Avatar

Asphodel and Wormwood

@professormcguire / professormcguire.tumblr.com

"How was your crossing? Did the Channel part for you?" "It went flat when I told it to. I didn't think to ask for more." --Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter" PayPal: professormcguire@gmail.com Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/professormcguire
Avatar

I've had a recent influx of followers related to some Snape posts that are making the rounds again, so I just want to make one thing crystal clear: JK Rowling is a reactionary dingbat and my love for my trans sisters is immeasurable. I'm not interested in "debating" this with anyone. Respect ALL women or fuck off.

Anyway, hi new people, welcome, can I offer you some Eileen/Minerva content in these trying times?

Avatar
reblogged

the topic is Trapper and the army as foils, you have three hours, go

In no small part the satire of Mash, particularly in the first half of the show, is tied up with gender performance.

The army represents traditional, stifling and violent masculinity. This is shown through everything from freudian jokes about guns (eg Frank and Margaret's flirtations in The Sniper or The Gun), to Margaret trying to cajole Hawkeye into performing a more traditional standard of masculinity while treating him like a soldier in Comrades in Arms Part 2, to many jokes and comments about (usually) Hawkeye not being a real man in contrast to army standards and various specific army personnel (eg Lyle in Springtime, Flagg in White Gold), to Frank and Margaret's worship of the masculinity of the army ("He's twice the man you'll ever be," re: Flagg and Hawkeye, Margaret's lust for MacArthur, Frank pursuing the sniper in The Sniper in an attempt to be a "real man" in Margaret's eyes, etc) to many jokes positioning the military as a sexually aggressive man pursuing Hawkeye ("Sure, the sun the moon the stars, your high school letterman jacket. Same deal I promised nurse Baker." "A receipt please, and promise you'll go out with other doctors," etc.)

In contrast, the main characters all fail to perform traditional gender in some way, from crossdressing to immaturity to indecisiveness to peacefulness to Margaret's masculinity and Frank's pathetic failure to live up to his own masculine ideals, to just about everything about Hawkeye. His cowardliness, his jokes about not being a real man, his jokes about taking the feminine role in sexual encounters with men and women, even multiple double entendres about his average at best penis size.

Trapper is the most traditionally masculine of the main cast. He still subverts masculinity in some subtle ways here and there, such as the occasional feminizing joke and mentions of not being in great shape, but overall he's the more butch counterpart to Hawkeye's fem. He plays the role of boxer while Hawkeye plays the role of diva in their respective manager/star roleplaying episodes. He's broader and buffer and plays football, often seen playing catch with someone while walking around the compound, while Hawkeye disdains sports and doesn't participate. He reads Field and Stream which Hawkeye derides in Alcoholics Unanimous while making a wry comment about shaving his armpits. A past lover nicknamed him Big John.

And there are many, many jokes about Hawkeye and Trapper being sexual partners. The recurring Uncle Trapper and Aunt Hawkeye gag, if my father sees this you'll have to marry me, for me? only if you put those on, your father and I will tell you what we did to have you, that's when I fell in love with him, etc etc etc. It's constant. In these jokes Hawkeye usually takes the feminine role, though not strictly every time ("Me and the missus," is one exception in As You Were, the dance in Yankee Doodle Doctor is another).

Trapper's masculinity is differentiated from traditional military masculinity in a few ways. Most obviously, Trapper abhors the military's violence. He never uses guns and mocks Frank's obsession with them, he's a healer rather than a soldier, and he's disgusted by the results of military violence on the men on his operating table.

He's also secure in himself. The military's brand of masculinity is strongly characterized by insecurity and overcompensation. Frank is the main representative of this military insecurity - a coward who insists he's brave (The Army Navy Game), a man who clings to a phallic gun to compensate for his sexual and gendered inadequacies (a main theme of The Sniper, perfectly mirrored when the army itself comes in with a vastly disproprotionately powerful automatic machine gun on a helicopter to shoot down one sixteen year old), a homophobe repressing his own attraction to men (As You Were, the original script of George), etc. We also see this in Flagg, who implicitly sublimates sexual urges into violence (seen when he suggestively caresses his gun while describing how he wants to torture a boy in Officer of the Day).

Trapper doesn't need to overcompensate. He's well-endowed physically, he's portrayed as a competent and considerate lover, he's a brave man who doesn't mind being seen as a coward, and he may or may not be attracted to men but either way he's not a homophobe (George) and he doesn't express his sexuality through violence. When Margaret proves herself stronger than him, his response is to be impressed rather than offended (Bombed). When he dances with Hawkeye for a gag, he doesn't mind letting Hawkeye lead.

He's also differentiated in terms of tradition, with the mliitary representing a more propagandic 50s traditionalism, and Trapper representing a 70s, countercultural freedom from tradition. We see this in the way Trapper has plenty of sex despite being married, while adultery is a court-martial offense in the military. It's notable that he's open and carefree about it, while Frank and Margaret are surreptitious and hypocritical in their affair. This lack of traditionalism is also shown in his disrespect for authority, often in direct contrast to Frank and Margaret's worship of it, and his allyship to George who the military would persecute for his sexuality.

So ultimately we can see that while Trapper and the military are both examples of masculine performance, Trapper's masculinity differs from the military's in being more flexible, less violent, less traditional, and more secure. The military's masculinity is far more toxic than Trapper's, particularly in the context of 70s counterculture media, which aligns womanizing with sexual liberation rather than a lack of respect for women, accurately or not.

This contributes to their respective dynamics with Hawkeye.

Hawkeye, we've established, is usually more feminine, and there are a myriad of jokes characterizing Trapper as his sexual partner, as well as the military as a sexual pursuer.

The jokes Hawkeye and Trapper make about their relationship tend towards cozy domesticity. They're Radar's "aunt and uncle," they directly roleplay marriage ("Martha, we're going to have to move, the people upstairs are impossible,") and less directly behave as though married (the bickering in Alcoholics Unanimous, the discussion about naming their pony in Life With Father). Occasionally they're treated as a healthy couple in contrast to Frank and Margaret's toxicity ("While I'm gone, promise you'll go out with other doctors," vs "Touch anyone else and I'll cut off your hands" in Aid Station).

In some instances the jokes lean towards predatory - "If you're trying to get me drunk, it'll work," or "Who is this man in bed with me?" "I followed you home from the movies," but they're always playful, always fond. If Hawkeye takes on a submissive or victimized role in these jokes, it's one he has fun with and discards just as easily in the context of the rest of his relationship with Trapper.

So, it's important to note that Hawkeye and Trapper support each other and look after each other in an equal, enthusiastic friendship. From Trapper ensuring Hawkeye gets to sleep in Doctor Pierce and Mr. Hyde, to Hawkeye supporting Trapper when he wants to adopt a child, to Trapper right at Hawkeye's side as they attempt to procure an incubator, they are there for each other every step of the way. If their relationship is a marriage in some ways, it's a healthy, strong, and non-traditional marriage, an equal and open partnership free of jealousy and insecurities.

Compare that to the military's relationship with Hawkeye. In jokes it's characterized as powerful and predatory, far from an equal partnership. Sometimes it approaches positive - in Carry on Hawkeye, much of the humour is derived from Hawkeye and Margaret's gendered role reversal as she assumes military command of the unit. Hawkeye playfully calls her sir, seductively lies on her desk like a secretary in a porn film, and most notably treats an immunization shot as sexual penetration in a prolonged gag about sexual role reversal. Hawkeye has fun playing a sexually submissive role to a representative of military authority in this episode, but it is a submissive role.

Several of the one-off jokes have a similar sensibility, such as the double entendre of "My bellybutton's been puckering and unpuckering all day," in response to a representative of MacArthur assuming their excitement over the general's arrival to the unit, or Hawkeye's "Okay, take me, I'm yours," to Colonel Flagg. They demonstrate a willingness to play the receptive role on Hawkeye's part, but they also, pointedly, disturb the object of the jokes.

When Hawkeye makes these jokes that sexualize military authority, he's attempting to be provocative as well as defiantly drawing disruptive attention to his own powerlessness as a drafted surgeon. The power dynamic between Hawkeye and the authority of the military only goes one way, and Hawkeye gets a kick out of pointing it out in ways that perturb the representatives of that authority, but it's a power dynamic that takes its toll on him.

Many of Mash's plotlines revolve around Hawkeye rebelling and attempting to seize some scrap of agency back from the military. Adam's Ribs, for example, in which he starts a mild riot over the food he's being fed and spends the episode attempting to procure barbecue ribs from Chicago (which Trapper procures for him), or Back Pay where he tries to charge the military for his forced labour. A particularly notable example is Some 38th Parallels, in which Hawkeye complains about being paid the equivalent of a nickel per operation, and his frustration manifests in impotency until he can perform a gesture of rebellion against the military.

One unfortunate consistency of these episodes is that the army ultimately retains its power. When Hawkeye achieves his goals, it's only in small ways that do little more than satisfy his own need to assert his sense of self. Often, Hawkeye doesn't achieve his goal at all, but is thwarted by the army, such as in For Want of a Boot. In every instance he remains powerless in comparison to the authority of the military.

So the context in which Hawkeye makes these sexualized jokes about the military literally fucking him is one of abject helplessness. In a sense, all he's capable of is pointing out what the military is doing and putting it in his own, audacious terms. He's not capable of preventing it. His jokes usually have an edge of bitterness to them in delivery, and when they don't, that tone is imparted anyway by the greater context.

With Trapper, Hawkeye can play-act a marriage or an assault, but in either case he's an enthusiastically consenting, equal partner. Trapper's performance of masculinity allows for Hawkeye to take any role from victim to wife to husband, and enables Trapper to respond in kind from a position of equality and respect. The military, in its insecure, domineering performance of masculinity, is a dictatorial authority, never allowing Hawkeye perform any role but a feminized, victimized one, and only ever giving him the choice of whether to perform with a wry smile or a sneer.

In short, Trapper is the cool, considerate service top to the military's insecure domineering boyfriend.

I'm tagging everyone who enabled this lol, share the blame. @beansterpie @majorbaby @professormcguire @rescue-ram

Avatar

Get to know you game: Answer the questions and tag 9 people you want to know better.

Tagged by: @marley-manson!

Last song listened to: Willie Taylor, Voyage, The Longest Johns.

Currently reading: I've slowly but surely been working my way through We Have Always Lived in the Castle (Shirley Jackson) and consuming Izzy Hands fanfiction with the voraciousness of a starving, crazed weasel.

Currently watching: I've been watching We Bare Bears on Hulu as stress relief after work. Ice Bear is husband material.

Currently obsessed with: Still the gay pirates. I need Amazon Prime or Netflix or whoever to pick up my crew so that Buttons can bring Izzy back to life with bird magic. I'll also take ghost Izzy -- I can be reasonable. Tell me y'all don't want to hire Leslie Jones, come on!

Tagging: You! Do the thing.

Avatar
reblogged

“Letting It All Hang Out”

Digital Painting

————————————-

Happy 77th Birthday, David Bowie! I’ve had a lot of fun working on this one. It started as just a silly idea and a good way to draw a lot of his costumes to practice textures. When I first started sketching, I hadn’t expected it to take over a year to complete, but I knew this one wasn’t to be rushed, but to be enjoyed to the fullest extent. I truly enjoyed studying photographs of each costume, both the beautiful detailed and well-lit pictures from the V&A museum exhibit, but also those captured over the years while the costumes were in use for performances, music videos, and movies. Every article of clothing here (even the ones in the basket (deep in the basket even!) and on David himself) are actual items worn throughout his career. I’m so super curious to see if anyone can name them all. I think my favorites to do were also the ones that were the hardest to capture, such as the Pierrot outfit on the far left and the Yamamoto piece in the center. Let me know your favorites in the comments!!

Check out my instagram for more Bowie art!!

https://www.instagram.com/silvermoon822?igsh=aGkzYzFpcnV3Y3V2&utm_source=qr

Avatar
reblogged

“The common welfare was my business.”

– Jacob Marley, “Stave One,” A Christmas Carol

The season of endless and overwhelming Christmas rolls merrily on.  Resigned, I’ve been watching handfuls of Christmas television specials, and I’ve become increasingly aware of something insidious about the most commonplace of them.  I’m sure most of you are familiar with the basic plot of any Disney-esque Christmas special – surrounded by their concerned-to-alarmed-to-downright-resentful friends and family, a grump of a character is prodded, poked, and shoved into showing the appropriate amount of “Christmas spirit.”  These stories are, of course, the literary descendants of the archetypal attempt to define and instill Christmas spirit, Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

Dickens’ story is somewhat infamous for reviving the Christmas holiday as a concept in England and America; its primary character, Scrooge, is so well-known as a holiday grump that both his name and his signature phrase (”Bah!  Humbug!”) have become shorthand for a person who hates Christmas.  Certainly the story would seem to advocate for universal involvement in the Christmas season.  Scrooge rejects Christmas greetings or family dinners, abhors what he considers the unbridled economic waste of the season, and must be persuaded with much grumbling and moralizing to give his clerk the day off with pay.  (One wonders if Scrooge and Cratchit perform the same song and dance each year at closing on Christmas Eve.)  Scrooge’s portrayal comes with a hefty amount of anti-Semitic coding surrounding the stooping money-lender and what nearly amounts to his conversion narrative [x].  The hegemonic nature of Dickens’ chosen imagery is deeply unpleasant.  And yet, what the story’s modern Christmas special descendants so profoundly fail to grasp is that this imagery is in service of far more than Christmas spirit for the sake of it.

Dickens’ story is about shoving Scrooge into the Christmas spirit, true, but the story defines the Christmas spirit according to generosity – and specifically economic generosity.  Scrooge betrays the spirit of Christmas by refusing to pay his clerk a livable wage; by denigrating charitable work; by praising the institutions of the 1834 New Poor Law, the workhouse and the debtors’ prison.  He betrays the spirit of Christmas by turning away his less-wealthy remaining family; by denying his clients empathy and kindness; by allowing his clerk’s son to sicken and die rather than use his mouldering piles of money to help.  Scrooge is not visited by four spirits sent to show him the error of his ways because he doesn’t decorate his counting house with holly in December.  He is not threatened with a meaningless death and everlasting torment because he doesn’t like Christmas carols.  He becomes the object of a moral lesson because his greed and avarice – emblematic of Victorian England’s attitude toward the poor – cause death and misery wherever it is allowed to run unchecked.

Dickens did not choose to write a message about Christmas spirit because he just really loved Queen Victoria’s court’s whole Christmas tree idea.  Dickens chose the season of Christmas to lend compelling imagery to a message calling for specific social and economic reform.  To strip the story’s influence of its economic foundation reduces it both to the ugliest of Dickens’ xenophobic conversion tendencies and to the most violent of Christianity’s hegemonic impulses.  Scrooge’s salvation does not lie in Christmas spirit; Christmas spirit is his salvation’s window dressing.  Scrooge is saved because he raises his clerk’s wages, uses his money to heal Tiny Tim, and donates to a Christmas charity.  If those truths make you or your Christmas-celebrating audience uncomfortable, then you are Scrooge; if the exhortation to care for the sick and the poor makes you want to find a different message, then Dickens (and the Gospel of Luke) is speaking to you.

Happy Christmas everyone – I’m currently watching Scrooge (1970), so have a cranky reminder.

Happy Christmas (Eve) once again, y'all. Still cranky about it.

Annual reblog of a persistent problem. Happy Christmas!

Happy Christmas, my friends. We watched The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992) yesterday, and as a result I have some thoughts to add to this old post. Quotations taken from the Project Gutenberg text of the story here.

Another common theme among the Christmas special Dickensian knockoffs that inspired my original post is how the anti-Christmas grump's bad attitude not only stains his own soul but also spoils the holiday for those around him. His rejection of Christmas brings down the neighbourhood mood, and his friends and family can't enjoy their Christmas until he has been brought back into the fold. Scrooge, of course, also ruins Christmas for his neighbours, but that has nothing to do with his unadorned office front. Rather, it is Scrooge's cruel business practices and disdain for London's poor that ruin Christmas for those around him.

The gentlemen who solicit Scrooge for charity at the beginning of the story explain that they "choose this time" (Christmas) for their endeavours "because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices." Scrooge's sin isn't his distaste for Christmas carols, but rather the cruelty with which he meets the "scant young nose, gnawed and mumbled by the hungry cold as bones are gnawed by dogs" of the youthful caroller -- in other words, his unwillingness to help those in financial need even at a time when people of his social class spend lavishly on themselves. As Scrooge answers the charity gentlemen, "I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry [...] It’s enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people’s." Dickens's condemnation of Scrooge uses Christmas as its setting because it serves to drive home his point about charitable support for the poor, not the other way around.

Crucially, Scrooge is given multiple opportunities throughout his life to make generous choices, and he chooses every time to prioritize his own gain over all other considerations. Several of the Christmastime knockoff stories have characters who hate Christmas for emotionally understandable reasons (childhood trauma, dead wives, what have you), but Scrooge's selfishness is given no quarter. What we see from the Ghost of Christmas Past confirms that Scrooge's father is cruel, but his sister is kind, and in fact loves Scrooge enough to plead with their father on Scrooge's behalf. Nevertheless, Scrooge chooses to ignore her death and reject her son (his nephew). His apprenticeship is to old Fezziwig, kindly and generous with the whole neighbourhood, and yet he ignores this good example completely in his own business dealings. He has a woman who loves him, but she is "a dowerless girl," and so he chooses to let her go to spare himself the expense of a family.

With the two symbolic children, Ignorance and Want, that the Ghost of Christmas Present shows to Scrooge from under his robes, he tells Scrooge plainly that every person he passes on the London streets on his way to and from his counting house is an opportunity for good works that Scrooge chooses to ignore. Aghast at the "wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable" children, Scrooge cries out "Have they no refuge or resource?" to which the Spirit replies with Scrooge's own words: "Are there no prisons? [...] Are there no workhouses?” When Jacob Marley first comes to Scrooge, he notes of his own chain that "I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it," and this free will must apply to Scrooge as well. Marley is condemned to wander the world and witness the results of his choices, but importantly he also chooses to give Scrooge a fighting chance -- "a chance and hope of my procuring." Scrooge is not forced to embrace the Christmas spirit; he is given the opportunity to embrace Christmastime generosity.

A changed man, Scrooge says in his desperate cries to the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come that "I will honour Christmas in my heart," but more important is the second half of the sentence: "and try to keep it all the year." Christmas itself is not what matters to Scrooge's salvation. His salvation comes from his immediate donation to the charity from earlier, hiring of local urchins for small tasks at high rates, raising of his clerk's salary, and the pledge "to assist your struggling family" that he makes for Bob and for Tiny Tim. Dickens's message is not subtle. As I noted in my original post, to strip the story of its economic considerations reduces it to both the ugliest of Dickens's anti-Semitic conversion tendencies and the most violent of Christianity’s hegemonic impulses.

In summary: If you celebrate Christmas but support slashes to Medicaid and food stamps, you are Scrooge. Dickens and his ghosts are talking to you.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.