    I really appreciated the fact that his reactions to being transported to the Grid are incredibly realistic, though. Great job on that, director/screenwriter/actor team!

   Kevin Flynn's arc is a bit more satisfying, in that he goes from a self-preserving 'what happens will happen, just stay zen' mindset to actively pursuing goals for the sake of his son.

   Clu was a much more entertaining villain, as he has all of K. Flynn's traits, skewed by his ideals of perfection and mathematical calculation. But because of this, he comes off more as Kevin's villain, not Sam's, which makes their conflict really impersonal. For an example, when they find out Clu's reprogramming programs into mindless soldiers, Kevin is sorrowful, guilt-ridden, and horrified, while Sam's reaction is more along the lines of an American patriot.

   At least Clue does fight Sam, though.

  Also more connected with Clu and his crusade of perfectionism is the rebel program, Quorra, who has been living with K. Flynn as his apprentice ever since he disappeared. As far as obligatory strong female characters go, she actually wasn't that bad, because:

            A. She had a unique personality

            B. She had dreams and goals of her own

            C. When she caused a problem which risked all of their lives, she apologized for it

   (Man, that bar is so low...)

   

   However, above all this, I've got to say that the direction choices and editing stunted a lot of character appreciation for me, for instance:

   "Why is Sam just crouching on the floor for 15 seconds during this fight scene, watching programs get shredded apart? Oh, yeah, so we could have Quorra do that sick jump over him. I see."

Plot

   Genuinely not bad. Sam's an incredibly impulsive and emotion-driven character, so his decisions keep the plot moving at a steady pace, and the worldbuilding of the new Grid gives a lot of nice challenges.

The Fatal Flaw

   Generally I'd say this is a good example of the importance of music to a film. I understand that one of the main attractions of this film is that the soundtrack was composed by Daft Punk (who makes a cameo in the film) and it's fairly good, but it's overall tone is disconnected from everything on screen, floating above the film so it makes scenes that should be emotionally gripping fall flat. If your protagonist is screaming in fury/terror but the music sounds like something from a techno spa, it's not going to work.

   Also this film was smothered in the latter acts by a ton of Buddhist philosophy which was really distracting from what should have been the primary theme of a father and son trying to reconnect after years of separation and estrangement, rather than, 'Be zen, answers will fall into your lap -- Oh wait, you mean I've actually got to make decisions that require self-sacrifice and further abandoning my son? Uh, it's fine. He'll get over it. Because he'll learn to be indiff- I mean, zen.'

Summary

   I had high hopes for this movie. Then the second and third acts came along and slapped those hopes in the face. The visuals were nice, but no amount of computer graphics in the world can cover up a forced and bad moral theme.  

   Probably a film I'd watch again only to spark deep philosophical discussions with friends.

   5/10.

Movie Review: Tron

    You know what the biggest problem with legendary old movies is? 

     You really have no way of knowing what they're like until you watch them. 

     Because they're so popular, no one bothers to review them anymore, and most of them came out before 1984, so the only real ratings at the time were G and R (which wasn't really accurate until much, much later, which is why us kids got the VERY suggestive bar song in The Great Mouse Detective, but couldn't watch The Ghost and The Darkness, which is debatably less violent than Lord of the Rings.)

     But now I've gotten myself a subscription to a streaming service and guess what I found!!!

(Alternative title: Epileptic Triggers 101)

      Due to pop-culture and the sequel, you're probably familiar with the premise: A man gets transported into a computer, and there are epic Frisbee fights. 

      Sorry to bust the bubble, but only the first part of that really applies to this film. 

The Story & Plot

     Before we begin, a clarification:

     Story is the why characters do things, such as Frodo wanting to protect the Shire and the friends he loves.

     Plot is how characters do things.

     This movie is an example of all plot, minimal story.

     Early on, Flynn says he has to hack into Encom to prove that he created a game his boss is now taking the credit for, but nothing in the rest of the film reflects this moral conflict, except for the concept of the Master Control Program absorbing other programs to make itself bigger.

     Being pulled into the game, Flynn's focus abruptly changes to breaking the MCP so he can escape.

     Admittedly, I wasn't too invested in the tension because SPOILERS >> I knew a bunch of the characters make it to the sequel<< SPOILERS but also because the characters themselves didn't seem that invested in them either. Maybe it was just a thing of the era. 'When all seems hopeless, might as well go to your doom quietly, unless you're the main character!'

The Characters

   The characters are all pretty simplistic, but not horribly so. Despite what I said about the lack of tension in the previous category, the actors themselves are very good and have just the right amount of earnestness in their portrayals, neither being cardboard or melodramatic.

    Sark, though.

    Sark is the primary villain, tasked by the MCP to kill Flynn in the games. Sark boasts to the MCP that he's grown tired of fighting accounting programs and the like, but is too afraid to take on a user. So we end up with a villain whose specific task is to kill Flynn, but he and Flynn NEVER have a direct confrontation (except for when he's boasting about capturing Flynn, then saunters off.) 

    

The World

     The most popular view of Tron was about how it utilized computer-animation to portray the computer world, and, predictably, it's a bit underwhelming to us now, but I can see how shocking it would be to audiences back then.

      As for worldbuilding, I think I'd be able to appreciate it more if I was a programmer, because then I'd understand how the different programs function better. 

    I did like the detail that programs take on the appearance of their makers, and regard their makers as somewhat divine, because that makes sense, given the situation. However, if the filmmakers were trying to draw some real-world parallels with this, then it gets hairy later on when one of the programs asks Flynn if they [the users] have a plan, and Flynn says that there is no plan. 

Negative Details

   One scene.

   Flynn's ex-co-workers come to visit him and he makes several comments that imply that the female co-worker has had sex with him and that she is now having sex with the male co-worker (or at least is living with him,) and that he himself is willing to do it again. 

   That's it.

   I'm honestly surprised it's only that much!

Conclusion

   All in all, I'd say a pretty okay movie. Not very engaging, but alright. Probably a good sick-day movie.

   I'm hoping the sequel is better.

The World is Watching - How Should Christians Respond to Covid-19?

      I didn't want to write a post about Covid-19, but here we are, the times have brought us here.

      Unless you've been seclusion for the past six months, or are just stepping into the era of life when we're all more aware and concerned about the news around us, I don't need to give much backstory on the issue.

     Covid-19 is here, that's that.

      BUT that's not all that. Half of a pandemic is the pandemic itself, the other half is how we humans respond to it. And frankly, the majority response from the Christian field has been a bit disquieting.

      For credentials, I've seen everything in social media posts from likening the government's response to Orwel's 1984 society to posts about the recklessness of reopening everything immediately. Also I listen to the World And Everything In It morning podcast (not a sponsor, I just think it's cool.) I assume those on social media also are listening to the news, so this is not to discredit them, this is just to say that I am also paying attention to the situation, and this is my take.

      Disclaimer: THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL POST. 

      This is just me looking at the Bible, looking at the pandemic, and offering a theory about how we could properly respond.

     Part One: What is the Government's Order?

     So what actually is the government telling us to do?

     Well, in North Carolina, these things happened:

      - An order that no more than 10 people could gather in a home at a time
      - The playgrounds and schools were closed
      - Most big-name stores were closed
      - Restaurants only provide drive-through or delivery services
      - Bars were shut down
      - Grocery stores had varied responses (Whole Foods is a very different place from Lowes Foods at the moment.)
      - We were generally advised to stay 6 feet apart (however, this was not strictly enforced in parks)
      - Churches were shut down, but are slowly opening up again (yes, it took a federal judge to get us that part, but judges are part of government too.)

      Other states, from my understanding, are under very similar restrictions, but the rate of easing them is varied (my greatest sympathies to those in New York.)

      But are these orders unconstitutional?
      I looked into the bill of rights just now and the only amendment that seems to relate to these circumstances is the first.

     "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
                                                                                                                   - Bill of Rights, 1791

     As with most everything, let's look at the context.

     "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

     'Establishment' is primarily used today as a synonym for 'place' or 'building'. However, in the historical context of the bill, 'establishment' refers to the creation of a state government. Remember, this was written shortly after the United States split from a country with a long and bloody history of monarchs establishing state religions and persecuting those who didn't agree with it.

     Furthermore, even though our churches were closed, they were not ordered to dissolve. We still have the right to meet through live streams, conference call technology, and with small groups or individual brothers and sisters in Christ.

    "... or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press..."

    Now, Facebook and other social media platforms have taken the liberty to delete posts from their users spreading news about Covid-19 that they deem false or misleading, which is highly suspicious, but Pinterest does the same thing if you request it, and there is no record of the government actually telling them to do that as of yet.

    "... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    The Oxford comma is a wonderful thing, and can alter the meaning of a phrase so simply. However, as it isn't present here, my interpretation of the amendment is that the government cannot make a law preventing people from peaceably gathering to petition the government to pay for grievances that it (the government) has inflicted.

    But even if these orders are leaning on the rights, are they really telling us to do anything wrong?

   (My background did a weird thing after I pasted the following quote and I can't fix it, so... yeah.)

    Part Two: Rights vs Right

    One of the most disturbing things I've seen in response to our pandemic state is this quote from a Mr. Ted Nugent (who is evidently an American singer-songwriter) that was posted by a confessing Christian.
    Behold:

   “Why do I have to stay home just because 𝘆𝗼𝘂 are scared? How about 𝘆𝗼𝘂 stay home....𝘆𝗼𝘂 stay in 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 house indefinitely, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 wear a mask, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 socially distance yourself from me, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 avoid restaurants, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 avoid baseball games, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 stay off the roads, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 avoid malls and beaches and parks, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 believe the made up death numbers, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 believe the media hype, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 get your toxic vaccine while avoiding vitamin C, sunshine and the things God gave us to actually heal, I'm done playing 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 dumb game...I'm no longer staying in my house or catering to 𝘆𝗼𝘂 because 𝘆𝗼𝘂 are scared. I'm not wearing a mask and I'm not staying 6 feet away from you anymore because I'm not afraid of you. You are not my enemy and if I get sick, it's not because of 𝘆𝗼𝘂, it's because of me and my system..."

   .........
   .............
   *Deep breath *

   This is probably going to get me mugged outside a Texas Steakhouse, but I strongly disagree with this quote. Namely because while there's a lot of *yous* in it, the entire focus of it is *me*.

  'Why do I have to stay home just because you are scared? How about I tell you were to go, I get to go outside, I get to go to restaurants, I go to baseball games, I go to the mall and beaches and parks - by the way, you're an idiot - and I'm not going to do things because they make you feel better. I will invade your space because I'm not scared. I take responsibility if I get sick, but I don't care if I make you sick.'

  I find the masks very uncomfortable too. 
  I miss going to the movies.
  I miss having hugs.

  But I was thinking the other day, what does Scripture say about this?
    
   "And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that He answered them well, asked Him, "Which commandment is the most important of all?" Jesus answered, "The most important is, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God will all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these.""
                                                                                                              - Matthew 12: 28-31

   Christianity should not be a *me* real estate. If anything, the greatest hurdle of Christianity is dying to oneself (this is not to say self-abuse is right, but that's another blog for another day.)

   I find the masks very uncomfortable, but perhaps its best to wear them around those who are the most likely to have bad reactions to the disease - and who knows who that is in the grocery store.
   I miss going to the movies, but understand that if we open the theaters back up again without any restraints, there would be sold out shows everywhere and those same people who are likely to have bad reactions - who are most definitely also if not MORE depressed in this time - aren't going to be able to enjoy themselves or feel safe.
   I miss having hugs, but I'm not going to demand them from people, regardless of how they feel.
   I can hardly wait until we can all meet up and have fun again, but until then, we've got to keep our heads.

   Complying with the government orders about Covid-19 shouldn't be a matter of fear among the Christian community, but it should be one of love.

   "Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these."
                                                                                                                 - Matthew 6: 25-29

   A quick little fact: the hills of Israel and covered with rocks. It's hard to imagine so many rocks until you see pictures of it. And yet a few bright, beautiful flowers are able to grow in ground so harsh as that.
  This is exceptionally hard teaching to remember when you don't have a job, but there it is, in bright red ink.

   The world is watching, and what will they see?

Book Review: Sister of the Bride

     We've all been under a lot of stress lately, and we all need a break from the antagonism and the politics and the gloom - that and we haven't finished reading the next Beverly Lewis book we scrounged up. So, in the interim, I thought I'd review some books I actually enjoyed!

    Let's start off with Beverly Cleary's 'Sister of the Bride'.

    Honestly, I didn't even know this book existed until a couple weeks ago, which is odd, since Beverly Cleary was a big thing at the libraries of my youth.
    Boy, that makes me sound old...

    ANYWAY, 'Sister of the Bride' is the story of 16-year-old Barbara MacLane, her elder sister's wedding, and the lack of romance in her own life.
    Before you go running off, Cleary actually addresses the last subject very uniquely, in that this story isn't so much about romance, but rather growing up to be ready for romance -- a view seldom explored in today's stories.
   
     While there is a love triangle in play, the way it plays out is also interesting in that neither guy is wholly good or bad by the end. The one boy, Tootie (unfortunate, yes,) is attentive and compassionate, but struggles with self-esteem issues*. The other, Bill, takes Barbara for granted, but is sincere and goes above and beyond to apologize to her.

     (*Now, Tootie's self-esteem issues manifested themselves in a 'woe is me' attitude in the opening chapter, which manipulated Barbara into saying "I like you," which led to Tootie immediately asking her out to the movies, so at first I didn't like him, BUT can we collectively take a moment to thank Beverly Cleary for using this circumstance to show how uncomfortable a situation that is and the fact that just because you care about someone of the opposite gender doesn't mean you're in love with them AND that even if a person annoys you, you can still care about them (and vice versa.))

     The original publishing date was in 1963, so some aspects are very aged, but not so much as to be horribly distracting, and otherwise it's a nice example of what life was like back then.

     Overall, a simple, vivid book that once more showcases Cleary's gift of depicting growing up in the middle of chaos.

On Heroines (the Writer's Dread Terror)

    So I've been trying to write a novel for a while, but right now it's a trash fire, so I'm procrastinating on that and writing this.
    Might as well, one of my problems is a female protagonist.

   My Issues with Modern Heroines

   For the past several years, it seems that only two types of girls exist in fiction:
    1. The kick-butt warrior
    2. The love-interest

   Sometimes you'll get a combination of the two (say, in fantasy or science-fiction works) but for the most part a female character falls into one of those fields, and it becomes a trope.

    Now, before I go on, I do like some characters who fall into those tropes, such as Katniss Everdeen, Cosette, Wonder Woman, and Okoye.
   The problem with the pattern, however, is that it becomes exactly that: a pattern. From that, we end up with many generic characters that are easily interchangable . You could easily swap Snow White with Sleeping Beauty, or movie-version Ginny Weasley with Iron Man 2's Black Widow, and not much would change in the overall plot.

     Sometimes authors don't even seem to care about that. As long as a heroine can shoot and be the audience's eyes, that's all we need. Developing a personality just takes up time. Might as well just take a male character and change his gender, there's no difference, right?
 
    On the other end of the spectrum, some people say that if you have a female protagonist, the story has to be about them being female. I don't get that. We don't have too many stories with male protagonists just about them being male.

     But an even more frustrating trope (to me) is how female characters are depicted as perfect, be that as a male-fantasy 'she was the ideal woman', to the hyper-feminist 'she is a juggernaut of power, don't question it!'

   I'll be the first to admit I'm a perfectionist, but this creates a HUGE problem.

   The 'ideal woman' is just insulting on many levels...

   "You're all I ever wanted. You're beautiful!"
   "Thank you. But what else?"
   "What else?"
   "Is beauty all that matters to you?"
   "What else is there?"
                        - The Swan Princess
 
   As for the other, Captain Marvel was criticized for being arrogant and cocky, but the majority rebuffed this with the argument that Tony Stark was the same way and well beloved (so clearly we were all a bunch of sexist jerks.)
   What was forgotten is the fact that Tony Stark changes, and Tony Stark doesn't really believe he is all that great. His cocky attitude is a defense mechanism, not the default setting. While Captain Marvel ends her debut film smirking and telling Fury that he'll definitely need her again, Tony ends his debut film with these lines:

    "I'm just not the hero type. Clearly. With this laundry list of character defects, all the mistakes I've made, largely public... The truth is: I am Iron Man."

      ... Yeah, there's a difference.

      Worse still is when people try to justify flawed heriones' flaws as being their true strengths, such as Tris Prior's impulsive independence as 'strong and selfless', when really it just makes more trouble and melodrama for the story as her boyfriend has to rescue her 20 times.

      Hope for Tropes???

      But you've probably heard all of the above before, so I'd like to pose a new question:
      Can a character be a trope -- by definition -- and still be interesting?

     The answer I've found is: YES.

     I put up that anime art in the beginning for a specific reason. The character in it is Violet Evergarden. I'm going to have to give some details about the show to fully explain my point, so if you'd rather watch the show without any fore-knowledge, I'd recommend stopping here.

    ......... We all good?

   Okay, so Violet Evergarden was forced to join the army at age 10 and proved to be a natural assassin, showing no emotion or hesitation when it came to killing others. During this time, she developed a close relationship with her superior, Major Gilbert Bougainvillea, but they were separated after a battle which sent Violet to the hospital and ended the war. One of Gilbert's friends takes her in and gives her a job in his mail-company, which has the added business of writing letters for people. At one point Violet witnesses a love-letter being written, which brings her to realize that she has no idea what love means.
    At all.
    This isn't some angsty-romantic-philosophy situation.
    It's literally that she has no familiarity with the concept of love.
    The entire plot of the anime is her trying to figure out what love is.

    So what do we get from this?

    1. Violet is attractive
    2. Violet is a kick-butt warrior
    3. Violet could end up in a romantic relationship
    4. Violet's personality, to begin with, is a bit repressed

    BUT this is all okay with me because:

    1. Violet must grow and change to fulfill her story
    2. Violet's flaws are shown to be exactly that -- flaws

    It's a really beautiful story so I won't go further into it, but the points are clear. An interesting heroine has to be a person. Not an ideal, not a compromise. Just an actual person, with actual flaws, who has to change to achieve a better life.

   This is why the Winter Soldier version of Black Widow resounded so much more with me. Her flaw was set up in that she was secretive, independent, and didn't invest too much in honest, vulnerable friendships. Then midway through the film she's hiding under Steve's shield, crying in terror for her life. Later on she and Steve have a heart-to-heart about how it seems like they can't trust anyone to be honorable anymore. She has a flaw, the flaw is challenged, explored, and overcome.

    So, in summary, all we ladies want is to just have some engaging heroines, be they weird, fashionable, poor, rich, creative, logical, beautiful, ugly, tall, short, brave, afraid, whatever. Just give them a journey and make them really change.
    That's why we all remember Ramona Quimby, but not The Assassin Girl™ from fantasy world X.

(Art credits: Violet Evergarden by Tomachi-chan,
Screenshot by Netflix)