TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Deconstructing Magical Girls

Go To

zeroplusalpha The World Is Mine from behind the 7th Door Since: Apr, 2009
The World Is Mine
#76: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:05:26 PM

Well, from that point of view most of society is useless. All that's "useful" is food and sex, or at least the reproductive side of sex.

How so? It's only the ceremonial stuff that perpetuate these kinds of rituals, but even then there would be some who would argue that this in itself bestows some kind of functionality, by contributing to maintaining social identity and similar constructs.

edited 1st Nov '09 11:06:26 PM by zeroplusalpha

Play Again? Y/N
Clarste One Winged Egret Since: Jun, 2009 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
One Winged Egret
#77: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:14:34 PM

And here comes the proverbial kid asking "why?" over and over again. Either you're a reductionist or you aren't. I think calling weddings etc useless but not subjecting the rest of society to the same analysis is sort of half-assed.

Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#78: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:20:47 PM

Bah, ceremonies are important, they give structure and function to important meanings of society.

The *particular* ceremony is admittedly less important, but rituals are part of what makes society function.

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
zeroplusalpha The World Is Mine from behind the 7th Door Since: Apr, 2009
The World Is Mine
#79: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:22:15 PM

Well, I'm not really qualified to make that kind of analysis.

I personally would classify a wedding ceremony as "useless" in terms of concrete productivity, in that its achievements are either cosmetic or intangible concepts (cultural idiom, custom, etc etc.)

"Useless" as I define it here doesn't mean "Wrong", or "Obsolete". So, yes, that would apply to some of "the rest of society", but...I think that's too large a statement. Possibly, if given a narrower margin.

Play Again? Y/N
Clarste One Winged Egret Since: Jun, 2009 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
One Winged Egret
#80: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:28:23 PM

Why is concrete productivity an end in itself in a way that abstract productivity isn't? Don't answer that since there's no point in derailing this thread further, but that's pretty much the place the place to start.

zeroplusalpha The World Is Mine from behind the 7th Door Since: Apr, 2009
The World Is Mine
#81: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:30:38 PM

I won't answer that...because I can't, and it's a good question. I think about this sometimes, but I wouldn't presume to advance any arguments on the subject.

Play Again? Y/N
Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#82: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:57:27 PM

Related topic

Basically, it revolves around the notion of gender roles in the ancient world. The modern world is effectively decended from two (kind of three) major cultures: The Romans (who were taken over / infected culturally by the Abrahamic religious tradition), and the Chinese.

Not really, you're leaving out both India and the arabic tradition, both of which are different from the structure of the romans. (especially with respects to inheritance)

Both / all three were fairly family-centric, male-dominated, and fraknly, outright misogynistic cultures.

I'll note that this is the case of literally every culture discovered. There are no documented matriarchies.

The question can be "Why, exactly, were these cultures the ones that succeeded, when other cultures were absorbed or conquered, or recieved massive cultural influence from these major cultures?"

I think concentrating on Rome, Israel and China somewhat misses the point: The main difference was always between settled agricultural lands and mariginal areas. Remember that when the romans fought their first battle there were already civilizations thousands of years old in Mesopotamia. And whose family structure was not all that different from that of the romans.

A simple, but brutal, answer can simply be that They Had Reserves. They were able to play the numbers game better than other nations. When Hannibal Barca eliminated two whole legions of the Roman Army, Rome would not collapse, because it could simply absorb the loss of essentially the bulk of its military forces by pushing more citizens into military service. Hannibal could not muster the ability to lay seige to Rome, and the Romans could simply let Hannibal pillage the countriside for as long as it took for them to sack Carthage, which could not sustain a war.'

Bad example, since it has much more to do with political and military organization than family structure (the Carthaginians didn't really marry much different than the romans) the romans did indeed have reserves, but that was because of a conscious policy of recruitment, military service, and of absorbing subject populations into the roman polity. (as opposed to the Carthaginians who mainly left their subjects alone and preferred to hire mercenaries) Rome did not have a significant *population advantage* compared to the areas controlled by Carthage: They however, did exercise much greater control over their areas and could make better use of their manpower resources. It's not a matter of there being ten times more romans, it's a matter of rome being able to put say, every tenth man, underr arms while Carthage might only muster every thirtieth.

'''There's even reference to this in the legendary history of Rome, see The Rape of Sabine. After all, when women are relegated to no more role than making offspring for the next wave of soldiers, they're far more likely to actually be making those babies. In fact, prostitution was a common occupation for unmarried, unwealthy women.'''

Except that roman women were relatively active in economic and social life. Certainly more so than greek women. Like in most warrior cultures they were expected to take on a wide set of responsibilities when their husbands went to war.

'''That's not even counting the Jewish heritage, which was very much family-centric. In fact, the whole book of Leviticus, as I argued with Zyxzy recently, was primarily created specifically for "cultural warfare" - ensuring that the ancient Isrealites "lived like Isrealites", and remained free of outside cultural influences, including marrying outside the religion, while focusing upon creating as large a family as possible, so as to spread the purified culture, rather than through conversion, which would allow in undesirable blendings of culture. (As happened when the Romans adopted Christianity.) All of this leads to victory through sheer fecundity. The heartlessness of Western Civilization is the source of its power.'''

Except that by the time the West gets a decisive advantage over the rest of the world... That kind of family structure is already gone. Europeans married *later* than people from elsewhere, and thus had *fewer* children than non-europeans. When you marry at 25 rather than 15 you lose out on some of the most fertile years of a woman's life. The euroepans when they first encountered other civilizations did not significantly outnumber them: Quite the reverse! But in the case of america contact itself soon changed the equation.

Europeans had many advantages when it came to exploiting non-europeans: Economic, political, institutional and military. But numerical advantage was never one of them.

'''Meanwhile, that Taoist belief? Yeah, that was China. And China spread it throughout the Eastern world, and it became part of the foundation for Eastern civilization. Might (in terms of numbers) eventually made them, if not right, certainly the victors, and the ones who wrote the history books. And he who controls the past controls the future... We are the descendants of those cultures, because almost all other cultures crumbled to dust before them, or simply accepted that their ways were superior, and let their culture get Borged with the would-be conquerers.'''

Except that this particular view simply doesen't jive with the historical record.

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
zeroplusalpha The World Is Mine from behind the 7th Door Since: Apr, 2009
The World Is Mine
#83: Nov 1st 2009 at 11:58:40 PM

I'll note that this is the case of literally every culture discovered. There are no documented matriarchies.

I remember reading somewhere that the Ainu (amongst others) were (EDIT: and apparently still are) matriarchal. I will endeavour to confirm this.

Let's start here.

edited 2nd Nov '09 12:01:56 AM by zeroplusalpha

Play Again? Y/N
Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#84: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:00:58 AM

I remember reading somewhere that the Ainu were matriarchal. I will endeavour to confirm this.

The ainu are matrilineal and I think also matrilocal not matriarchal.

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
zeroplusalpha The World Is Mine from behind the 7th Door Since: Apr, 2009
The World Is Mine
#85: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:02:50 AM

I don't know what those words mean, so...okay.

Play Again? Y/N
Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#86: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:11:57 AM

A matrilineal society is one that traces descent and families on the mother's side. (So you belong to the family your mother belongs to, etc) a matrilocal society is one where, once married, the couple moves into the mother's house.

Matrilineal societies are usually still patriarchal (IE: male-dominated) in societies that are matrilineal but not matrilocal your father would be considered a member of a different househodl than your own. (his sister's/mother's household) and you'd most likely be raised by your uncle (who is a member of your household since he's your mother's brother)

If the society is also matrilocal (as some native american societies were) your father would move into your mother's house.

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
Gaunt88 from Australia Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
#87: Nov 2nd 2009 at 5:11:37 AM

Yikes, this thread's vered a bit off-topic, huh?

Regarding the original post, there's a few good ideas in this (sadly far too short) thread in the writers block forum.

GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#88: Nov 2nd 2009 at 11:36:39 AM

Arilou: The *particular* ceremony is admittedly less important, but rituals are part of what makes society function.

No, I'd argue that the rituals aren't what makes society function (apart from the market for wedding supplies and rentals and some musicians and photographers), but it's the institution of marriage—or, more accurately, the willingness to acknowledge people as being married, and the willingness to recognize or assume there is a difference between those who are married and those who are not—that is a significant part of society.

Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#89: Nov 2nd 2009 at 11:44:57 AM

No, I'd argue that the rituals aren't what makes society function (apart from the market for wedding supplies and rentals and some musicians and photographers), but it's the institution of marriage—or, more accurately, the willingness to acknowledge people as being married, and the willingness to recognize or assume there is a difference between those who are married and those who are not—that is a significant part of society.

But that's what a ritual is, it's an acknowledgment and a setting apart. Saying "This is something special, out of the ordinary" and, in the proper use of the word, "holy" (which means something like "set aside")

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#90: Nov 2nd 2009 at 11:48:02 AM

No, the ritual is the whole bunch of shenanigans—e.g. vows with a priest, long wedding gown for the lady, best men, invitations to tons of family and friends, and all that stuff.

Arilou Taller than Zim from Quasispace Since: Jan, 2001
Taller than Zim
#91: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:01:50 PM

Yes, yes it is. These things are precisely there to set it apart, to mark it as something different from the ordinary.

EDIT: Hence my point that the *particular* rituals aren't that important.

edited 2nd Nov '09 12:02:16 PM by Arilou

"No, the Singularity will not happen. Computation is hard." -Happy Ent
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#92: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:20:53 PM

The parts of weddings/marriages I have trouble with are the bits that make it look like an economic exchange. In theory, I'm planning to live with this lady out of our own free fucking will, not buy her from her dad. Jeez.

Anyways, on the topic of historical pressures towards or against matriarchy: what about disease factors? How relatively egalitarian, gender-wise, were societies like those of the Native Americans or others where they simply didn't inherit the brutal history of disease organisms that where the real genetic legacy of dark ages European sanitation? If it follows that a) more misogynist cultures reproduce more and thus create a greater pool for the disease organisms to play with, b) more misogynist cultures were better suited for organizing labor around domesticated animals, or c) any other factor which would tie gender roles to disease resistance, then we've got an interesting pressure that could be symbolized in a Magical Girl story (to try and draw the tangent back to the main topic).

Imagine: the Sealed Evil in a Can that every Magical Girl gains her powers to fight long ago came up with a counterweapon. It developed an STD that is very easily carried from parent to child, especially to sons. This STD grants the EVIL some power over those carrying the disease (allowing for the kind of "supernaturally corrupt the background character this episode focuses on" stuff you saw in Sailor Moon), plus probably a few symptoms that can be mitigated with simple magic to the point that they become ritual for everyone in the world and people historically forget its a disease at all (bonus points if the symptomatic treatments form the basis for the rituals of the setting's Path of Inspiration Religion of Evil - which, of course, serves as a front for the Sealed Evil in a Can).

Just like it's easy for one male to have kids with a lot of different women, a single male could spread the STD widely and guarantee a generation of infection. What this means way down the line (when our Magical Girl story happens) that females who are NOT infected (and can thus access these powers) are very special and important, and the rare males who are uninfected are extremely rare and valuable. Insert questions of whether such males can use the powers themselves, play up the inevitable sexual tensions with love triangles between infected and uninfected characters, and so on. It has potential.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#93: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:22:38 PM

And you could play this for drama, turning a growing-up story into a story about losing one's innocence, virginity, and magical power at the same time.

RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#94: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:33:26 PM

And you could play this for drama, turning a growing-up story into a story about losing one's innocence, virginity, and magical power at the same time.
I made my decision. Even if I was a girl at the time, it was my decision. Was it worth it, you ask?

...ye gads, this could be quite awesome. Someone write this.

edited 2nd Nov '09 12:59:46 PM by RadicalTaoist

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#95: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:40:50 PM

No, no, you see, that would mean that losing one's virginity is a BAD thing, if it also means losing one's magical power.

RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#96: Nov 2nd 2009 at 12:59:32 PM

Actually, if you lost the virginity to another uninfected, no harm no foul and you could keep the powers. Which means inevitable shipping dilemmas.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
G.G. Since: Dec, 1969
#97: Nov 2nd 2009 at 1:34:27 PM

Also, can there genuinely evil villains? Not necessarily Card Carrying Villains who do a Face–Heel Turn after being beaten by The Hero but villains who are so despicable that you love to hate them? And even Batman-esque villains who all seem to represent Batman own psyche in a way who either misunderstood or complete monsters who can either sympathized or hated immensely. Even Lex Luthor who we all know had humble beginnings did something of a Face–Heel Turn when he became obssessed with killing Superman. I ask this because Nanohaverse (or some magical shows of this type) annoys me deeply as most "villains" are Anti Villains who just needed to blasted by the heroine to get back to "normal". Can't story have some herines who not all that heroic just as villians who only act out of necessity? I like the ideas presented here and I just want to keep the ball rolling.

edited 2nd Nov '09 1:40:32 PM by G.G.

GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#98: Nov 2nd 2009 at 2:04:24 PM

Radical Taoist: Then we'd end up with Rape as Drama with extra drama because it also destroy's a girl's magical powers if the guy raping her has the anti-magic STD?

AceOfScarabs I am now a shiny stone~ from Singapore Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Drift compatible
I am now a shiny stone~
#99: Nov 2nd 2009 at 2:05:12 PM

Precia Testarossa, Quattro and Scaglietti come to mind.

The three finest things in life are to splat your enemies, drive them from their turf, and hear their lamentations as their rank falls!
G.G. Since: Dec, 1969
#100: Nov 3rd 2009 at 7:38:54 PM

I admit they have Crossed The Line a bit but their punishments seemed too light for this troper.


Total posts: 1,023
Top