POI

[kindkit]

I finished season 1 tonight.

So, the inevitable heterosexual backstory for Finch has arrived. *sigh* I knew it was inevitable, because for a US network to allow a lead character in a prime time show other than a soap or sitcom to seem gay is about as unlikely as for them to let said character be actually canonically gay. And Finch seemed gay. Not just for stereotypical reasons, although there were those, but because of his lack of any known heterosexual interest, his intense relationship with Nathan Ingram, and his intense relationship with Reese.

I knew it was inevitable, but that doesn't help, and in fact part of my disappointment comes from knowing it was inevitable. It shouldn't be inevitable. Sometimes queer subtext should actually pan out into queer text. *lots more sighing*

The other thing is that the introduction of Finch's Compulsory Heterosexuality wasn't even good storytelling. If the show wanted to demonstrate the human cost to Finch himself of making the machine, it was right there already, in the death of Nathan Ingram. We've seen how much Finch loved Nathan, and I'd say still does love him. Besides all the melting-eyed looks Finch gives Nathan in their scenes together, there was also that moment in "Identity Crisis" when Finch, high on Ecstasy, calls Reese "Nathan." What that says to me is that all the feelings of an ecstasy trip, such as (I'm told) intense happiness, connectedness, openness, the joy of loving and being loved--those are feelings Finch associates with being with Nathan and nothing else in his life. All the groundwork for that storyline had already been laid. But instead, thanks to the need to demonstrate that Finch is Absolute Not Gay Oh No, we get five minutes out of nowhere with a woman we've never seen before, and whom we've never seen interact with Finch, and are told this is the great loss and heartbreak Finch has had to endure. To which I respond: meh. And seriously, this is such an obvious "pull heterosexuality out of a magic hat" move that I wonder if the showrunners actually meant for Finch to be in love with Nathan and then the network said OH HELL NO. Or else, and this is the sadder but perhaps more likely explanation, heteronormativity is still such a powerful and invisible force that nobody among the showrunners noticed how emotionally vapid and implausible the storyline was, because of course Finch must have loved a woman and of course we must all be moved to our hearts that he had to give her up.

*sighing x1000*

Before anyone jumps in with "but FANFIC": yes, I know. I know fanfic can make Finch and Reese and Carter and Fusco and the whole damn show queer. That's not the point. Fanfic is a handy dissolver of heterosexual master narratives, and I love that, but fanfic is always unofficial, marginalized, provisional, unreal. The heterosexual master narrative is still the storyline with the official imprimatur, the one we see onscreen, and the only one most people will ever know exists. (ETA: It could be argued that text-queering fanfic is a classic example of the limitations of subversion as a tactic of resistance. It's not empty or meaningless, but subversion is very much a tactic of the powerless. It doesn't dislodge or even much disturb the dominant ideology, and in fact it can itself be subverted, recuperated into the dominant to some extent. Witness the Deliberate Queer Tease in many sources and the way it brings us--people who want queer characters and queer stories--into the fold as consumers of narratives that are explicitly and exclusively heterosexual. /I was an academic once, let me show you it.)

Like I said, I knew this would happen, but the fact that I knew makes it worse, not better.

I am nevertheless attempting to cheer myself up with "but FANFIC." In my head I can see a couple of easy ways around the fiancée issue, in part because I'm willing to see Finch's love for Nathan as unrequited. Maybe Finch fell genuinely in love with Grace despite a pre-existing unrequited love for Nathan, or maybe he had a relationship with her out of friendship and his own loneliness, knowing he could never have the person he really loved (which is not a nice thing for him to do, but it happens). I will cling to these scenarios until/unless canon makes them impossible.

Speaking of tragic heterosexual backstory, Reese and Jessica. There was more than a hint of classic fridging there, and it was even more unnecessary than that sort of thing usually is because Reese's motives for going underground were already pretty clear and compelling. I was momentarily intrigued by the idea of Reese being so dark that he would kill Peter and Jennings in cold blood (and actually why wouldn't he be, considering his CIA work?), but then that was averted to try to hand Reese back some moral high ground. I guess we're supposed to assume that Peter is in the Mexican prison too, and perhaps also the serial rapist from 1x04?

Moving on to more pleasant things: Reese's stalking investigation of Finch is just a little too obsessive to be purely professional, isn't it? Which would explain why Reese was unwilling to ask him questions when he was high: I can see how in Reese's mind that would be taking advantage and breaking Finch's trust, whereas anything he can find out through his own methods is fair game. If Reese just felt that for his own safety he needed to know more about Finch, I doubt he'd have such scruples. (Has someone made a Reese vid to the Police's Every Breath You Take? Surely they must have done, unless it's so obvious that no one has bothered.)

And then there's "Happy birthday, I bought you an apartment!" Yeah, that's totally normal. What do you want to bet that Finch bought Nathan slightly over-elaborate birthday and Christmas presents every year? Not apartments, because Nathan was rich, but always things were just a little too perfect and too generous. *cuddles unrequited!Finch* And is this episode the first time Finch calls Reese "John"? I don't remember it happening before this point.

To conclude with the season finale: I hate cliffhangers and I want to know NOW how Reese and Carter and Fusco will save Finch. I actually have season 2 on my shelf at this moment, because a used copy showed up at the store where I work and after my employee discount it was only $12. But I will not watch it yet, because I told halotolerant that I'd wait until she had her copy and then we could both watch and discuss it. Anyway, the plot of the finale was way over the top but satisfying, and it was fun to see Amy Acker's trademark vulnerable-little-girl persona subverted so that she turned out to be stone cold villain.

I can, however, ease my frustration with fanfic. It occurred to me that I can read fanfic and yet protect myself from spoilers so long as I only read fics that were posted before S2 started to air. I, er, also have a ficathon story to finish writing and a long-neglected chapter of the Regency romance to finish and post, so I should be able to keep busy enough that my head doesn't explode before I can start watching S2.



Oh, one last thing. Those of you who have POI icons, where did you get them? I want one.

Comments

[vilakins]

Finch could always be bi. So he called Reese John already? I wanted to tell you he eventually would but I couldn't remember when he started.

I also can't remember now, but didn't they show Finch sort of stalking the artist from afar before telling us who she was?

What else has Amy Acker been in? POI is the only show I've seen her in AFAIK. She's good, but her whiny insinuating voice annoys the hell out of me. [looks her up] OK, the only other thing I've seen is OUaT but I didn't recognise her so she must have used a different voice.

I'd like to get icons too. I suspect I'll have to make some.

[frayadjacent]

Amy Acker was also in Angel, Dollhouse, and Alias, the first as a main character and the latter two as a recurring character. She's super talented and her voice is pretty different depending on the character.

[vilakins]

[nods] I haven't seen any of those but she was quite different in OUaT; that's the mark of a very good actor. Some just basically play themselves.

So she chose Root's voice for the character; interesting.

[kindkit]

Finch could always be bi.

He could, but he won't be. Not canonically, which was my point.

Also, I am allowed to want more gay male characters, just as people are allowed to want more bisexual characters, more trans* charactes, more women characters, more characters of color, etc. etc. Bisexual and gay are not interchangeable. They're different experiences, and I don't identify with bisexual men the way I do with gay men. (I especially don't identify with the usual--to the extent that bisexual characters are even common enough for there to be a "usual"--media bisexual man, which is someone who may have sex with men, generally offscreen, but who is primarily or exclusively seen in relationships with women. But that's another rant.)

I know of Amy Acker through her being on Angel, where she played a fragile-girl character who annoyed me a lot of the time. But she's an excellent actor.

[vilakins]

Sorry, see your point. I was just thinking up reasons for Finch/Reese. The relationship with the artist isn't even that credible as they haven't given us much foundation.

If Root annoys you, it won't be for being fragile. :-)

[frayadjacent]

I totally think the same as you Re: heterosexual narratives, the limits of subversion, and the Queer Tease. Really well put.

I like chayiana's POI icons. There are also some at fandom_icons.

[kindkit]

Thanks! I think about these issues a lot because they come up a lot and really bug me every time. But I think this is the first time I've managed to articular why I find fanfic powerful and yet at the same time, compared to canon, inconsequential. Fanfic is a wonderful kind of resistance to problematic canons, but it's not a solution.

Thanks for the icon links! I'll have to go looking for some that were made long enough ago not to be spoilery. /massive spoiler-phobia

[frayadjacent]

The fandom_icons ones will spoil you for which characters are around in S3, which I try to avoid knowing at any rate. But these are from s1 and very early S2: http://chayiana.dreamwidth.org/75656.html

[jb_slasher]

Indeed there is a vid to Every Breath You Take though it is the Scala version.

[kindkit]

Cool, thanks!

[lilliburlero]

That sounds like a terrific bore: Compulsory Heterosexuality that's been pasted on with a gluestick is the pits. I tend towards the view, unfortunately, that it's an overriding heteronormativity that drives it, rather than writers including queer characters and themes and then producers and companies balking.

I loathe Queer Tease stuff with increasing virulence; the phrase that often gets used is 'having your cake and eating it' but for me the experience of watching one of those dynamics is not having your cake while not eating it: as well as shutting down the possibility of an openly acknowledged sexual relationship, they shut down the possibility of serious engagement with non-sexual love. It's lose-lose.

I also sometimes wonder who does see themselves represented in/identifies with a lot of the canonical het pairings out there: in almost everything I'm fannish about, the canon het pairing is the one I'm really, really not pushed about hearing any more of. (This might be just me, of course, but I like to think it might be an indication that a lot of writers are even getting heterosexuality wrong.)

BUT FANFIC seem to me very partial as a solution as well, for all the reasons you suggest. I value canon-compliancy (to varying degrees and in varying forms, but the sort of fic in which there's just an unspoken agreement that [canon thing] NEVER HAPPENED--I don't, of course, mean canon divergence AUs where the world is changed because something didn't happen, but just the sort where an element is removed because the writer didn't like it, even if I don't like it either!--is usually more frustrating than fun to me) and it always seems like a terrific waste of energy having to find plausible mechanisms to obviate plot and character elements that never seemed plausible in the first place.

[kindkit]

a lot of writers are even getting heterosexuality wrong

I think maybe they are. In so many shows and movies and books with a male lead character, the creators forget to make the woman he supposedly loves a person. She's just a role: her life revolves entirely around the male character and she's got no discernible other interests, no personality apart from loving and supporting him. Person of Interest (I don't know if you've seen it) is a good example of this. There's a very important recurring woman character who's a homicide detective, and she gets quite a bit of character development and backstory. I think the show does a good job with her. But the two women who are supposed to be the loves of the main male characters' lives get none. We see one of them repeatedly in flashbacks, but no personality comes through because all she gets to do is be beautiful and love and rely on the main character.

I think it's terrifyingly possible that this really is the way the average straight man thinks about women. But I can't imagine any woman looking at the female characters in these relationships and thinking "oh, yeah, I can totally identify." I'm not surprised that what seem to be the big het pairings and big het fandoms are from female-character-centric and/or female-authored sources. Or at least more egalitarian sources like, say, the X-Files.