While not possessing cable TV, my sister and I manage to maintain obsessions with certain television programs. Aside from our common crack-like addiction to Gilmore Girls, my weakness is House, and for a while Cathi's was Bones. For those of you who, for whatever reason, don't make a habit of familiarizing yourselves with every mildly interesting criminal investigation drama that hits primetime, Bones is a show about a forensic anthropologist named Temperance "Bones" Brennan who, with the help of her male detective friend Booth and a team of ludicrously competent forensic specialists, solves murders.
Following the footsteps of every forensics-focused show since CSI, Bones takes obvious pains to differentiate itself from CSI by including a wacky twist to the premise. (For peer review, see NCIS [CSI, but with marines!], Numb3rs [CSI, but with math!], and The Mentalist [CSI, but with a super hot perceptive guy!]) In Bones, the twist is Bones herself. Bones, as a character, is logically and empirically-minded to the point that she seems autistic at times. She fails to pick up on emotional cues, vocally discards concepts like love and religion as chemical imbalances and delusion, and generally makes everyone uncomfortable with her bluntness and lack of regard for social norms. But she's a woman. Watch as the freak emotionless women awkwardly receives a hug, and then solves a crime. Riveting!
Clearly, I object to Bones for this reason. It offends my sensibilities and validates my disgust for media culture that the concept of a preeminently logical woman is so mystifying as to make a viable premise for a television show. Plus, any good feminist would note that while Bones is so socially and culturally incompetent as to fail to recognize a reference to American Idol or understand why a fed and changed baby may still cry, she manages to adroitly wield eyeliner and put together a form-flattering outfit for each episode.
Still, after having watched a few episodes (because though I morally oppose the show's premise, I am nothing if not a hopeless crime drama junkie), I can't say I dislike it, and I actually find myself relating to Bones' character. She is not a sexualized being. There is an emphasis on her intelligence and problem-solving abilities. She, too, disdains cultural norms. Frankly, as a young lady possessing stunted emotionality by most conventional female standards, I take pleasure in finally seeing this quality of myself represented in the media.
It's necessarily a love-hate relationship. Bones features the only leading female that I've found on television who possesses a general tenor of analytical-mindedness that I can relate to, but she's still more a gimmick than anything. On one hand, sometimes there are lines like this:
Bones: People have done much worse for beauty - neck stretching, foot binding...
Booth: Okay, you're saying that makes it okay?
Bones: Of course not. Any major alteration of our underlying architecture demeans us.
On the other hand, there are lines like this:
Booth: Why don't you go mingle?
Bones: Why?
Booth: Because you're a girl.
I think I'll have to call it a wash for feminism.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
It's a story as common as a penny, son
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment