Joss' fascination with torture ?

POSTED BY: TheSomnambulist
UPDATED: Monday, December 27, 2004 17:15
VIEWED: 35109
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

THESOMNAMBULIST

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 1:46 PM

Hey all.

I was recalling a few Buffy, Angel and Firefly episodes the other day and I realised how each show at various times dedicates an episode to having the character/s endure some form of torture.

Does Joss have some fascination with it do you think? Or is it just a great topic for character development?

What do you think?...And how well were they done?

Cheers
TheSomnambulist

www.cirqus.com

GORRAMREAVERS

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 2:01 PM

"Does Joss have some fascination with it do you think?"

Well...I think he 'goes there' because of the violent nature of all his shows. As for the character development, if your hero withstands torture and doesnt give up the goods than the hero becomes even cooler so yeah..I'd go with that one.

My fav is the end of season 2 of Buffy when Angel tortures Giles. When Dru makes Giles see Jenny...oooh...good stuff. Plus, Angel is funny in that scene (as in torture funny HAHA! :P)

"..it is my very favorite gun."

THESOMNAMBULIST

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 2:08 PM

Yep. I remember thinking that for a TV show like Buffy and the kind of audience it would have gathered after the first series, this was a really brave thing to be doing to the characters.

For Angel as much as Giles, because Angel was someone the audiece would have had certain ties with and to have him be so evil was a great twist for the audience to deal with.

www.cirqus.com

HUITZIL

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 2:16 PM

I think he has a fascination with birthdays.

I reckon he has crap birthday's like I do... many a scorched cupcake.

___________
the turtle and the wolf are natural enemies

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:23 PM

Whedon spent much of his High School years at an English private boarding school.

RE-EDITED on advices below

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:28 PM

Whedon knows his audience, and how much they are entertained by the suffering of others. It is possible to address the evil of torture without presenting its enactment. What we have is torture as entertainment.

Does anyone else not re-view War Stories? Well, apart from Summer and Jewel's opening scene.

THESOMNAMBULIST

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:34 PM

Quote:
Purplebelly
Whedon spent his High School years at an English private boarding school.

Me to. It aint that bad!
:)

www.cirqus.com

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Me to. It aint that bad!

I think the canonical line is It never did me any harm

THESOMNAMBULIST

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Me to. It aint that bad!
I think the canonical line is It never did me any harm

Well I never said I came out unscathed....

www.cirqus.com

HONORBOUND

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Gorramreavers:
"Does Joss have some fascination with it do you think?"

Well...I think he 'goes there' because of the violent nature of all his shows. As for the character development, if your hero withstands torture and doesnt give up the goods than the hero becomes even cooler so yeah..I'd go with that one.

My fav is the end of season 2 of Buffy when Angel tortures Giles. When Dru makes Giles see Jenny...oooh...good stuff. Plus, Angel is funny in that scene (as in torture funny HAHA! :P)

"..it is my very favorite gun."

One of my favorite scenes is later in the series when Angel is now "good" again and he goes to Giles for help. Giles answers his door and Angel asks to come in. Giles walks away and Angel says kind of sheepishly "Ah, I can't come in without an invite." Giles comes back with a crossbow aimed at Angel and says "I know... Come in."

A kind word turneth away wrath, but not as well as superior firepower

JENCHRISSYM

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:32 PM

Not re-view War Stories? That is one of my favorites! The torture scene is genius and it is really well done. The badassery in the episode is in full effect and I love it! Also I just look forward to Wash saying, "Bastard's not gonna get days"

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jenchrissym:
Not re-view War Stories? That is one of my favorites! The torture scene is genius and it is really well done. The badassery in the episode is in full effect and I love it! Also I just look forward to Wash saying, "Bastard's not gonna get days"

So, you're entertained by witnessing torture? Could you expand on really well done? What is the nature of the exclamatory love? My interest is almost as great as my concern. I hope you're the same person that noticed the reversed shot in one of the torture scenes because he had freeze-framed through it, but I fear not.

BADGERSHAT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Whedon spent his High School years at an English private boarding school.

That's not entirely accurate... he actually spent at least SOME time at a high school in the North Bronx (right down the block from me, actually). Not sure what part of high school but he was definitely here for some of it (he was the honorary speaker at the school a few years ago, invited by my former boss' English wife, who works at the school... convoluted enough?).

Anyway, my two cents of the day.

--Jefé The Hat

***************************
--Don't bother trying to predict, figure out, second guess, criticize, or suggest anything that comes from the mind of Joss Whedon, for you shall usually be wrong, and shall find out the Truth and Purpose in due time.
(This is the Truth of Whedoning)

"I like smackin 'em"--Jayne

XION47

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 5:35 PM

I think he's fascinated by S&M and subsequently that carries on to torture. He's made some comments in RL about dominatrixes and the like and we even saw in "Convictions" the character of Spanky. I really don't want to know what he and his wife do alone.

Harken: "Seems odd that you would name your ship after a battle you were on the wrong side of."
Mal: "May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
~ƒireƒly

RABIT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 6:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
So, you're entertained by witnessing torture? Could you expand on really well done? What is the nature of the exclamatory love? My interest is almost as great as my concern. I hope you're the same person that noticed the reversed shot in one of the torture scenes because he had freeze-framed through it, but I fear not.

The scene was really well done, for me, in that it was impressively constructed and concieved. See, for me it's more about taking the characters and putting them in a situation to see how they'd deal with it. Mal, left by himself (as we see later) refuses to give up to the extent that he is using humor to show his antagonist that he is not going to give. But with Wash there, Mal knows that Wash won't be able to make it. He does everything he can to push Wash, to keep him from giving in to it.

I look back at scenes such as Faith's torturing Wesley, and I don't see any humor in it. I see the torment that Faith is struggling with, and how she's trying to understand and manage her guilt and pain, pushing that pain onto someone she partially blames for it. There's no humor there, just characters dealing with their situation.

Is this entertainment? It depends upon how you look at it. I'm entertained because I enjoying seeing how the characters deal with situations, so yeah, I find this "entertaining". Do I enjoy what they are doing to each other? No. I have no S&M interests or anything like that. I'm not psychologically sick (more than normal, anyway

). I'm not "disturbed".

But that's just my take on it.

In my opinion, those scenes are meant to make you uncomfortable. You shouldn't enjoy them. You should find yourself troubled by the fact that you laughed at Mal and Wash while they were quivering in pain and agony.

It means you're okay...

Rabit

MAUGWAI

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BadgersHat:
Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Whedon spent his High School years at an English private boarding school.

That's not entirely accurate... he actually spent at least SOME time at a high school in the North Bronx (right down the block from me, actually). Not sure what part of high school but he was definitely here for some of it (he was the honorary speaker at the school a few years ago, invited by my former boss' English wife, who works at the school... convoluted enough?).

Anyway, my two cents of the day.

--Jefé The Hat

I've heard this rumor before about Joss going to school in New York, but I don't see how it's possible. In all his interviews her talks about his schooling in England, and before that he grew up in L.A. I just don't see why he would go to NY for school. Maybe his connection is through his wife or a friend?

And Rabit, I agree. War Stories is my favorite ep because I find it so intriguing that such a disturbing scene can be kind of funny at the same time. "Jokes in the face of danger" as Buffy would say. It tells you just what kind of brave people those two men really are, which is the whole point of the episode.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

BADGERSHAT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:15 PM

Well, it was a brief stint at Fieldston in Riverdale, NY, and when I met him in L.A. 3 years ago, I asked him myself if he'd gone there, and he said yes... so I'm thinking it was one of those brief periods that goes unmentioned due to lack of significance.

--Jefé The Hat

***************************
--Don't bother trying to predict, figure out, second guess, criticize, or suggest anything that comes from the mind of Joss Whedon, for you shall usually be wrong, and shall find out the Truth and Purpose in due time.
(This is the Truth of Whedoning)

"I like smackin 'em"--Jayne

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Rabit:
See, for me it's more about taking the characters and putting them in a situation to see how they'd deal with it.

Thank you, Rabit. It seems Whedon does know his audience. He puts their words into the mouth of the torturer.

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
War Stories is my favorite ep because I find it so intriguing that such a disturbing scene can be kind of funny at the same time.

Thank you, maugwai. It seems this is an episode that tells us much, about ourselves.

MAUGWAI

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
War Stories is my favorite ep because I find it so intriguing that such a disturbing scene can be kind of funny at the same time.
Thank you, maugwai. It seems this is an episode that tells us much, about ourselves.

And your response certainly tells me something about you.

Have you ever read a novel about war? Fiction or nonfiction, written by experienced soldiers or historians, all soldiers find something to laugh about in the middle of battle. If they didn't, they'd be carried away by the horror of it all and couldn't keep fighting.

Mal refused to give in to Niska. Instead, he joked. He made genuinely funny comments to keep up both his spirits and Wash's. And it's okay to laugh at the things he says because they're funny. That doesn't mean anyone who laughs at them goes out and drowns kittens in their spare time. It doesn't mean that person doesn't see the tragedy in torture. It simply means they understand what Mal is trying to do, and that is to keep himself from giving up. If you can't find something to laugh about when the chips are down, you might as well pack it in, because you've just lost your will to go on. That's what I like about the ep. The writers and actors did a good job keeping it funny and intense at the same time, which is very difficult to do.

The episode is about many things much more complex than "torture=bad". It's about conquering our fears and dealing with them - with humor, if necessary.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

MAUGWAI

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BadgersHat:
Well, it was a brief stint at Fieldston in Riverdale, NY, and when I met him in L.A. 3 years ago, I asked him myself if he'd gone there, and he said yes... so I'm thinking it was one of those brief periods that goes unmentioned due to lack of significance.

--Jefé The Hat

I stand corrected.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

MALICIOUS

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:27 PM

I agree with Maugwai and will further it by saying that the worse the torture appears, the more you cheer when the torturer gets their comeuppance. It justifies the "hero's" vengeance, thus furthering the story all the while making you empathetic to it, rather than aghast by it.

Mal-licious

Co-Holder of the Red Bell from Hell

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Malicious:
... the worse the torture appears, the more you cheer when the torturer gets their comeuppance.

Thanks Mal-licious. Do you think there is a limit to the degree of depiction, or is the catharsis directly related to the realism? Having European sensibilities, I genuinely do not understand the majority audience in this case.

DEBBIEBUK

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:50 PM

Don't think Joss is particularly fascinated with torture, just that it shows people in extremes and how they deal with things because of faith (not necessarily religious). I think that the torture more reflects that there are bad people in the world and this is how the victims/ heroes cope. It's not just S&M, a hobby for bored sophisticates, torture really happens, now, around the world, to people who believe in changing things.

But on another note I had a lot of trouble trying to "convert" my sister to Firefly because her teenage sons really like War Stories and she though the whole series was like that.

One of my favourite eps, because it shows the team coming together to save Mal, most definitely not because of the torture.

Debbie

HOTPOINT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Having European sensibilities, I genuinely do not understand the majority audience in this case.

Sorry to possibly go O/T on this one but what do you mean by "European sensibilities" in this context because I'm European and not following you here at all?

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

HEB

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 9:15 PM

Quote:

I've heard this rumor before about Joss going to school in New York, but I don't see how it's possible. In all his interviews her talks about his schooling in England, and before that he grew up in L.A. I just don't see why he would go to NY for school. Maybe his connection is through his wife or a friend?

B]

I'm pretty sure he only studied towards A-levels (without actually taking them) at Winchester in England, which means he was just there for two years 16-18ish and then went to Uni in the US. I think the rest of his school years he spent in the US somewhere.

...................
Well, my sister's a ship... we had a
complicated childhood
.................
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

MARYA

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 9:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Having European sensibilities, I genuinely do not understand the majority audience in this case.

Quote:
Sorry to possibly go O/T on this one but what do you mean by "European sensibilities" in this context because I'm European and not following you here at all?

Ditto that Hotpoint, you just beat me to it. I am European and I don't get it either. Dying to know what "European sensibilities" are. I didn't think we had many left. How are they different from American ones (which I assume you must compare them to)?

NIKNAK

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:12 PM

Though I do not share it, I can understand Purplebelly's point of view. It's seems wrong that we should be entertained by torture. Yet we enjoy by gunfights and Shakespearean tragedies. Almost all of our favourite stories involve pain and suffering in some way. As Early would say: Does that seem right to you?

I think emotional enjoyment is based on feeling SOMETHING. Whether good or bad emotions we want our brains to be stimulated.

The entertainment came from the conflict between Mal and Wash and the humour rather than the torture. The torture was unrealistic and its best just to sit back, enjoy the story and not think about it too much. I don't think I've ever seen the horror of torture ( http://www.amnesty.org/stoptorture) portrayed accurately and I don't think I want to. I suspect that if any film showed it everyone would be seriously disturbed by it.

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by heb:
I'm pretty sure he only studied towards A-levels (without actually taking them) at Winchester in England, which means he was just there for two years 16-18ish ...

I don't know the dates, but private schools are less regimented in their approach to study than state schools, A-level courses may be started earlier and completed in a more concentrated time-frame. IIRC Whedon pursued two consecutive courses in English at A-level.

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Marya:
Ditto that Hotpoint, you just beat me to it. I am European and I don't get it either. Dying to know what "European sensibilities" are. I didn't think we had many left.

Just my first cut at an attempt to find the line between entertainment and offence; it may be that, regardless of domicile, I have the sensibilities of a middle-aged pinko-liberal of moderate education without a TV

For me, the acceptable approach to this kind of violence is that made by The Wire. Its existence is acknowledged by the narrative, but its depiction is not presented as entertainment.
But I'm not really interested in me, perhaps the European posters could suggest when torture as entertainment becomes unacceptable to them?
So far, the consensus seems to be that it's tolerable if accompanied by jokes and provides the justification for subsequent slaughter.

HOTPOINT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:

But I'm not really interested in me, perhaps the European posters could suggest when torture as entertainment becomes unacceptable to them? So far, the consensus seems to be that it's alright if accompanied by jokes and provides the justification for subsequent slaughter.

I cannot really be said to speak on behalf of three quarters of a billion Europeans but personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment"* specifically because I am a Liberal and therefore believe there should be no limits of freedom as long as the exercise of that freedom does not infringe upon the liberty of others.

Not liking something is a truly illiberal reason for thinking it shouldn't exist

BTW. Actually it's not the humour that means I personally had zero problem with watching the scenes in War Stories but the drama of the situation

* simulated torture of course

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

HEB

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by heb:
I'm pretty sure he only studied towards A-levels (without actually taking them) at Winchester in England, which means he was just there for two years 16-18ish ...
I don't know the dates, but private schools are less regimented in their approach to study than state schools, A-level courses may be started earlier and completed in a more concentrated time-frame. IIRC Whedon pursued two consecutive courses in English at A-level.

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/425/425492p2.html

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/425/425492p3.html

"Well, let's see. I went from Riverdale, a fairly progressive private school that my mother taught at, where I'd gone for ten-and-a-half years, since first grade – because it went all the way through, K-12. I went from that, having never been out of the country, to a 600-year-old all male boarding school where I actually listened to a lecture on why co-education will never work. The cultural difference couldn't have been huger. The only thing that was the same was that, like at Riverdale, I had no money and was surrounded by very rich people."

"It was not the instructor's choice – it was whatever play was on the A levels that year. And because I actually wasn't planning on going to university in England, the tests themselves were not that important, so I started on A level English when I got there, which was above – I was still at O-levels in everything else. Then sort of bumped back to a different A level ... I think Lear and Othello were the main ones for the second one, but for the first we studied Hamlet. This was a thing where, in A levels, your getting into a decent university depends on three tests. That's it. You spend the last two years of high school studying for those three tests, and you choose your three subjects. It's very odd, but it's also great because I didn't have to take math or science."

Hopefully these quotes will answer the question.

...................
Well, my sister's a ship... we had a
complicated childhood
.................
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 10:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
... personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment" ...

You were at Fratton Park on Sunday

HOTPOINT

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
You were at Fratton Park on Sunday

No. Torture is having Jim Smith join Harry Redknapp over at Southampton. If they turn up over here ever again someone is likely to fetch a rope

Apologies to all for the threadjack btw

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

PURPLEBELLY

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
Apologies to all for the threadjack btw

I'm a native of Sussex so you'll understand that, after looking at your profile, the level of violence you're prepared to accept has become clear to me - I've heard stories about the Provost Marshal's men

TLACOOK

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:26 PM

Forgive me if someone else has already mentioned this but the vast majority of torture scenes in Angel and the War Stories torture scene was written by Tim Minear. I am sure Joss had input, of course but let's give Tim his evil due!

Buffy torture belongs to those other than Tim because despite the rumors tothe contrary, Tim never worked on Buffy.

REEQUEEN

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:26 PM

Personally, I think it's a mistake to construe too much of another's personality from an episode of (admittedly excellent) television, because one can never extrapolate the full psychology of another person simply from what he writes or produces. Most especially in a medium like television, where there is input from more than one person.

"War Stories" was actually written by Cheryl Cain (with, I assume, input from Joss Whedon and Tim Minear), and directed by James Contner (a Mutant Enemy vet). So, really, the hypothesis the JW has a thing for torture, as relates to this episode, falls apart. Forgive me, but I'm not going to go research all the Buffy and Angel eps that have torture in them and find out who wrote and directed those.

As one of my fave Firefly eps, "War Stories" has a couple of subtexts that I find interesting - be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it, being one (Wash wanting to have a War Story of his own); that personal vengeance on someone who has done you wrong isn't actually necessary is another (Mal saying, "no, no I don't" when Zoe says, "Don't, he needs to do this for himself"). One of the biggest messages I got out of it (and this is just my own perspective, I don't expect anyone to agree) is that an individual can get through anything, even dying, by knowing that, inside, whatever happens, one is always oneself.

Simply by not giving Niska what he wanted (whatever esoteric goal that may have been), Mal showed that, inside, he was free, and he would always remain free. I think that's important.

My own opinion on the recurrence of torture themes in the three JW shows is that all shows are about extremes - whether horror, fantasy, sci-fi, they all deal with extremes of human behaviour, and torture is an extreme form of human behaviour. I don't recall a character that was tortured unto death (with the notable exception of Warren, and even then he was tortured then blasted to pieces), and the characters who survived underwent changes that, in my opinion, made them more interesting for having that experience. Not that I'd recommend being tortured to be more interesting, but I am talking about fiction.

I don't expect authors of horror stories, or those who write about psychopaths, to be psychologically bent. They may be, sometimes, but I'm guessing it has little to do with how and what they write. We all have imaginations, and sometimes our imaginations take us to dark places. Thinking about it, or writing about it, doesn't mean we're going to do something awful, that we practice sado-masochism every Thursday night, or that we run over squirrels deliberately (it was an accident!).

Unless one is a close, personal friend, of Joss Whedon, or, y'know, married to him, I think discussing his married or personal life is in extremely bad taste. Hey, if one were a close personal friend of JW, or married to him, discussing these things in public is in the worst taste imaginable.

Just my buck-oh-five.

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

TLACOOK

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:31 PM

Pretty much what you said.

See my post above. Tim says he wrote the torture scenes in War Stories and he is the one responsible for killing Mal.

And no true fan of the Tim Reaper is surprised by this. LOL

REEQUEEN

Wednesday, December 22, 2004 11:41 PM

Yeah, I caught your post after I spent (too much) time writing mine. ;-D If my son wasn't watching a Treehouse of Horror DVD, I would've thrown War Stories in (obsessive, moi?) and gotten more detail, instead of doing a quick'n'dirty net search. Heh.

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

TERAPH

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:

But I'm not really interested in me, perhaps the European posters could suggest when torture as entertainment becomes unacceptable to them?
So far, the consensus seems to be that it's tolerable if accompanied by jokes and provides the justification for subsequent slaughter.

Well, I'm not a European, but I'll take a shot at this.

I doubt anyone here finds torture entertaining.

Most apparently find a scene that includes torture can be entertaining. They are not, however, getting off on the torture. They are entertained by the dramatic and emotional events of the scene. They are entertained by the struggles of the characters. Not by the torture itself.

You suggest in an earlier post that Whedon's audience is entertained by the suffering of others. I disagree. We are entertained by characters and how they respond the events of their lives. I doubt that many people here enjoy the actual suffering. I doubt that anyone here tuned-in to "Objects in Space" because they get off on watching someone threatened with rape. They tuned in because they care about the characters and their situations. They care about how the characters respond. They care about how the characters overcome challenges.

The subject of "War Stories" is "let us see the real you". The torture is a dramatic device to allow that to happen. We see more of the real Book and more of the real River. We see the real love Zoe has for Wash. And Wash, in that room with Mal, sees the real Mal. He sees why his wife follows him. He sees what inspires the loyalty. In that room, being tortured, Mal does everything in his power to keep Wash aware and strong. He does everything he can to take Wash's attention away from the pain. His focus is on helping a member of his crew get through. Mal attacking Niska isn't the real him. Mal trying to keep Wash strong is the real him.

Yes, we laugh when they are arguing about Mal and Zoe. We should. The argument is so completely absurd in light of their predicament. It's also the best thing Mal can do to help some he cares about. Nobody is laughing at the torture, and the scene isn't about the torture. If it was, they wouldn't have bothered with all the pesky dialogue.

This show is a drama. Bad things are going to happen. In this case, really bad things.

And it's entertaining. Just like King Lear being blinded is entertaining. Just like a pair of star-crossed lovers having their relationship be destroyed is entertaining.

Just because I am entertained by those things doesn't mean I took pleasure in the suffering. I take no pleasure in how Romeo and Juliet ends.* But the play entertains me. I don't like the end of "The Professional" but I think it's a great movie. I don't like what happens to any of the characters in "Requiem for a Dream" but I own the DVD.

Torture as entertainment is not acceptable to most people. Including most people who liked this episode. Thankfully, this episode does not present torture as entertainment. We are not watching to see the torture. We are not focused on the act or torture. We look at its consequences, and we are entertained by how the characters react. We look at the story, and it is definitely not a story about torture.

(*Although I recall a production of R&J where the audience wanted Juliet to die, but that was an issue of bad acting. The audience wanted their own suffering to stop.)

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by teraph:
This show is a drama. Bad things are going to happen. In this case, really bad things.

There appears to be a consensus that the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment. Is the level of violence which is acceptable dependent on the characters involved? Would Zoe and Kaylee have been acceptable victims?

MALICIOUS

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by Malicious:
... the worse the torture appears, the more you cheer when the torturer gets their comeuppance.
Thanks Mal-licious. Do you think there is a limit to the degree of depiction, or is the catharsis directly related to the realism? Having European sensibilities, I genuinely do not understand the majority audience in this case.

I have no idea if there is a "limit," per se. It's just an individual and therefore subjective limit per person. In my opinion, I think the torture is there to be gotten through, rather than as entertainment in and of itself. In other words, it is a means to an end, not the end itself. At least, it isn't for me!

Mal-licious

Co-Holder of the Red Bell from Hell

JENDANDY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:31 AM

You'd think we were talking about real people and real torture here instead of characters on a TV show.

Way too much is being read into this. I like War Stories and believe it or not I don't get up and cheer everytime I watch and the torture scene comes on. I think that can be said for most of us.

You must hate slasher flicks PurpleBelly...

REEQUEEN

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:39 AM

PurpleBelly wrote:

Quote:
There appears to be a consensus that the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment. Is the level of violence which is acceptable dependent on the characters involved? Would Zoe and Kaylee have been acceptable victims?

I don't believe anybody is saying that "the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment." What we are discussing here is fiction - not the real depiction of torture (in which case, call the authorities), and most certainly not anybody's sadistic enjoyment of same.

The torture is part of the story. That's really the beginning and end of it. I don't think I, or anyone else, are, by enjoying this episode, sublimating our urges to go out and buy a car battery and some leads, perhaps some restraints, and I'm almost certain no one here has a victim he or she is "shopping" for. Because that seems to be what you're saying, even if you don't quite realize it (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt). Especially as concerns Americans (why else would you mention "European sensibility" as if there was such a thing?), which I think is bloody ridiculous, to tell you the truth.

Because every single country contains within it people who are not good, who would buy a battery, leads, restraints, and who have probably already picked victims. America may not be the shining light of all that is good and right in the world (I'd be the first to admit that), but neither is any other country. No culture can claim the high ground, PurpleBelly, and I think it's the height of arrogance to attempt something like that.

Nobody is innocent of having "wrong" thoughts, and nobody has the right to cast aspersions on other people simply because of their taste in Firefly episodes.

Basically, that's all it boils down to, taste. You don't like the episode as much, and that's fine, but trying to psychoanalyze the rest of us who do enjoy it is not only wrong, it's pretty darn silly.

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

SIMONWHO

Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:25 AM

>> but trying to psychoanalyze the rest of us who do enjoy it is not only wrong, it's pretty darn silly.

Not least because of all the other questions you could ask of yourself in a similar vein.

*adopts rubbish German accent*

"So, you like this show set in the future, yes? Are you unhappy in the present? Do you wish to be hundred of miles and years away from here, yah? Tell me about your mother."

It's a TV show, to say we're there to enjoy torture is tenuous beyond belief.

TERAPH

Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
There appears to be a consensus that the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment.

Nope. There is a consensus that it is acceptable for torture to be portrayed in entertainment. That is not the same as "the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment". The former says that one can be entertained by a story that includes a scene of torture. The latter says that one is entertained by the torture itself. They are not the same thing.

Quote:
Is the level of violence which is acceptable dependent on the characters involved?

Yes, in the sense that it's dependent on what is necessary for the story and the development of a specific character.

Quote:
Would Zoe and Kaylee have been acceptable victims?

For this episode? No. It wouldn't have served the story. (Neither would Book or Jayne.)

Could they be in another episode? Possibly. It depends on where they want to go with the characters and the story.

NEEDLESEYE

Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:44 AM

I think something has been overlooked. One of the main reasons people watch and enjoy torture or anything horrific on film is due to the adrenaline rush you get from being frightened or in danger. There is a sense of euphoria once the "danger" is over from the adrenaline high.
So, writing in a torture scene, or maybe someting reaver related (reaver=tortured twisted beings) gives the fans the adrenaline rollercoaster ride. Which the euphoric feeling, when we're all relieved that the Capt and Wash are safe, makes us want to watch more.
Joss and Tim surely know what they are doing throwing in torture.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 8:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JenDandy:
You must hate slasher flicks PurpleBelly...

It's not an experience that I have sought. Do you think it would be useful? Is there a canon that would help me to understand the consensus opinion in this thread?

PINGJING

Thursday, December 23, 2004 8:35 AM

Some really good points have been made in this thread, especially by Teraph. One is that danger, horror, and violence are not appealing in themselves, but they are appealing when you see how empathetic characters deal with them. Another is that fiction does not parallel life, nor should it, necessarily. I'm curious why anyone against the torture scene would be a fan of Firefly, or any violent tv show, actually. Kaylee is shot and nearly dies, ditto for Book, Mal... Yet, aren't we fans "entertained" by those episodes? When other forms of violence are acceptable as narrative or dramatic devices, what makes torture a special case?

Julia

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 8:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
... why else would you mention "European sensibility" as if there was such a thing?), which I think is bloody ridiculous, to tell you the truth.

Quote:
sensibility: peculiar susceptibility to a pleasurable or painful impression (as from praise or a slight) -- often used in plural

Used in this thread to emphasise that the opinion is not based on a moral stance alone. The choice of adjective is explained elsewhere; it is an acknowledgement that sensibility may vary with education and experience.

THESOMNAMBULIST

Thursday, December 23, 2004 12:17 PM

Some fascinating points of view.

However I do think the torture scenes have been taken out of context though and applied to real life, and removed from the confines of TV.

I enjoy all those shows depicting 'a kind of torture' because quite frankly they're nothing like realistic.

I'm only imagining here but in my minds eye I can visualise far more horrific images of horror and torture merely from the point of view of my own personal fears.

It's this that I was trying to provoke. Wether or not Joss has some sort of personal fear of torture. To have produced three shows over , what a ten year span, and to have included in all three a significant torture scene, interested me.

Kinda like when you watch enough Hitchcock you become aware of his obsessions, namely the suspense, the leading blonde who is beautiful, tragic and made to suffer physically, and mentally, all these punctuated with his keen eye for the perfect murder.

A pattern immerges in an artists' work and I was wondering in this case wether for Joss it was torture. But it could be a league of things, as was said: Birthdays !

As to wether watching a show with torture in it makes you unbalanced - personally I think not. It's just not real enough to evoke those sorts of emotions... I mean it's a glass-fronted box sat in the corner of the room.

Of course that depends on how well you can remove yourself from a topic in a TV show to a topic it relates to in the real world. Personally I avoid watching the news because it's portrayal of violence is far more disturbing, not for it's realism per se, but more for the manner to which it is glossed up for us. (3d animated graphics simulate what may have happened in the event of an accident) - to me that's creepy. But I digress.

I'm impressed by the manner in which this has been debated. It's good to see we can all express differeing opinions without loosing our composure, and remaining civil.

I'd have loved to carry on here but I am a work, and I must get back to it. Apologies for undefined ideas and notions.

TheSomnambulist

www.cirqus.com

GORRAMREAVERS

Thursday, December 23, 2004 2:50 PM

"I'm impressed by the manner in which this has been debated. It's good to see we can all express differeing opinions without loosing our composure, and remaining civil."

Yeah but reading this thread has left me feeling like I dont want to post here for a while. It was taking a strange turn yesterday and I was curious to see what posts were added since. I dunno...but I am only comming back to this site for news and such. I feel like if I said "I like War Stories" than I would have to defend myself. That isnt why I come to this place.

"..it is my very favorite gun."

THESOMNAMBULIST

Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:04 PM

Hey Gorramreavers

Sorry you feel this way. Personally I don't see you have to defend yourself for liking 'War Stories'

I aint judging you, or anyone else for that matter - so if it means anything you can always shoot the breeze with me.

On a side not The Train Job also had images of torture; when Niska opens the door to reveal his nephew hanging upside down! That's surely just as violent isn't it? Yet none seem to be concerned with this? It doesn't bother me I must admit - but I'm wondering how the boundaries of acceptability are drawn?

Anyone wish to clarify?

Meantime Gorramreavers, I hope you continue to post.

TheSomnambulist

www.cirqus.com

GORRAMREAVERS

Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:21 PM

Thanks THESOMNAMBULIST,
I was lurking for a min to see if anyone responded to my post. :) My post had nothing to do with what you posted before. I have always enjoyed reading what you have to say for that matter.

Im not going to get into specifics or point fingers..I just didnt like how I felt about reading some of the thread. No biggie...carry on.

"..it is my very favorite gun."

JENCHRISSYM

Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:41 PM

I kind of agree with Gorramreavers, I felt a little defensive after I posted above, but apparently I did not explain myself indepth enough. I thank Rabit and Maugwai for clarifying my point, I agree with basically all they said. I am not taking it personally, but I was surprised at how my love for an episode was taken so badly! I do not revel in torture but I did like seeing how the characters each handled their situations and how the crew knew what was going on and were willing to risk it to save their own. And Purplebelly, in your reply to me you mentioned a reversed scene and your fears were correct, I have no idea what you were referring to.

REEQUEEN

Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
... why else would you mention "European sensibility" as if there was such a thing?), which I think is bloody ridiculous, to tell you the truth.
Quote:
sensibility: peculiar susceptibility to a pleasurable or painful impression (as from praise or a slight) -- often used in plural
Used in this thread to emphasise that the opinion is not based on a moral stance alone. The choice of adjective is explained elsewhere; it is an acknowledgement that sensibility may vary with education and experience.

Okay, let me try this:

Sensibility (dictionary definition): 1. The ability to feel or perceive. 2. a) Keen intellectual perception: the sensibility of a painter to color. b) Mental or emotional responsiveness toward something, such as the feelings of another. 3. Receptiveness to impression, whether pleasant or unpleasant; acuteness of feeling. Often used in the plural: “The sufferings of the Cuban people shocked our sensibilities” (George F. Kennan). 4. Refined awareness and appreciation in matters of feeling. 5. The quality of being affected by changes in the environment.

Which of these definitions do you mean? I have my own perspective, which means I think you're referring to def. #3 - what you have implied by saying "those of us with European sensibilities" (to paraphrase) is that you, and others from your geographical cohort, have sensibilities that those who don't share your geographical location do not share. I find this to be a form of geographical snobbery which, given the vast amount of information any individual can pick up from many different sources, is a little insular. You may not be judging, per se, but there is a sneaking suspicion that you find yourself, and your sensibility, just that much better than those of us who enjoy War Stories. Which, again, a bit silly to base such an opinion of us on a single episode of television.

I am perfectly aware of my inability to be concise, please bear with me....

Naturally, everyone has perspectives and opinions based on education and experience, however, I would not propose that everyone who lives, say, in Salt Lake City, Utah, has the same "sensibility" as I do, because I tend to be unusual in that I'm a liberal that's so far to the left of most liberals, I should be standing on the right hand of Attila the Hun. There is no such thing as a "Utah" sensibility, although (I admit) there may be such a thing as a "Mormon" sensibility. Breakdown by religion is much more accurate than mere physical location, and even then, pshaw.

Despite my argument, though, I do understand what you're trying to say. I just don't agree, or, really, like it that much.

So. I watch the History Channel a lot. And I always watch the history of torture shows, not to mention Wild West Tech and it's episode on hangings. I admit it, I like history and all that entails. Sign me up for the S&M Thursday night meetings! ;-D

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

GORRAMREAVERS

Thursday, December 23, 2004 4:41 PM

Quote:
[\B]I find this to be a form of geographical snobbery which, given the vast amount of information any individual can pick up from many different sources, is a little insular. You may not be judging, per se, but there is a sneaking suspicion that you find yourself, and your sensibility, just that much better than those of us who enjoy War Stories. Which, again, a bit silly to base such an opinion of us on a single episode of television.

Thanks for saying this ReeQueen, part of what I was getting at before.

"..it is my very favorite gun."

ODDNESS2HER

Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:24 PM

What Joss is obsessed with is power.
To me, the point of torture scenes is to show how the "victim" can avoid complete powerlessness by making jokes in the face of someone who seeks to eradicate his/her humanity.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
sensibility: peculiar susceptibility to a pleasurable or painful impression (as from praise or a slight) -- often used in plural

Which of these definitions do you mean?

The definition in my original which is Merriam-Webster. You quote my original, but appear not to have read it. If you are asking me to choose another, I decline.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
I find this to be a form of geographical snobbery which, given the vast amount of information any individual can pick up from many different sources, is a little insular.

Please follow the direction to elsewhere in this thread contained in my original. In addtion to an explanation of the choice of adjective, you will find a reply from a UK resident who fully approves of the depiction of torture as entertainment.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
I am perfectly aware of my inability to be concise, please bear with me....

I'm afraid zoid will be jealous that I even read a reply that exceeds twenty five lines. More especially as you seem not to have read my short original. So, I'd better stop

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 6:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
And I always watch the history of torture shows, not to mention Wild West Tech and it's episode on hangings.

Except that I can't resist this one. Does this sort of TV exist, or are you being ironic across the whole paragraph? The History Channel doesn't extend its reach to Scilly Sussex; one of those geographical things, I expect.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 6:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jenchrissym:
And Purplebelly, in your reply to me you mentioned a reversed scene and your fears were correct, I have no idea what you were referring to.

I am happy for you that this so. Sorry if I was a little harsh, but I was hoping to flush out some responses

GEEZER

Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by teraph:
This show is a drama. Bad things are going to happen. In this case, really bad things.
There appears to be a consensus that the depiction of torture is acceptable entertainment. Is the level of violence which is acceptable dependent on the characters involved? Would Zoe and Kaylee have been acceptable victims?

While acknowledging that this thread is about torture, I wonder why the apparent moral outrage from you specifically about torture? In the course of less than a full season, everyone onboard Serenity has been shot or shot at, knocked out, stabbed, beaten, threatened and bound, bombed, held at gunpoint, etc. Was having Kaylee shot or Inara slapped less violent somehow than having Mal and Wash strapped to a metal rack receiving some un-named and rather vague torture?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

REEQUEEN

Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:07 PM

Gorramreavers said:

Quote:
Thanks for saying this ReeQueen, part of what I was getting at before.

Ta. ;-D There has been a lot of good discussion here, which I enjoy. I would hope that you don't continue to be too dismayed to continue participating, because I've enjoyed what you've had to say. While I, too, come to these various boards for news on Serenity, I'm easily distracted by bright and shiny (at least, metaphorically!) things and am thus tempted to rant a bit.

That being said - I'm sorry if I'm repeating what others have said in a different way, but there does seem to be some sort of miscommunication that (whether or not it is deliberate I cannot guess) causes me a little frustration. To follow PurpleBelly's example, the reasons why will be continued in following posts....heh....

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

ANKHAGOGO

Thursday, December 23, 2004 10:06 PM

Man, I wish I'd gotten here before! But I didn't, so alot of my thoughts have already been posted by other people, so I'll try not to repeat.

Just for the record, I don't have a problem with War Stories, but here's the question-- is physical torture worse than mental? I noticed quite some time ago that Whedon does seem to looove torture scenes, but the physical torture is just an occasional thing. However, at least one character is put through the psychological wringer in every episode of Buffy, Angel, or Firefly. River is practically the poster child for Psychological Wringer, and Mal's just a-seethin' with trauma. True, it's drama, and you gotta have some traumatics with it, but Whedon's characters get kicked in the teeth all the time, and in extremely harsh ways. What's the limit on that kind of torture? Because it
is torture -- River daily suffers more mentally than Mal or Wash did physically in just one episode. Heck, I believe the word "tortured" has been applied to her, and Mal, more than once. This isn't bothersome?

Personally, I tend to find the mental more upsetting that the physical -- well, not "upsetting", per se, but "affecting". I worry more about the characters' states of minds than their health, perhaps because you can see the effect of physical torture, but with mental, you're always guessing the worst. I can see Mal's body has healed up from Niska's rough treatment, but in Trash, when Inara starts to point out that he hasn't really looked for work since.....she trails off, but in my head, I'm finishing the sentence "...since Niska tortured them. Of course he hasn't; the man killed him, and he's a little shook up", and then I'm all off on worrying about how well Mal's sleeping, etc., etc. I would say that was metaphorical, but it's really not. I find that type of thing more affecting--characters dealing with their psychological reactions to the situation.

Or is mental torture less bothersome (if it is)because of what I've just said? Because you don't have the effects right there in black and blue on the person's face?

"I know your name, jackass!"

REEQUEEN

Thursday, December 23, 2004 10:29 PM

Hmmm....I don't understand why someone would imply that posts longer than twenty-five lines would somehow be less worth reading than shorter comments. I usually judge what I read by what is written (and sometimes by whom it is written, 'cause some folks - not excluding myself, natch - can bore to tears), not by length, but perhaps I'm in the minority?

I find serial posts both annoying and irritating. That's just me, and doesn't mean I won't read 'em. I just find them unnecessary (and I kick myself when I do it).

PurpleBelly wrote:

Quote:
Having European sensibilities, I genuinely do not understand the majority audience in this case.

This is where you first mention "European sensibilities" in this thread. To which

Hotpoint asked:

Quote:
Sorry to possibly go O/T on this one but what do you mean by "European sensibilities" in this context because I'm European and not following you here at all?

And Marya made the point that:

Quote:
Ditto that Hotpoint, you just beat me to it. I am European and I don't get it either. Dying to know what "European sensibilities" are. I didn't think we had many left. How are they different from American ones (which I assume you must compare them to)?

Which I think makes my point that your use of an all-encompassing phrase such as "European sensibilities" is a bit of a stretch.

Here is your definition:

PurpleBelly

Quote:
regardless of domicile, I have the sensibilities of a middle-aged pinko-liberal of moderate education without a TV

Nice backpedalling, I give it an 8.5. Only after two others in your general geographical location had registered queries regarding your use of the phrase in question, do you address the issue. On the other hand, with the exception of not having a tv, and possibly not being the same gender as you (I don't know, I'm not as psychic as I'd like to be), I can claim the same qualities of pinko-ness, liberal-ness, and middle-aged-ness. Which is why it is so hard for me to fully understand your insistence in (seemingly) judging people who like War Stories as somehow a group of sadists who get off on the depiction of torture.

Hotpoint:

Quote:
I cannot really be said to speak on behalf of three quarters of a billion Europeans but personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment"* specifically because I am a Liberal and therefore believe there should be no limits of freedom as long as the exercise of that freedom does not infringe upon the liberty of others.

* simulated torture of course

I agree. I absolutely believe in free speech, even unto the expression of things I find hurtful and hateful. I personally like to know what the bastards are thinking, and where they are.

I'm sure I've gone past my allotted twenty-five lines, now. Is anyone still reading?

PurpleBelly:

Quote:
The definition in my original which is Merriam-Webster. You quote my original, but appear not to have read it. If you are asking me to choose another, I decline.

Which differs not in substance from the definition I quoted from Dictionary.com. I think what happened was that I was writing my post on the definition when you posted yours, which therefore showed up before my post, and thus I did not even see your post until this afternoon. I suppose that's really my bad, but I am disinclined to take the blame for this one. File it under Stuff Happens.

I wouldn't dream of asking you to pick another definition. Only you can know what you really mean, I was merely making a guess as to what your intention was in the original post.

PurpleBelly:

Quote:
Except that I can't resist this one. Does this sort of TV exist, or are you being ironic across the whole paragraph? The History Channel doesn't extend its reach to Scilly Sussex; one of those geographical things, I expect.

Yes, the History Channel has a show it repeats every several months on the history of torture, complete with visuals of torture implements and descriptions (with illustrations, no re-enactments) on how

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Here is your definition:

PurpleBelly
Quote:
regardless of domicile, I have the sensibilities of a middle-aged pinko-liberal of moderate education without a TV

Nice backpedalling, I give it an 8.5.

Well, no and no. The conditional phrase it may be, omitted from your quote, means that this is not a definition but a conjecture. No backpedalling. My reply goes on to invite contributions to more closely identify the demographic of the entertained

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
I think what happened was that I was writing my post on the definition when you posted yours, which therefore showed up before my post, and thus I did not even see your post until this afternoon. I suppose that's really my bad, but I am disinclined to take the blame for this one. File it under Stuff Happens.

I wouldn't dream of asking you to pick another definition. Only you can know what you really mean, I was merely making a guess as to what your intention was in the original post.

My original is time-stamped Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 08:44. Your reply, which quotes my orginal , is time-stamped Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 16:26.

GORRAMREAVERS

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:04 PM

31 M

Maine, USA

ReeQueen

"..it is my very favorite gun."

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:

Hotpoint:
Quote:
I cannot really be said to speak on behalf of three quarters of a billion Europeans but personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment"* specifically because I am a Liberal and therefore believe there should be no limits of freedom as long as the exercise of that freedom does not infringe upon the liberty of others.

* simulated torture of course

I agree. I absolutely believe in free speech, even unto the expression of things I find hurtful and hateful. I personally like to know what the bastards are thinking, and where they are.

...

I'm also not favourable towards your language in stating that this same person "fully approves" of what you deem the "depiction of torture as entertainment."

Hotpoint appears to approve, you seem to agree, then disagee.

You're right - in as much as I'm bored. Can we have some more posts from people telling us they find torture exciting and that they're very nice people?

HOTPOINT

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:20 PM

There is a difference in implied tone between my own words "do not object to" and your spin that I "approve" of torture as entertainment.

Toleration of something for artistic reasons is not the same as enthusiastic ringing endorsement of that concept on general principle.

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Yes, the History Channel has a show it repeats every several months on the history of torture, complete with visuals of torture implements and descriptions (with illustrations, no re-enactments) on how they were used.

It's a shame it would be off-topic, because feed-back on the level of interest induced by the History Channel would be instructive; not very informative without re-enactments, I suppose.

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
There is a difference in implied tone between my own words "do not object to" and your spin that I "approve" of torture as entertainment.

Toleration of something for artistic reasons is not the same as enthusiastic ringing endorsement of that concept on general principle.

There's difference between approve(to accept as satisfactory) and endorse (to express support or approval of publicly and definitely). I spy a kettle

EDITED: to aid the lexicographically challenged; I was originally too polite to mention it

HOTPOINT

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
And there's difference between approve and endorse. I spy a kettle

Nice try but it was the tone of your post that equated the notion of acceptance with approval at the level of endorsement. If you don't think it does you need to read your own words more carefully.

EDITED TO ADD - Please don't edit your posts without announcing you have done so. It's bad nettiquette

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
Nice try but it was the tone of your post that equated the notion of acceptance with approval at the level of endorsement. If you don't think it does you need to read your own words more carefully.

Quote:
you will find a reply from a UK resident who fully approves of the depiction of torture as entertainment

Must be a problem with the dialect

Anyone want to talk about Joss and torture?

HOTPOINT

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Must be a problem with the dialect

You think "fully approves" doesn't indicate a somewhat greater endorsement than just "approves" or "accepts" would?

EDITED - To remove a double negative

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

PURPLEBELLY

Thursday, December 23, 2004 11:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
I cannot really be said to speak on behalf of three quarters of a billion Europeans but personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment"* specifically because I am a Liberal and therefore believe there should be no limits of freedom as long as the exercise of that freedom does not infringe upon the liberty of others.
...
* simulated torture of course

Seems non-empty to me

MAUGWAI

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:01 AM

Okay, Purplebelly, let's all get it straight on just how morally superior you really are. I gather then, that you find each of the following items offensive?

1) When Vincent Vega shoots Marvin in Pulp Fiction
2) When Austin Powers squashes a simple henchman with a steam roller
3) The entirety of Payback
4) Every war movie ever made

The only good fiction is a story where the writer is willing to put his characters through the hell. Even comedies make their characters experience horrible humiliations for a laugh. The source of story is conflict: Man vs Man, Man vs Self, Man vs Nature, or Man vs Society - or did they not cover that in your European school? If you only watch movies where nobody suffers, you'll be watching Bed of Roses for the rest of your life. If that's the case, congratulations, you are true to your word. You are also very boring.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

HOTPOINT

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
I cannot really be said to speak on behalf of three quarters of a billion Europeans but personally I do not object to "torture as entertainment"* specifically because I am a Liberal and therefore believe there should be no limits of freedom as long as the exercise of that freedom does not infringe upon the liberty of others.
Seems non-empty to me

Because I would not limit freedom of speech or expression does not mean I "fully approve" of everything anyone has to say merely that I'll tolerate it

That I would not ban the publication of either the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf does not mean I am therefore a Communazi

...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
Okay, Purplebelly, let's all get it straight on just how morally superior you really are. I gather then, that you find each of the following items offensive?

You speak of things outside of my experience, especially moral superiority; please see previous postings about sensibilities

EDIT: isn't this OT? Better ask Hotpoint if we should flag it

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
Because I would not limit freedom of speech or expression does not mean I "fully approve" of everything anyone has to say merely that I'll tolerate it

Could you describe in fresh terms, the extent to which the depiction of torture as entertainment could be tolerated? Any reference to Whedon's opus would help keep us on-topic; we really don't want to start discussing me

Anyway, it's after midnight for both of us - Have a Happy Christmas.

REEQUEEN

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:36 AM

....following quote edited to remove my words, 'cause I remember what I said....

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

Not least because of all the other questions you could ask of yourself in a similar vein.

*adopts rubbish German accent*

"So, you like this show set in the future, yes? Are you unhappy in the present? Do you wish to be hundred of miles and years away from here, yah? Tell me about your mother."

It's a TV show, to say we're there to enjoy torture is tenuous beyond belief.

I just had to say, this is very amusing (and sorry for taking so long to comment). I personally blame all my personality flaws on my mother, up to and including my (supposed) penchant for watching people hurt other people. "Ja, meine frau, das ist gut! Sprechen sie all about your History Channel fixation, und I vill explain your neuroses." So far, 19 neuroses, and counting.

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

CARDIE

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:04 AM

Some late and very random observations about the issues raised in this, uh, lively thread.

--Joss Whedon's tv shows have all posited the existence of very powerful evil in their 'verses. All those Big Bads. Because torture is such an extreme violation of one person by another, it becomes a shorthand for the serious, way beyond your garden variety evils that villains in the Jossverse practice.

--What does it mean to be able to watch the tortures Joss dishes out? Well, it can mean a whole range of things. There are people who do "enjoy" watching simulated tortures. There is S&M as both sexual practice and sexual fantasy that never goes into real world serial mutilator sorts of sadism. There are shoe fetishists who were probably getting a very different charge out of Carrie's Manolos on "Sex and the City" than the rest of us.

But there are people who can tolerate watching the depiction of torture in the service of a powerful drama or as a means to revealing interesting things about characters without finding the torture in and of itself enjoyable.

Then there are people who simply can't watch these depictions without being so repulsed that they have to turn away. As they say in fanfic circles, everyone has their "squicks." I can't watch depictions of medical procedures and also usually turn away from people being beaten up. Yet I could watch the tortures in "War Stories" without being squicked. (I think it's because we don't see a lot of blood or exposed internal organs.)

Finally, there may be people who simply believe that it is morally wrong to depict torture in the service of entertainment. From PB's statements, I'd guess that this is where he's coming from. To tolerate "War Stories" is tantamount to approving of bear-baiting, or cockfighting, or giving thumbs down to the gladiators in the arena, even though no real pain is felt or real blood shed.

--Does taking any one of the above positions on torture in the Jossverse relate to one's political beliefs, age, or place of residence. I'd have to say that it is much more a case of individual sensibilities. Had PB simply said, "I couldn't bear watching those scenes again, how did you others manage?" we would have had a very different thread.

PB, the way you have phrased all your questions about "the demographic" and "torture as entertainment," you have seemed to imply a) a moral deficiency on the part of those who do not for whatever reason turn away from those scenes in "War Stories" and b) to relate it to some alarming quality inherent in, at various points, non-Europeans, non-liberals, people younger than you, people who own televisions (and thus are under the sway of mass culture?), or "The majority audience" (who are by definition not those of refined sensibilities, because refined sensibilities are always the attribute of the few?)

I don't think I'm the only one on this board who took your original statement as insinuating, "Of course, I'm not one of those yahoo Yanks with their vulgar, violence-saturated popular culture who just re-elected that dangerous, stupid cowboy George W. Bush."

Cardie

ANKHAGOGO

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cardie:
From PB's statements, I'd guess that this is where he's coming from. To tolerate "War Stories" is tantamount to approving of bear-baiting, or cockfighting, or giving thumbs down to the gladiators in the arena, even though no real pain is felt or real blood shed.

If this is the case, I have to say I don't understand it. There's a huge difference between being able to tolerate torture or human combat in a fictional setting, and being able to tolerate it in actual life. I for one won't watch things where the pain is real -- Jackie Chan tends to make me queasy, as he's still doing all his own stunts last I checked. Actually, if I know it's even based on reality, it bothers me -- war movies being the obvious example.

Quote:
PB, the way you have phrased all your questions about "the demographic" and "torture as entertainment," you have seemed to imply a) a moral deficiency on the part of those who do not for whatever reason turn away from those scenes in "War Stories" and b) to relate it to some alarming quality inherent in, at various points, non-Europeans, non-liberals, people younger than you, people who own televisions (and thus are under the sway of mass culture?)

Quote:
it may be that, regardless of domicile, I have the sensibilities of a middle-aged pinko-liberal of moderate education without a TV

I guess the most obvious question I would have that I haven't seen asked (and sorry if I missed it & am repeating)is "How on earth did you watch/are you watching Firefly if you don't own a TV?"
It doesn't bother me if people have those "Kill Your TV" stickers -- hey, that's your right. But if you say you don't own a TV, then proceed to become a member of a website specifically dedicated to a fairly recent TV show, taking a screenname that's slang within that show's universe, a show that is only currently available on DVD, which you need a TV to view-- well, you've already undermined a large part of your image or arguement. Sure, you could be going to a friend's house to watch it, but that would be rather hypocritical,as if you were saying, "I only watch TV at other people's houses, cause I won't have an idiotbox in mine." (insert upturned nose here) That's like saying I'm not a smoker because I only bum smokes off of other people.

"I know your name, jackass!"

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 7:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ankhagogo:
I guess the most obvious question I would have that I haven't seen asked (and sorry if I missed it & am repeating)is "How on earth did you watch/are you watching Firefly if you don't own a TV?"

No. Many fans of Firefly have been unable to view the show on broadcast TV.

Your assumption that the conjectured profile is me may be mistaken.

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 7:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ankhagogo:
But if you say you don't own a TV, then proceed to become a member of a website specifically dedicated to a fairly recent TV show, taking a screenname that's slang within that show's universe, a show that is only currently available on DVD, which you need a TV to view--

I use one of those computer thingees

EDIT: that's not to say I don't own a TV

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 8:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cardie:
PB, the way you have phrased all your questions about "the demographic" and "torture as entertainment," you have seemed to imply a) a moral deficiency on the part of those who do not for whatever reason turn away from those scenes in "War Stories" and b) to relate it to some alarming quality inherent in, at various points, non-Europeans, non-liberals, people younger than you, people who own televisions (and thus are under the sway of mass culture?), or "The majority audience" (who are by definition not those of refined sensibilities, because refined sensibilities are always the attribute of the few?)

No. The judgements are your own. If they are shared by others, they speak of your shared apprehensions not mine.

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 8:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cardie:
--Does taking any one of the above positions on torture in the Jossverse relate to one's political beliefs, age, or place of residence. I'd have to say that it is much more a case of individual sensibilities. Had PB simply said, "I couldn't bear watching those scenes again, how did you others manage?" we would have had a very different thread.

Individual sensibilities are formed by what we do and what we learn. Much of which is related to when we are where we are. Could we resume this thread by asking I couldn't bear watching those scenes again, how did you others manage?. Possibly broadening the scope to the whole of the Whedon opus, to get back on-topic.

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 8:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cardie:
I don't think I'm the only one on this board who took your original statement as insinuating, "Of course, I'm not one of those yahoo Yanks with their vulgar, violence-saturated popular culture who just re-elected that dangerous, stupid cowboy George W. Bush."

I would be disappointed if this was the reason for the interest in this thread, which I hoped would be about you-all, not me. But perhaps it has been after all.

EDITED: to emphasise the plurality of the pronoun, after noting the misapprehension of following poster.

CARDIE

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:02 PM

My response began by being about both a hypothetical, general "you" (different people who can watch torture scenes or not, for various reasons) and then about my own reactions, the "you" now addressed in your last post. So I don't think I've dodged the question.

The way the poster representing him/herself as Purplebelly phrased the questions has invited the debate to focus on Purplebellies reasons for saying what PB did. It would be disingenuous to pretend that this is an aberrant reaction. As to whether the Purplebelly construct has anything to do with who is really posting messages under that screen name, of course none of us can be certain about that.

Cardie

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 12:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cardie:
As to whether the Purplebelly construct has anything to do with who is really posting messages under that screen name, of course none of us can be certain about that.

Not only Purplebelly believes this

EDIT: I get even more confused on the SerenityMovie site

ANKHAGOGO

Friday, December 24, 2004 4:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PurpleBelly:
Quote:

Quote:
EDIT: that's not to say I don't own a TV

What you said was "it may be that, regardless of domicile, I have the sensibilities of a middle-aged pinko-liberal of moderate education without a TV", which would lead one to believe that you yourself do not own a TV. But if this is an incorrect assumption, then that would lead me to assume also that you're neither middle-aged nor a pinko-liberal, have less or more than a "moderate education", and are not European, geographically or biologically. Oh, and that your posts on this thread are all a big wind-up.

Quote:
I use one of those computer thingees

I would find not owning a TV yet watching shows on your computer more hypocritical than not owning a TV yet watching shows at a friend's house. People who are against TV are not against the actual physical piece of technology that the media comes through, they object to the media itself (which, admittedly, is mostly crap). My dad hates current TV programming -- in fact destroyed our TV when I was small -- but he does have one now to watch movies, etc. But he rarely, if ever, watches anything but tapes or DVDs.
BUT he does have TV shows on DVD/tape. If he's watching a show produced for television broadcast,he's still watching TV. And even if he were watching it on a computer, he would still be watching TV -- he's watching a TV show. He's just not watching it on a TV. It's not as if that, in owning a computer, you don't have access to more total crap than is available through the television industry. Implying that you don't have a TV is just trying to be elitist. :sanctimonious:

Oh, there's not a smiley for that?

"I know your name, jackass!"

MAUGWAI

Friday, December 24, 2004 4:31 PM

We might as well give up. This is like arguing with a really pretentious brick wall.
It's PB vs everybody else, so obviously it's his/her problem. We love Joss and we love War Stories. If PB thinks that's immoral, so be it. His/Her loss.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ankhagogo:
... that would lead me to assume also that you're neither middle-aged nor a pinko-liberal, have less or more than a "moderate education", and are not European, geographically or biologically.

It could be that a guess was made of the profile of the majority poster, and that was inverted. Purplebelly's Denouement may have been a clue to the technique.

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ankhagogo:
I would find not owning a TV yet watching shows on your computer more hypocritical than not owning a TV yet watching shows at a friend's house.

I love this idea. Does it have common currency?

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ankhagogo:
My dad ...

You're among friends. We feel your pain. Let it out.

REEQUEEN

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Gorramreavers:
31 M

Maine, USA

ReeQueen

"..it is my very favorite gun."

And, I

"Were I not married I would take you in a manly fashion" "'Cause I'm pretty?" "'Cause you're pretty." (By which, of course, I mean, thank you - made my day!)

In the interests of fairness (edited so to not make my English make me look dumb):
38 (almost 39); F; married (three sons, the oldest of whom is in college); SLC UT; and, in the further interest of fairness, I am flirty but usually not intentionally. I'm a banter-fluff and I like people.

On a completely other note
I have a hypothesis I want to offer:

Since I am not the only one (duh, obviously!) who found "European sensibilities" and what followed to be un-ignorable, I can't help but wonder if there hasn't been some chain-yanking. Not that I don't believe PurpleBelly is sincere, but that he or she has, perhaps, gone over and above the bounds of merely supporting an argument. The tenacity kinda gave me a clue.

But, since I too can be tenacious (and have been), and I have been known to carry an argument further than necessary because of entertainment value, I can't but be entertained. I'm just used to being the yanker, not the yankee.

(Edited to add) Having just gone back through the thread, to read more carefully of what was posted yesterday - since I was all excited this morning about my epiphany! - I know I'm not the only one to come up with the same general theory. Just wanted to state that I am aware of that, and will not claim all the glory come Judgement Day.

"Today we get to meet the real you." Niska - War Stories

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
If PB thinks that's immoral, so be it.

That judgement isn't contained in this thread, because it hasn't been made. And would probably be off-topic. Does anyone have anything to say about Joss and torture? The original poster would probably like to know. How about the torture of characters with whom we do not identify?

PURPLEBELLY

Friday, December 24, 2004 5:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ReeQueen:
Not that I don't believe PurpleBelly is sincere ...

There must be some gentlemen out there who can help the lady?

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE