wren_kt7oz | Epiphany

This is something that I posted to the bj spoilers board, and now I'm putting it here as well.

It's my interpretation of what I think that last scene in Babylon means.

Open to all comments (even the rude ones).

Was thinking again about what we've been hearing about the
ending and I had an epiphany that I thought I'd share.

It struck me that the problem for me (and I suspect many like me) is
that we've become so bj focused, that the larger issues that C/L
might be trying to address have sort of slipped by.

I asked in an earlier post what the message from the last scene was
meant to be, and totally missed the obvious.

It's not about bj.

It's not even about Brian.

It's about the fact that, despite Stockwell and his ilk, despite
bombs and hatred and violence, Babylon and all it represents are
alive and well.

Brian, from what we have heard, comes close to despair in the final
episode. He considers not rebuilding. He's on the verge of letting
the haters win.

But he doesn't. As once before when he fought Stockwell, he comes
through. He takes up the challenge, and Babylon, his culture, his
way of life, is rebuilt, young and beautiful forever.

I think that's the point that C/L are trying to make with the last
scene.

It's not about Brian being alone and lonely and doomed to permanent
isolation.

It's about Brian (and the unapologetic gay lifestyle he represents)
being triumphant against all the odds.

Did they have to split bj up to do that?

No, of course not.

But, in a sense, that's part of the message too.

Justin is the new generation. He also has survived hatred and
violence, and he's emerged stronger than ever, ready to spread his
wings and take on the world.

He's now "the best homosexual he can be" and he's gone off to live
his life to the full, despite all those who would like to see him
fail, to see him fall, to restrict and reduce him (think the
Hollywood honchos kowtowing to the Bush-ites).

And yes, there are probably ways that all this could have been
achieved without the split.

But I don't think that C/L place the same sort of focus on the bj
relationship that I do.

I think, for them, getting this amazing gay love story to the screen
was almost an end in itself. It doesn't have to have a
conventionally happy ending for them to feel it was all worth it.

For me, looking at it from a character-centric viewpoint, not from a
general, politicised stance, it seems that Brian especially has been
sacrificed. But I suspect that they simply don't see it that way.
That they see both Brian and Justin as representing the triumph over
the forces of bigotry and hatred and Bushism.

I think that's the message we are supposed to get from Brian dancing
alone at a restored Babylon.

Which simply leaves it for us to know the characters well enough to
understand that from here, they can only move on to bigger and better
things. That Brian is no more stuck in limbo in Babylon than Justin
is stuck forever in a garret in the East Village.

And that they are not forever doomed to being apart.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

You write that you "have no idea what the heart of the Michael character is." I agree. Perhaps that is what is so annoying about Michael. He is like an empty box: all the facets are there, but why? Michael has all the features the boy next door should have, but has nothing else. He doesn't have anything real inside of that package. I blame Hal for that emptiness; I don't see him loving the character. He doesn't give a part of himself to Michael. Is it because Hal can't identify with a gay character? I choose to believe so. He has been the only one of the grew that has repeatedly pointed out his heterosexuality. Why does he think that it is necessary when he is acting in this show? He is afraid of something, and I think we know what it is.

BTW: If you want to laugh at Michael, my story Beery Busy Night on Liberty Avenue might give you a chance. http://www.livejournal.com/users/elaere/8559.html

If we take the characters as different facets of gay life, the Michael and Brian - relationship becomes even more complicated. Michael is attracted to Brian, but Brian is not attracted to Michael. So, does that mean that the lifestyle Michael represents has a yearning in it for something wilder? And at the same time that the lifestyle Brian represents does not have similar feelings towards the other lifestyle. Brian's attitude towards Michael - "you are so pathetic" - gets quite a different interpretation if that is true.

I have to admit that I simply can't stand Hal. It started with merely disliking Mikey, but now I can't even stand to look at photos of the man.

I have a theory that we're just allergic to some people, and I think I'm allergic to Hal.

As for his constant "I'm straight" ... he just drives me nuts. I can't tell whether he's closeted, extremely homophobic or both.

But what did it for me as far as Hal was concerned was the comment he made about only dating slim women, because women who weren't slim were in some way spiritually impaired. I've forgotten the exact quote, but that was the gist of it. Honestly! Of all the ignorant unenlightened garbage. And in a country where women and young girls die of annorexia and other eating disorders, it's downright wicked to be putting stuff like that out there IMO.

Yuck!

I did read the story. I laughed out loud as soon as Guinness was mentioned. I'm of Irish descent, and I can't drink the stuff myself, so I really felt for poor Mikey. But I also had to laugh.

What you say about the characters is interesting, isn't it? But maybe the fact that Brian has let Mikey hang around all this time does mean that the wild side (if you like) still likes to know that there's something more settled around to fall back on sometimes. I'll have to think more about that.

As for now - it's Monday morning and I'm off to work.

Have a good one.

W

I also started out hating the character Michael, from the hospital roof in 101. Then I noticed that Hal could act about as much as my left boot. Then I watched my first and last interview of his, both at the same time. And the latest addition to my disgust of both is this:

Question: If there was a Queer as Folk reunion in 10 years, what would we see?
Hal's answer: Well, Melanie and Lindsay would still look terrific, Bobby Gant would still have giant pecs, and a different actor would be playing Brian. [Laughs.]

http://64.78.33.181/features/index.cfm?id=2434&cat=1&page=features&sub_page=weekly

Whatever is the reason for that kind of thought is irrelevant here. That he says something like that in an interview where Gale is not interviewed with him is enough to show what kind of a man Hal Sparks is. Despicable.

I'm glad I could make you laugh! Thanks! I felt for Ted as I wrote, but I didn't feel any qualms about torturing Michael. He is my favorite victim for ridicule: always has, always will.

Ela

Epiphany

no subject

no subject

no subject