![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
breathedoutWell last night greywash and I caught up on our Magicians watch through the end of Season 3, and then this morning at the gym they were playing one of Peter Jackson's epic Hairy Men Go On a Violent Hike Through New Zealand movies in which our all-white heroes do epic battle with an army of dark-skinned baddies on elephants, and now I'm like. Mad about a trope within the fantasy genre?? Since when?? I don't want these feelings; I was happier not caring.
For those who don't watch The Magicians, both it and the books it's based on deliberately riff on the Narnia setup where a bunch of kids from Earth stroll through a portal to a magical land where they quickly become kings and queens over a diverse array of human and non-human beings whom they had never met before, and in whose cultural norms and values they are not steeped (in Lewis, this results in the beginning of "the Golden Age of Narnia"). And like. This was never going to be a politically neutral daydream. But from the pen of a white, aggressively Christian Oxford don in NINETEEN FORTY-NINE, let's all just acknowledge that it's straight-up British Imperialist propaganda (for those who don't want to click those links: Afghani independence 1919; partial Egyptian independence 1922 (full independence would come in 1952); Statute of Westminster 1931 (which removed ability of British Parliament to enact laws in Dominion countries); India/Pakistan independence and partition 1947; Burma (now Myanmar) independence 1948; Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) independence 1948; Ireland severs ties with the Commonwealth 1949—and a WHOLE BUNCH of other independence movements in British colonies were very active, and would continue to bear fruit throughout the 20th century). It's important, I think, to look at the historical moment: this was the dream of a representative of an imperial power whose empire was in the midst of crumbling. It seems almost tautological to suggest, as I'm sure many have done before me, that the pastoral, nostalgic setup, in which It Is Decreed that (earth) humans are meant to rule over everyone else because of some kind of magically-enforced version of the Divine Right of Kingly Succession, and all will not be right in the world until they do, is deeply fucked up in a way I frankly would expect that we'd be challenging a little more explicitly in 2019.
In Season 3 of The Magicians, Eliot and Margo, Earth 20-something humans who have stumbled into monarch-ship of the magical land Fillory, are subjected to a popular uprising at the hands of the Fillorian peasants. Once they're in chains, their native Fillorian advisor, Tick, turns on them and announces that he will take back the administration of Fillory, which he had been doing before the earth folks arrived. For plot-related reasons not limited to their hunger for power, this is narratively Bad, because our heroes need to regain their thrones in order to get their hands on a Mcguffin that will enable them to complete their Quest and turn magic back on (an outcome in which we, the viewers, are meant to be invested, although I have a whole other set of questions about whether magic is really benefiting this universe or whether everyone would just be better off accepting its loss and getting real jobs... but that's a post for another time). Eliot, Margo, and their pal Josh get Tick to call an election, in which Eliot makes wild and unfulfillable election promises, Tick proposes actual well-thought-out policies, and Margo wins on an unplanned write-in campaign due to her willingness to chat with what turns out to be the majority constituency in Fillory: the talking animals.
So, I think my issue with the show's treatment of this whole plotline is threefold: (a) it basically depicts the rioting peasants as an ignorant, misguided inconvenience; (b) it treats Tick as simultaneously a turncoat for betraying Eliot & Margo, and boring and politically naive for focusing on actual policies to better the lives of Fillorian people; and (c) it treats BOTH rule by democracy AND coalition-building rather than execution post-election, as innovations introduced by the foreign, minority rulers of a nation otherwise portrayed as extremely backwards and incapable of thinking up such enlightened concepts on their own. It doesn't use the opportunity to address any of the issues that would (IMO) have been more interesting and germane given this setup, such as:
I don't know! I feel like it was a missed opportunity, and the show's treatment struck me as sort of sneakily "Well yes there was some unpleasantness but at least the British brought railways, democracy, and political unity to the squabbling natives" when... the actual results of British railways and Imperialist practices were violence and famines, not a "golden age." Maybe the perpetual famine in Fillory is a RESULT of Earth rule. Historically speaking, it is far more likely than not.
It's frustrating, I think, when a media source that really tries for political engagement and genre-savviness, and succeeds on several fronts as The Magicians does, falls down on an opportunity like this; and probably it's unfair to find it more disappointing than when a media source just doesn't try at all (like... Peter Jackson, you did not have to cast that baddie army as Middle Eastern, or every heroic character as white.... it would have been SO EASY NOT TO DO THAT; yet here we are). But it did make me hope that there are people out there creating fantasy narratives that really engage with anti-imperialist politics, and directly challenge this inherited notion of divinely-decreed human and/or foreign rulers over a magical land. I'm certainly not going to write them and tbh I'm probably not even going to read them because, see title: I don't really go here; but I hope they're out there, and I hope they get made into films and TV shows with big budgets and good actors. SURELY they are. Hopefully they will.
Soliciting recs in the comments for people who read more fantasy than I do, but share my frustrations. (Edit: Marlon James's Black Leopard, Red Wolf looks like it might be doing some of this, with bonus queer Black protagonists.)
greywash and I caught up on our Magicians watch through the end of Season 3, and then this morning at the gym they were playing one of Peter Jackson's epic Hairy Men Go On a Violent Hike Through New Zealand movies in which our all-white heroes do epic battle with an army of dark-skinned baddies on elephants, and now I'm like. Mad about a trope within the fantasy genre?? Since when?? I don't want these feelings; I was happier not caring. For those who don't watch The Magicians, both it and the books it's based on deliberately riff on the Narnia setup where a bunch of kids from Earth stroll through a portal to a magical land where they quickly become kings and queens over a diverse array of human and non-human beings whom they had never met before, and in whose cultural norms and values they are not steeped (in Lewis, this results in the beginning of "the Golden Age of Narnia"). And like. This was never going to be a politically neutral daydream. But from the pen of a white, aggressively Christian Oxford don in NINETEEN FORTY-NINE, let's all just acknowledge that it's straight-up British Imperialist propaganda (for those who don't want to click those links: Afghani independence 1919; partial Egyptian independence 1922 (full independence would come in 1952); Statute of Westminster 1931 (which removed ability of British Parliament to enact laws in Dominion countries); India/Pakistan independence and partition 1947; Burma (now Myanmar) independence 1948; Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) independence 1948; Ireland severs ties with the Commonwealth 1949—and a WHOLE BUNCH of other independence movements in British colonies were very active, and would continue to bear fruit throughout the 20th century). It's important, I think, to look at the historical moment: this was the dream of a representative of an imperial power whose empire was in the midst of crumbling. It seems almost tautological to suggest, as I'm sure many have done before me, that the pastoral, nostalgic setup, in which It Is Decreed that (earth) humans are meant to rule over everyone else because of some kind of magically-enforced version of the Divine Right of Kingly Succession, and all will not be right in the world until they do, is deeply fucked up in a way I frankly would expect that we'd be challenging a little more explicitly in 2019.
In Season 3 of The Magicians, Eliot and Margo, Earth 20-something humans who have stumbled into monarch-ship of the magical land Fillory, are subjected to a popular uprising at the hands of the Fillorian peasants. Once they're in chains, their native Fillorian advisor, Tick, turns on them and announces that he will take back the administration of Fillory, which he had been doing before the earth folks arrived. For plot-related reasons not limited to their hunger for power, this is narratively Bad, because our heroes need to regain their thrones in order to get their hands on a Mcguffin that will enable them to complete their Quest and turn magic back on (an outcome in which we, the viewers, are meant to be invested, although I have a whole other set of questions about whether magic is really benefiting this universe or whether everyone would just be better off accepting its loss and getting real jobs... but that's a post for another time). Eliot, Margo, and their pal Josh get Tick to call an election, in which Eliot makes wild and unfulfillable election promises, Tick proposes actual well-thought-out policies, and Margo wins on an unplanned write-in campaign due to her willingness to chat with what turns out to be the majority constituency in Fillory: the talking animals.
So, I think my issue with the show's treatment of this whole plotline is threefold: (a) it basically depicts the rioting peasants as an ignorant, misguided inconvenience; (b) it treats Tick as simultaneously a turncoat for betraying Eliot & Margo, and boring and politically naive for focusing on actual policies to better the lives of Fillorian people; and (c) it treats BOTH rule by democracy AND coalition-building rather than execution post-election, as innovations introduced by the foreign, minority rulers of a nation otherwise portrayed as extremely backwards and incapable of thinking up such enlightened concepts on their own. It doesn't use the opportunity to address any of the issues that would (IMO) have been more interesting and germane given this setup, such as:
- Why SHOULD foreigners rule Fillory? Especially completely untrained foreigners with no education in the history of the place? Especially foreigners who have, at a public trial among other places, voiced their contempt and disgust for Fillory and the Fillorians? Why should we be invested in the continuance of this state of affairs? This is the #1 question that I feel like it's BIZARRE that the show did not, in any serious way, address. I frankly didn't WANT magic turned back on, and I certainly didn't want it turned back on enough to want Eliot or Margo, however much I enjoy them as characters, back on the throne.
- The rioting peasants have resided for centuries in a land with MAGIC, yet most of them are still living in shacks, and regularly starving. What are the sources of structural inequality in a magic kingdom? Given the wealth on display in the castle, Earth (and other human) rulers have plainly been hoarding resources for a long time. Why SHOULD the Fillorians accept this, and who is best placed to address it?
- What are the demands of the rioting peasants, other than the ousting of the Earth rulers? We know there is an established resistance movement, because one of its representatives was previously thrown in the dungeons by our heroes. Maybe we could get a more developed sense of its aims? Or a more developed character who is a member of it? Maybe our heroes could return to said movement, with whom they have an established "in," in order to work with them on drawing up a plan for self-rule?
- Does the movement we've been introduced to include the talking animals, and if not, is there a separate grassroots non-human rights movement? (Like... plainly the answer to this question is a resounding "Yes" if they managed to win an election on a write-in campaign that the candidate was not even intending to run. That's some civic engagement magic right there, y'all.) What do these movements look like? What are the relations between the human and non-human branches?
- From Eliot and Margo's perspective, or even just the perspective of the show as a whole: if someone told you to go on a quest, but as part of that quest you're required to prop up an unjust system, at what point do you think to yourself, gosh, maybe this quest isn't actually morally justified? Apparently, the canonical answer to this from every single character except Alice is "Never," but man I would have been thinking it LONG before now. The show is pretty savvy about, for example, gods and other magical beings being self-interested dicks a lot of the time; in that context I don't find the statement "some dude with a tail gave this quest his seal of approval" to be a very convincing argument for its ethical spotlessness, nor would I think anyone else should.
I don't know! I feel like it was a missed opportunity, and the show's treatment struck me as sort of sneakily "Well yes there was some unpleasantness but at least the British brought railways, democracy, and political unity to the squabbling natives" when... the actual results of British railways and Imperialist practices were violence and famines, not a "golden age." Maybe the perpetual famine in Fillory is a RESULT of Earth rule. Historically speaking, it is far more likely than not.
It's frustrating, I think, when a media source that really tries for political engagement and genre-savviness, and succeeds on several fronts as The Magicians does, falls down on an opportunity like this; and probably it's unfair to find it more disappointing than when a media source just doesn't try at all (like... Peter Jackson, you did not have to cast that baddie army as Middle Eastern, or every heroic character as white.... it would have been SO EASY NOT TO DO THAT; yet here we are). But it did make me hope that there are people out there creating fantasy narratives that really engage with anti-imperialist politics, and directly challenge this inherited notion of divinely-decreed human and/or foreign rulers over a magical land. I'm certainly not going to write them and tbh I'm probably not even going to read them because, see title: I don't really go here; but I hope they're out there, and I hope they get made into films and TV shows with big budgets and good actors. SURELY they are. Hopefully they will.
Soliciting recs in the comments for people who read more fantasy than I do, but share my frustrations. (Edit: Marlon James's Black Leopard, Red Wolf looks like it might be doing some of this, with bonus queer Black protagonists.)
no subject
Date: 2019-03-12 10:32 pm (UTC)That's a frustrating pattern, if indeed a pattern it is. :-/ Thanks for the validation of my frustrations, anyway!