But I don’t want to cut for spoilers. What do you mean, you still haven’t seen the episode? Fine.
Everyone else, I’ll see you below the cut.
I know, I know, you want to know where I’ve been. Reporting on roller derby, for the record. Also playing roller derby, at job interviews, and also in Dublin. And then I’ve been reading Hunger Games, and as I’m halfway through Mockingjay, you’re lucky I’m sitting at a computer at all.
Anyway, where were we? Oh yes. Reasons a palaeontologist might kill someone.
Incidentally, while the last instalment was about illegal activities on the black market, fossil smuggling and dastardly private collectors, there is a more above board, but just as fraught disagreement going on right now with a twelfth specimen of the renowned Archaeopteryx, the “first bird” known from only eleven specimens all from Germany. The recently discovered twelfth specimen is not just worth millions of euros to its discoverer (and the owners of the land, if they can claim ownership) but is almost priceless in scientific worth, if it ends up in an accessible collection. [Please note, I am not saying that anyone is going to be murdered over ownership disputes over this specimen and its availability to researchers. I am saying it would make an EXCELLENT crime show plot.]
3. To Establish Publishing Priority
Okay, technically Elementary already did this plot this season, albeit with maths (whups, spoilers for Solve for X, I guess.) So it’s understandable that they didn’t go this route with palaeontology, but they so could have.
Have you watched Elementary yet? No? Care about spoilers? Yes? Then skip this post. Don’t worry, I’ll be back and you can find it again.
In this instalment of “seven reasons to kill someone (involving palaeontology):
2. Your dealings on the fossil black market are about to be exposed.
So a few episodes of Star Trek ago, Becca asked me: “Have you caught up on Elementary yet?” and I said “NO! But I know the most recent episode involves DINOSAURS.” And she said “I WANT TO KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS WHEN YOU DO SEE IT.”
So there resulted an email “chain” that was really just me emailing her every five minutes while she was asleep, but then she work up and said “You should post this email chain so the whole internet can read it!”
This isn’t that post.
But this post DOES contain SPOILERS for the episode called Dead Clade Walking. On the other hand, you’re not watching Elementary for the whodunnit plots, are you?
The details of the palaeontology used in the show I’m letting go because TV never gets anything exactly right – but I do think that the writers could have maybe done enough research to get the word ‘palaeontology’ right. They kept called the scientists archaeologists, which is already a BONUS MOTIVE for why palaeontologists might want to murder someone.
And now, if you’re willing to brave spoilers, come with me below the jump…
There are quite a few books in existence that I should have read already, that if I admit I haven’t read, I’ll feel obliged to add “…yet” to the end of the sentence, and the admission would probably garner surprise, from anyone who knows me, because of COURSE I must have read them. They seem so influential on my thinking! Usually these books are in the bibliography of Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould and other evolutionary biologists. (What? Dawkins has opinions about religion? I’m not interested.)
Well, that list of books just got one shorter when I finally got my hands on and read The Mismeasure of Woman by Carol Tavris. Considering its more famous big brother, The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould was one of the most influential books on my interpretation of anthropology and psychology, you’d think I’d have got my hands on this one earlier, but I had no excuse. Other than the fact that I already knew a bit about the way social and scientific rhetoric is used to put women In Our Place, and I wasn’t expecting to be super surprised.
I wasn’t super surprised, but there were still revelations that made me go “huh.”
Like the idea that Premenstrual Tension might not actually be a thing.
(No, think about it: the main indicator for PMT is that symptoms occur in the two weeks leading up to ones period. As in – in a two week window out of every four. That’s a really large window, ladies. Add to that observer bias and society’s insistence on dismissing every negative mood women ever experience, and I’ve decided to give up on believing myself an irrational slave to hormones ever again.
It’s 22 years old, this book, and it does only touch on intersectionality: the experiences of women of colour and queer women are only touched on, trans* people aren’t mentioned at all. And I have no idea what has changed in the last two decades: maybe medical students don’t all learn to think of the 70 kilogram male body as the paradigm from which all other patients deviate. Possibly someone has done extensive research on premenstrual symptoms and proven that societies perceptions are right: menstrual hormones do unequivocally cause specific mood changes. But that’s not the point.
The point is that the human insistence on dividing the world into two: artists and scientists, virgins and whores, clever and stupid, money makers and nurturers, men and women, is harmful to men, women, and everybody who wants and deserves to be treated as an individual (that’s everyone).
We all lapse into oppositional thinking without being aware of it. In one charming study, parents were simply asked to describe their children. Those who had three or more children spoke about each child in individual terms: Jane is intellectual, they might say. Sam is social and Pam is athletic. Parents who had two children, however, described them as opposites: Pam is a leader, Sam is a follower; Sam is the sociable son, Pam is the unsociable daughter.
Do I agree with EVERYTHING in the book? No. Do I take even what I agree with at face value? No. But it paints a powerful picture of the way the way we think and speak of sex and gender affects our society, and it’s well worth picking up if you’re interested in that sort of thing.
I really wanted to title this post “Well, that explains alot,” but it doesn’t. This post explains alot. The book I’m talking about explains something much less important than that. It explains why a terrible broadway musical was terrible.
I’m getting ahead of myself, aren’t I? Okay, context: Three years ago, Becca, Feather and I went to see Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark while it was in previews. To say that this was a terrible Broadway musical is not in fact accurate; when we saw it, it was two terrible musicals: Spider-Man, a terrible musical retelling of Sam Raimi’s 2002 movie; and Turn Off the Dark: a terrible musical retelling of Phantom of the Opera, but gender-flipped, and with spider-powers instead of music. Incidentally, I can’t stand ‘Phantom of the Opera, I think it is a bad musical telling a bad story, but Turn Off the Dark was worse, as I have gleefully told anyone who would stay still long enough for the last three years.
So when Becca, tasked with the job of being my Secret Santa, sent me a copy of Song of Spider-Man, a memoir by book writer Glen Berger, my squeal of delight was probably audible back in New York. A chance to relive the train wreck from inside!
Okay, I HAVE no thoughts about this. None whatsoever. I haven’t seen anything particularly DISNEY happen since the acquisition. I don’t know enough about how corporations work to think this should change Marvel properties or Disney properties.
Spider-Man ride at Disneyland?
I don’t know.
OPEN TO THE FLOOR. What should I be worried about?
For the 11th January (LJ | DW) sdelmonte asked for one thing I miss about NYC and one thing I don’t. And because MY FRIIIIIENDS would be obvious, I’m going to make it specifically about the city itself.
A Thing I Miss: TWENTY-FOUR HOUR SUBWAYS
The thing about living in London was that every late night at work, every social event, every night out, had to be planned and structured around The Last Tube, and the alternative Night Bus route and the difference in timings and does this pub close before or after Last Tube. When I worked at the Poorly Managed Sexy Coffee Shop, the time I finished cleaning up could make the difference between a 45 minute journey home and a two-hour journey home. Evenings out in Manhattan? You just allow half an hour more, maybe, because of infrequent trains. But you know you will get a train, and despite what popular culture would have us believe, I never felt unsafe on the late night subways…
(Well, except that one time I witnessed a domestic violence incident and then had to suffer a homophobic tirade from the man sitting next to me)
…but definitely not to the extent that waiting for a Night Bus – or even travelling on a Night Bus – would. No matter, the knowledge that no matter what the hour, I could get my usual subway home, made my life a lot easier.
A Thing I Do Not Miss: TIMES SQUARE
Ugh, what is the point of Times Square? It’s like the location equivalent of those celebrities that never seem to do anything – maybe they were on a reality TV show or perhaps their parent is a thing – but are just famous for being famous. Times Square is… some steps. And a bunch of shops that are there to cash in on the tourists who come to see… the shops. And the TKTS booth, I guess. It’s a hotmess of the things I hate most in the world – crowds and people dressed as muppets. SO MANY CREEPY ELMOS.
I said this to someone once, and they said “what? Doesn’t London have Piccadilly Circus?” and my response was “I know! I don’t get that, either!” Sadly, Times Square is close to places I actually did want to be (comic store, dance class, the garment district, the theatres) that I had to go there a lot. But I did so reluctantly and not without grousing every step of the way.
Ugh, Times Square.
It’s my bedtime when I’m starting this, so I’m sorry it won’t be long, but for the 10th January (LJ | DW) shoroko asked for my thoughts on Avatar: The Last Airbender / the Legend of Korra, which I really don’t know if I can do justice this late, but I will, because I was asked to!
Although I will say, it is hard at the best of times for me to give thoughts on Avatar that don’t amount to incoherent hand flaps and I love this franchise so muuuuuuch, because that’s not fair. Neither cartoon is perfect. They both have flaws. And the one I am most personally attached to is possibly the more flawed, and sometimes I want to hit them, if it were possible to hit cartoons. But then I realize how much I love them and I hide from the internet’s right and just criticism of them both,
But I love Avatar, a lot. A lot.
I love Aang, because he is excitable and distractable and incurably optimistic. I love Korra because she is self confident and headstrong and rushes straight in without think. I love that both Avatar shows are about children with great power and even greater responsibilities, who have to live up to the image the world holds up to them. Aang evades and Korra barges in, and both are scared and pushed around, and both turn around to the world and decide that no, actually I’m going to do things my way.
Aang has a counterpoint in his one time enemy turned friend Zuko, who also has to deal with the world’s expectations, and struggles to find his own path and make his own decisions when faced with the burden of a family’s expectations. Korra has… a boyfriend who is a jerk and who gets a weird plot that should be about a girl who has to live up to the expectations given to her by her social status, her financial power and her political leanings, but instead is all about… well, Some Guy. This is less interesting. But hey, can’t have ladies hogging the storylines, right? Everyone knows men can’t pay attention to women.
I love the world building – I love the idea of a world built around four elements, I love that the powers are tied into actual real martial arts and there’s a constant spirituality and it all looks and feels so constant, even when the two shows are separated by 70 years.
I love the supporting characters – even though I think the last season focused a little too much on the wrong characters. I love the way it manages to be a show centred on young people in a world run by adults, without making the young people any less important.
I really like the themes of growing into power in a world that’s real, complicated, and changing. Of changing the world and being changed by it. Of facing the world’s expectations and redefining those expectations to suit your path. And the fact that it’s consistently funny, and always pretty to look at – well, that’s a bonus.
Aaaaand now it’s even later and I want to write MORE. But it’s been a long day at the museum and… bedtime.
(I love Avataaaaaaaaaaaar.)
For the 9th January (LJ | DW) bjornwilde asked what global or cosmic hero/es I like, based on the correct assumption that I tend to prefer street level superheroes (The Question, Black Canary, Daredevil)
So here’s three powerhouses, from three different publishers.
I’d been dabbling a toe into the Super books since Kelly-Sue DeConnick’s run in Supergirl, which for a while was the only Super book I read. I really really did not like Man of Steel in a way that was eye opening about what I thought was important about Superman (no doubt acquired through osmosis by spending my weekends watching Justice League with a man who did his dissertation on Superbooks). So it turned out I had Opinions! And I started reading more superbooks. And then I fell into a hole of Power Girl, because 1) Jimmy Palmiotti and Amanda Conner and 2) if the Super family is a family of people who are displaced from their home and trying to find their place, then Power Girl is the losted and most displaced of them all. And of course, in the Ame-Comi universe she’s essentially a genderswapped Superman, and we all know how much I like genderswaps.
Anyway, I like Karen cause she’s flexible in her changing situations. She’s smart and tech savvy, and uses her secret identity to help people with Starrware rather than building up a personal arsenal, like SOME smart super rich ‘hero’ types I can mention. And she takes absolutely zero crap, from anyone. She’s brave, compassionate, and just trying to find her place in a planet – no, a universe, that isn’t her own.
Any claims that I like Carol Danvers for exactly the same reasons that I like Karen Starr will be met with a shifty look and an awkward subject change.
I jumped on the Captain Marvel bandwagon at the same time everyone else did – when Kelly-Sue started writing her solo book. (A pattern? To heck you say!) And I’ve been meaning to go back and read the rest of Princess Sparklefists, but there’s no hurry, right? As it is, Captain Marvel is one of the very few books I judge good enough to be on my small pull list. Carol, like Karen, is take-no-prisoners lets-punch-things. She has global powers and responsibilities (co-leader of the Avengers), but very real fears and worries (and a case of imposter syndrome, which is a very female concern.)
Otherwise known as Invincible’s super girlfriend, Samantha Wilkins has her own life, and her own problems (which don’t get focused on nearly enough) including her own archnemesis. Dealing with Mark Grayson’s melodrama should be enough to get her a medal on its own, but she never ever lets it stop her. She’s pretty much the most powerful person in the world, including Invincible himself, even though she makes the tough decision to not use her powers when she gets pregnant.
Yeah, there are problems in Atom Eve’s story, but she’s an awesome character and a great superhero.