Showing posts with label TVtropes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TVtropes. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 9, 2021

TVTrope's Standard Evil Empire Hierarchy page

I'm going to make some observations I've wanted to for awhile about the TVTropes Standard Evil Empire Hierarchy page. It's one of my favorite of their pages to revisit.

The more elaborate a TVTropes page is, the more likely it is it's mostly something the community editing that site imagined themselves and not something more general literary analysis scholars would take seriously.  And this page is a perfect example of of that.  Because I really don't think a single Fictional Empire that perfectly fits all the requirements actually exists.  But to me that makes it all the more interesting to over analyze and speculate about what created these ideas in the minds of these Internet Nerds.

This is partly related to how many of the Evil Empires that inspired these Tropes were trying to at least partly base themselves on the Nazis regardless of often not caring about their actual ideology.  But the page currently doesn't have a real life section so they aren't trying to apply it to the Nazi Regime itself.  Naturally Star Wars is a big middle man here.

It seems to me like the original concept behind this Trope was about the way the Protagonists in a JRPG or other kind of adventure story encounter the Empire rather then a truly objective view of how it's organized.  But over the years many editing it and adding examples have lost sight of that.

The Guard's role in a story is chiefly as the first significant Underboss the Heroes deal with.  He's often associated with a Fortress or Base of some sort because it's usually whichever one of those is nearest to the Starter Town.  They are referred to as one of the least sympatric because their mustache twirling villainy is what establishes the Empire itself as evil, once that's established there is then room for more nuanced characters within it.

In Star Wars this role is played by Grand Moff Tarkin, but Tarkin's rank in the Empire is not a unique one, it's a type of regional Governor basically.  Being entrusted with The Death Star may imply he's one The Emperor has particular confidence in, but the rank itself is still not unique.  In the expanded universe we do get to meet other Moffs.

For Code Geass the page designates this role to Clovis which is probably one of the most accurate to my theory of the original intent of any Gaurds on the page in it's current form.

In fiction using explicit Nazis a good model for The Guard trope is perhaps Conrad Veidt's character in Casablanca.  He's probably not a big wig in the overall Nazi hierarchy at all, but is locally who the people in Casablanca are most concerned about.  But one could also look at Klaus Barbie in 2020's Resistance.

The big evidence of how this page has lost it's way here would be it's Tolkien examples.  Sauron in the First Age and Saruman in the Third Age can be said to be guarding something, but that seems to have not been the actual original point of The Guard.  If I were to use that logic in designating a Guard for the Nazi regime the best bet would be Himmler, he did have that old Castle he ran the SS out of.

The Security Officer position was not originally part of the page, it wasn't there when I first started visiting it as recently as 2012.  And for Code Geass giving this position to Cornelia feels wrong, she was just taking over the same position Clovis held, she's really just a second Gaurd.  But is also equally as worthy as Schneizel for what The General refers to.  Historically Reinhard Heydrich (Later replaced by Ernst Kaltenbruner) fits The Security Officer probably better then any other leading Nazi fits any of these roles.

The General is described as being the opposite of the Guard in how sympathetic they are typically depicted as being.   Dennis Hopper's character in the 90s Samson movie is a pretty text book example of this kind of fictional General they are thinking of, the movie respects and sympathizes with him a great deal even though it also sees him as needing to die with the other Philistine leaders.

That role is often a General because something in the collective subconscious of many Military fixated cultures like Rome, America and at one time Japan desires to respect a good General, even an enemy one.  

This is part of why Trotsky is sometimes spoken of positively even by stanchly anti-Communist Conservatives, he was the actual Military Mastermind of the early Bolshevik victories against the Western Imperial powers who invaded Russia to try and stamp them out.  So these War fetishists can't help but admire Trotsky a little bit. Snowball is Trotsky in the Animal Farm allegory, that's why he's a Bad Ass in-spite of the cutesy name.  

And to the extent that WWII has influenced how a lot of fiction about War has been written in the last 80 years, the (many would argue manufactured) reputation of Erwin Rommel has definitely played a role there, the honorable German General who wasn't really a Nazi.  Patton's admiration of Rommel was a plot point in his movie.

But taking being THE General of the entire Empire too literally might result in one designating this to Goring.  But Goring was actually quite bad at that job and only really kept it because he was a shrewd politician, so basically the Axis Counterpart of Douglas MacArthur.

In Code Geass the protagonist's main talent is largely being a good General, so the person literally playing The General is also his "Evil Counterpart", and over the course of the story Cornelia and Schneizel both fill that role.  Schneizel isn't entirely unsympathetic, but this aspect of The General's role is clearly much better fulfilled by Cornelia, while Schneizel is more filling the Evil Counterpart role as Lelouch's aesthetic and ideological antithesis.

For Star Wars TVTrope's desire to designate this role to someone in the Original Trilogy results in it being claimed by someone who's name most casual viewers don't remember.  In the old EU (called Legends now) Grand Admiral Thrawn is the archetypical General, especially when later books give him more nuance.

The Right Hand and the Hero's Evil Counterpart are often the same person because both are partly modeled after Darth Vader's role in Star Wars.  That naturally makes it the least "Realistic" when trying to apply these tropes to Historical Empires, but there are still some historical things I could note.

In the 60s BBC miniseries The Caesars when Tiberius makes Germanicus the "Commander and Chief in the East" and then explains his intentions to Piso the Governor of Syria.  He says he intentionally wants who actually outranks the other to be "unclear".  So whenever I see a Star Wars podcast express confusion over the actual authority Vader and Tarkin have relative to each other, I think of that scene.

The part of how The Right Hand is defined about him being outside the normal organizational structure does make me when looking at the Nazis think of applying it to Rudolf Hess (and later Martin Borrman) they were the Deputy Fuhrer of The NSDAP Party but didn't technically have a government position at all, (kind of like being the Chairman of whichever Party the sitting United States President represents).  But since everyone in a dictatorship's government is a member of the Party that does make them informally the number two figure.

Britannia in Code Geass really doesn't have a proper Right Hand.  Bismarck who TVtropes designates that I would say is more a Security Officer but also an Evil Counterpart to Suzaku (while Suzaku himself was the Evil Counterpart to Kallen).

Since the page is open to new positions being added, I think something like "The Propaganda Minister" or "The Press Secretary" or "The Spokesperson" should be added.  Since I think in order for any Fictional Evil Empire to be like any modern Governmental Regime someone ought to be filling the Joseph Goebbels role, and for a not so modern setting the equivalent role could be something like "The False Prophet".  

For Apokolips in DC Comics that would be Glorious Godfrey.  In V for Vendetta (the movie version at least) that would be Lewis Prothero.  Currently many and probably most Fictional Empires don't have one, but the same is true for The Security Officer, and none of them are entirely universal.

In Code Geass I would oddly enough say Detard plays this role at the start for Britannia but then later for Zero and in the end for Schneizel.

The Oddball is defined as usually a Mad Scientist or Dark Magician, but the inclusion of Bobba Fett suggests it's sometimes just a mercenary being hired by the government.  The page currently saying this is Suzaku's role in Britannia is pretty weird, it should be Earl Lyod Asplund.  For the Nazis this is basically Mengele and other notorious Nazi Scientists, or from the Occult perspective people like Jakob Wilhelm Hauer, Karl Maria Wiligut, Savitri Devi or Miguel Serrano.  But given how some Trope pages treat this almost as the miscellaneous position, I kind of feel you could give it to Albert Speer or Julius Streicher.

"The Man Behind The Man" is who the TVTropes page most admits to being optional.  In Code Geass V.V. fits this pretty well.  In Star Wars you could say it's The Dark Side of The Force itself (or just The Force from Kreia's perspective).  In some JRPGs with a twist the Oddball and Man Behind The Man wind up being the same like Kefka in Final Fantasy VI(III on the SNES) and Dimentio in Super Paper Mario.

With the Nazis it depends on how you view them.  If you insist on saying it's a logical end point of Capitalism then you could look at Emil Kirdof, Friedrich Flick, François Genoud and the other businessmen involved in the I.G. Farben and Krupp arrangement.  People who continue to overstate the Thule Society's role would say Rudolf von Sebottendorf.  But I kind of see this being the role of Alfred Rosenberg.

Rosenberg is the only major player of the Nazi Regime who was a member of the Party longer then Hitler.  In fact everyone else who's name you're likely to remember or I mentioned in this post already didn't join till after the Kapp Putsch failed in 1920 at the soonest.  Rosenberg however was a member several months before Hitler was joining in the same month it was founded (January 1919) and had previously worked on an Anti-Semitic newsletter with two of the party's four founders, Dietrich Eckhart and Gottfried Feder.  So it almost seems justifiable to call him the fifth founder, and thus the only founder still important when the Party actually seized power.

It was Rosenberg who introduced Hitler to the works of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, making Rosenberg a key connection to both individuals who have been called "Hitler's John The Baptist".  While his power in the Government was mostly just running some bureaucracies, he was the person who's job it was to to fully define and articulate what exactly Nazi ideology was.  It kind of feels accurate to call him the High Priest of The Third Reich.

But Ulrich Fleischhauer is also worth noting.

Thursday, January 22, 2015

How do conservative and liberal writers write women?

[Update 2026: When I made this series of posts I was still mistaken about some aspects of Political terminology are used.  I called myself a Liberal but I was actually already a Socialist.]

I want to preface this by saying that I myself while Theologically Conservative have become increasingly socially and politically liberal (a left leaning Libertarian as opposed to most American Libertarians) and I certainly consider myself a Feminist.  So please do not interpret these observations as an endorsement of conservatism.

I had a post early in this blog's history where I discussed the strong women of French Pulp Fiction, (I've recently added to that post, and will add more).  I had promised back then that I would make more posts on that title subject.  And I still intend to do so, but this post is more so a follow up to a different aspect of that post.

The centerpiece of that post became my observation that.  "the two who were the “Conservatives” in the context of post Revolutionary France (in being devout Catholics and Royalists) Feval and Ponson. Seem to me to have over all been more inclined to write surprisingly strong independent women."

I want here to speculate how this trend might exist beyond simply the comparing of those 4 writers.

What I will say first is mostly that male authors who are liberal and feminists often fail, (not without successes to praise of course, my favorite characters in anything tend to always be the women) while if women are actually involved in the writing, like on a show like Pretty Little Liars  then women as characters and the handling of gender issues are each done much better then usual.

Hollywood writers tend to be liberal or leftist, many are not the Hollywood Liberal caricature Fox News pundits imagine, but they are left of center.  As are Comic Book writers and so on.  Yet that doesn't stop the handling of female characters and gender related social issues in those writings from being problematic.

The LadyGeekGirl blog deals with a lot of those issues, as does themarysue.com I don't always agree with them but their articles make good eye opening reading.  But two posts from different blogs are at the center of my thinking here.  I hate Strong Female Characters and this post which follows up on that.

I'm also intrigued by something I read on TVtropes about Pullman's His Dark Materials series.
"As a Reason.com review pointed out: Its kind of ironic that Phillip Pullman labels other works like Narnia as sexist and full of class snobbery, when Will the male hero, is the one who gets to fight the most and even becomes The Chosen One in control of the mystical Subtle Knife, meanwhile Lyra's greatest feats are accomplished by "feminine" wiles like lying and manipulation. "
Narnia (written by the very traditionalist C.S. Lewis) meanwhile is definitely not a work of Feminist literature, but it's handling of female characters is surprising.  The Pensvises are 2 girls and 2 boys, and A Horse and his Boy is also.

In the first book when the kids are given their weapons by Father Christmas he tells the girls that theirs are "Just in case" and doesn't intend them to be in battle.  But they are in the battle at the end, and it's Aslan who brings them there.  Also A Horse and His Boy criticizes the practice of arranged marriages.  Though admittedly by that time few even radical Christians stood by that practice, thought even today you'll find some defending it in concept.

Susan's fate is the main part of the Criticisms of Narnia as sexist.  Three things.

1. She did not go to Hell, Lewis himself said she could and probably will go to Aslan's country later.  In fact she's the one character still alive, in a story from her POV everyone else was fridged.

2. The negative things said about her are not really by Alsan or the narrator but other characters, her siblings.  Maybe their perception of things is flawed.  Remember Lucy had her jealously issues with her in Dawn Treader.

3.  It seems Lewis felt someone had to be left behind in The Final Battle for some thematic reason, and process of elimination left Susan the only logical choice, for reasons not related to gender.

You can validly look at it as Susan was the only one who Grew Up.

I'm the kind of person who rarely discuses Lewis without also discussing Tolkien.  But in this case I feel a discussion of Women and gender issues in Tolkien could be another post.

The Apocalypse series of Christian straight to Video movies from the the early 2000s were definitely made by Christians with highly conservative political values, and some disturbing homophobic implications.  But Hellen Hannah is the main hero of the series, and is very well written and acted.

The creator of Attack on Titan has gotten in trouble for defending Japan's actions against Korea and China during WWII.  Yet his handling of female Characters is among the most progressive of any Anime

So this clearly doesn't always happen, but it happens enough to warrant some wondering.  Maybe male liberal writers are sometimes more concerned with making their female characters Feminist friendly then with actually making them characters.  That wouldn't quite explain Pullman though.  Sometimes it may be simply that to many men no matter how Feminist they are other liberal agendas are more important.

I think even the most Feminist viewer of media would agree that a female character who's traditional but well written with depth is better then a "Strong" woman who has none.

Why are some "Conservative" writers surprising in this area?  My argument is not just that the women are well written regardless of being traditional.  Rather it's that sometimes they do defy gender norms without being vilified or even criticized for doing so.

Maybe sometimes the criticism is so subtle I mis it simply because I don't agree with it.  But if the writers who wrote Helen Hannah agree with many Baptists that women shouldn't be pastors, then their choice to write a woman as the leader of these End Times believers is odd.

Maybe it's the subliminal influence of ancient source material that isn't as "Traditional" as modern "Traditionalists" think they are.  Chief among those being The Bible. Deborah was likely the model for Helen Hannah, yet many "Conservatives" preach on Deborah blind to how her very existence in the Biblical narrative undermines their patriarchal assumptions.

In the case of the ones who are truly believers (I am an Evangelical Christian in case you didn't know) maybe The Holy Spirit worked through them in-spite of themselves.  And yes I think it's possible for even Catholics like Feval or Tolkien to be true believers in-spite of their Catholicism.  I was Saved for awhile before I fully accepted that the Roman Church I grew up in was incompatible with The Bible.

Maybe some of it is hypocritical, being selectively okay with women doing a Man's job if she does so in the name of some other Conservative cause.

Or maybe sometimes we should just see this as a reminder that people are complicated, and being conservative in one area doesn't mean conservative in others.  Or that believing in traditional gender roles as the norm doesn't always have to mean refusing to accept those who defy the norm.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

I think Dracula has an overlooked relationship to the Yellow Peril trope

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_peril
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YellowPeril

Dracula is not usually mentioned when discussing the Yellow Peril fear in fiction.  But I shall explain why I think maybe he should be.  (Note, The above linked Wiki sites could add Dracula in the future, but as of my writing this Post they don't mention Dracula).

Fu Manchu was not the very first such characters in fiction.  What he's usually considered to be is the first who's a really good Charismatic Super-Villain, but even that's disputed.

Fu Manchu himself was originally a much more sympathetic character then he's given credit for.  He has a Code of Honor, and was originally an extreme Revolutionary fighting to liberate the East from the British Empire.  Which makes me inclined to view him as being a lot like an oriental version of Paul Feval's Henri Belcamp or Fergus O'Breane., or Jules Verne's Captain Nemo.  And there was a genuine mutual respect between him and the British detective opposing his schemes.

The Yellow Peril Trope also has a strong connection to Gothic Horror.  H.P Lovecraft and some of his known influences like Robert W. Chambers. 

Above is a Police Sketch style drawing of how Dracula is actually described in Bram Stoker's Novel.  You may notice he looks kind of Asiatic.  The kinds of actors that pop into my head as someone who could look close to that are the ones that used to float around for The Mandarin before Iron Man 3 was cast.

In the Novel he is described as a Sezkely, and takes great pride in his believed descent from Attila The Hun.  Attila like Ghengis Kahn is among the historical figures that Yellow Peril style Super-Villains tend to look up to or identify with. The way western Super-Villains often tend to admire Napoleon Bonaparte or Alexander The Great.

The Novel also has a West vs East theme to it.  About an Ancient Evil from the old uncivilized Eastern Europe coming to infect Modern London.

And the Book does predate all or most major fictional works with a Yellow Peril theme.  And is only two years after the term is believed to have been coined in Germany.

It is no secret that Dracula is a very well known, popular and influential novel.  So why would it's connection to the Yellow Peril trope be overlooked?

To being with, Stage and Film productions have always cast White Actors to play him (with no offensive make up job like they get when they play Fu Manchu or a Fu Manchu knock off).  Bela Lugosi actually was more ethnic then most, but still did not have the features seen in the sketch.  And Dracula's appearances in Comics and Animation have followed suit.  So most people think of someone like Christopher Lee when they visualize Count Dracula.

Another reason is the overemphasis on his thin connection to Vlad Tepes, which was originally only a small thing Stoker threw in and by no means central to how he viewed the character.  None the less it has taken over how people choose to expand on his history.  Here is a good discussion of that issue.

Vlad Tepes himself had some Asiatic ancestry too probably.  So why would that contribute to Dracula originally being a Yellow villain being obscured?

First off would be more of the above reason, Cinematic depictions of Vlad always use white actors.  Hollywood typically just sees Europe and thinks white (especially when pre-1500), being uninformed that Eastern Europe was and is more ethnically complicated.

Another reason however is characterization.

While the Dracula of Stoker's Novel chooses the Asiatic aspect of his Ancestry to take Pride in, (Attila as discussed already).  Vlad Dracula was the opposite, he hated the Asiatic Turks, and thus hated the thought of sharing any kinship with them.

So, that's my rambling for today.  I hope I've given fellow Nerds something to think about.

Paul Feval, a very over looked but historically important author

I want to increase familiarity with him, here are some links about his works, including ones selling modern English Translations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Feval
http://www.blackcoatpress.com/feval.htm
http://www.blackcoatpress.com/johndevil.htm
http://www.blackcoatpress.com/invisibleweapon.htm
http://www.coolfrenchcomics.com/habitsnoirs.htm
http://www.coolfrenchcomics.com/habitsnoirstimeline.htm
http://www.reviewingtheevidence.com/review.html?id=6883
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheBlackCoats
http://www.blackgate.com/2011/05/06/john-devil-and-the-world-of-paul-f eval/
http://www.blackgate.com/2011/07/15/the-black-coats-an-introduction/
http://taliesinttlg.blogspot.com/2010/05/classic-literature-vampire-countess.html
http://taliesinttlg.blogspot.com/2010/06/classic-literature-knightshade.html
http://taliesinttlg.blogspot.com/2010/04/classic-literature-vampire-city.html
http://www.reviewingtheevidence.com/review.html?id=6803
http://www.reviewingtheevidence.com/review.html?id=6803
http://www.lsu.edu/necrofile/knightshade.htm
http://www.thedraculasociety.org.uk/ds_reviews-bst.html
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2010/02/vampire-city-by-paul-feval
http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/feval_paul

John Devil is arguably the first Supervillian, as a Detective author he is important in bridging the gap from Poe to Sherlock Holmes, and his Vampire stories are very interesting considering they predate Dracula and even Carmilla.

The Black Coats saga was his most seminal work, the in fact the first fictional depiction of The Mafia.