Pound Foolish Wisdom #4 6/30/13

     I have been saved once again from writing a post by the amazing PF.  Here is his latest Pound Foolish Wisdom... this time on a character I don't have a whole lot to say on... Barret.  Savor his eloquent musings...

                Pound Foolish Wisdom

               Where AIO Characters Are Put Beneath the Microscope

#4:  Barrett
When it comes to fiction, the little guys are the big guys.
Side characters leaven a story to perfection. Who do we remember from Macbeth? Not Macbeth, Lady Macbeth. Tintin? The Thompsons. The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe? Tumnus, yet he barely gets any lines.
The reason is we like them, so we want to see more of them. But the key is we’re denied that. We catch only glimpses, and so they become like beautiful sea shells. We can’t have the entire beach in our room, but shells give us crumbs of a much greater beauty.
But if a sibling were to take a box of beach sand into our room to make a sand castle on our floor, we would be… well, displeased. A box of sand would be more of the beach than a shell, but still we would… maybe get a little grumpy. Okay, we’d pull our hair, say some rather nasty things, yell for our parents, and then storm downstairs and write in our diary how horrible our sibling is.
The magic of shells is that they’re only crumbs of the beach.
Therein lies the balance. It can be difficult to turn a side-character into the main character. In general, it’s best not to attempt it. (Remember Cars2, starring Mater? If you’d managed to forget, I apologize for reminding you.)
Barrett is one of those characters who started as a shell. But now he’s grown. Is he beautiful beach, or a bunch of messy sand in your room?
We first met Barrett in album 51, Game for a Mystery. This episode has taken some online abuse. People always find something to complain about in it.
The mystery’s too complicated. The mystery’s too simple. Emily’s voice is too childish. Emily’s voice doesn’t sound enough like a child. Matthew is too uninvolved. Matthew is too involved.
Now, frankly, these arguments are like clean shoes and a mud puddle. They cannot coexist. People may dislike the episode, but reviewers have yet to hit on a concrete problem with it.
Except one:
You don’t care about Barrett getting his game back.
However, this is only a problem… if Barrett’s the one you’re supposed to latch onto. He’s not. Emily is the star of the episode. What detective with a love of questions wouldn’t be interested in finding something missing? And so, the missing game matters to her. And she matters to us.
Barrett is, after all, a side-character at first.
 In, When You’re Right, You’re Right, Barrett, without a great and glorious “Verminoids” fetish to panic over, comes off as more mature. He has a good line or two: “I’m sure she loved it. Make her eat the whole bowl.”  In his birthday song for Priscilla, he’s still buffoonish, but on purpose. This, subtly developing him, shows us he can be funny on purpose but still be the same person.
Next stop, Stage Fright. Ah, by now, we’ve come to know Barrett. The charming actor, the remarkable singer, the smooth flirt… wait, what!?
In many ways, Barrett acts not at all like himself in this episode. Barrett was none of these things until now. Yes, we heard him practicing the trombone a bit, but why is he suddenly so good at singing? Lessons from Selena Gomez?
Also, Priscilla flirts with Barrett in a coquettish voice. Priscilla is either “Knee Deep in Love” or her “Wells Fargo Wagon” has gone around the bend. And one can almost see Barrett’s romantic smile when he says, “Charm is locked and loaded, Miss Adelaide.” It’s a wonder our romantic Emily didn’t put on a cheerleader outfit and hop and down yelling, “Yay, Barrett, make ’er swoon!”
But all that rather throws out the buildup we’ve had till now of Barrett the Bumbling Blunderbuss. But not entirely. Barrett, after-all, is a scaredy cat in this episode. He’s still a buffoon, just a buffoon with talent and a girl who adores him. So, Barrett is developed in this episode into someone more relatable and rounded. Well played, Kirby Atkins, McCusker and Dave Arnold.
Barrett is back to his silly self in the thought-provoking slice-of-life episode Opposite Day and the entertaining, The Malted Milkball Falcon, with amusing results.
But then trumpets, The Amazing Loser. Emily is apparently off spying on people with binoculars in a tree or something, Barrett is now a full-fledged protagonist on his own. But do we care? The show tries to make us focus on his rivalry with Jay, but since Matthew’s the one who solves all the clues, Barrett’s really competing against Matthew. And what would be so bad about Matthew beating Barrett?
Then comes, Unbecoming Jay. This well written episode feels like a black-and-white movie classic rewritten to star kids. It has all the subtlety and emotion, and lack thereof, of a Cary Grant film, and for that, it earned an impressive, “91.4” Odyssey Wiki fan-rating. At the center of it all is Barrett, the witty Barrett, the pleasant Barrett, the… huh? Now, where did this come from? In this episode, Barrett gently cracks a number of quick little jokes, making Jay’s cousin Cindy, and the listener, laugh.
Who are you, and what’ve you done with Barrett?
Are you the same guy who yelled, “I’m proud of you for admitting that you have a problem!”? Are you the same person who said, “Your flute playing was very… flute like.”? Since when do you easily know what to say?
We all like this episode, but what’s up with Barrett?
Then comes his latest appearance, his first three-parter, For Three Dollars More. And his metamorphosis is complete. Now, the tables have turned! Now we can see Matthew be absurd, with his rat-disease inflicted Katrina! Come see Connie spontaneously program the ROC (how exactly did she do that?) to absurdly make a bank explode. But is Barrett absurd? Oh heck no.
Barrett? Absurd? Never.
Instead, he’s frustrated how absurd everyone else is. And where is all the humor he had in his last episode? Does he see any of the hilarity in his situation? Does he try to make even one joke? Oh no, he’s just mad. And don’t forget, there’s more! Whoopy! Whit teaches Barrett a lesson by making us listen to him as a grouchy, stingy miser for ten minutes. Oh joy.
Some months ago, a commenter on the AIO podcast said something like, “Does Barrett have a personality? He seems to have a different one with every episode.” I chuckled, ignored it and forgot it. I can’t even remember who said it. Now, we can see the commenter was right.
This isn’t to say Barrett is a bad character. Barrett is a fairly good character. All his appearances, even Three Dollars, are enjoyable on their own. Some are unforgettable.
But put together, they’re problematic. Barrett is glaringly inconsistent. First he’s just plain nuts. Then he’s a talented musician with a girl who adores him. Then he’s a clever joke-making gentleman. Then he’s mature but grouchy and never makes a single joke.
Those are facts.
And Barrett will have to deal with them if he’s to endure.
It’s shape up time, Barrett. Or else, get back in your sister’s shadow, and be a side-character again. You must either be a lovely shell or a beach. But if you’re going to be messy sand in our room, hit the road. We hate vacuuming.

     Bravo!  Bravo, Mr. Foolish!  I do hope you enjoyed that.  It's certainly longer and more complete than anything I could do. (Unless I spent more time on my articles.  Hey! that's an idea.  I'll make a note of it.)
     Thanks for reading!

AIO Article: Pound Foolish Wisdom #3 12/16/12

     I apologize for not posting the last two days.  I'm afraid blogging was not my highest priority.  But, PF saved me yet again with a new Pound Foolish Wisdom.  It's not Christmas-themed, but... eh, who cares?  But before I get to PF's article, allow me to write a short introduction to it...

     Magazine and website articles are often made to sway the reader's view on things.  This is not the case with newspaper articles, as newspaper articles are boring little things that are "fair and balanced".  I actually enjoy reading the newspaper, but not because I think it's great writing.  Articles on the other hand, can be rich of information and opinionated at the same time, and that's what makes them so great.
     And there are some articles that don't make a dent in the public's view on a certain subject.  These articles are weak and void of meaning and good writing.  I am embarrassed to say that I have written some articles such as this on this blog, mostly because I was in a rush, or I didn't really know what my opinion was on a particular subject.  But either way, those kind of articles do nothing to sway anyone's opinion or even give information on something.
    But there are other articles that do stir things up just a bit, and do change the someone's view on a subject just a bit.  I believe I can safely say I have written a couple of these as well.  These articles could be considered merely "good" or "average", as they're certainly not bad and certainly not fantastic.
     And, finally, there are those articles that might cause an earthquake, metaphorically speaking of course.  These articles are so brilliantly written that they can sway a reader's opinion on a particular subject, even if they give both sides of the argument.  These articles can cause a good or bad effect, depending on what the writer's stance on an issue is.  I can also safely say that I haven't written a single one of these kinds of articles.  But I believe PF has.
     Now, you may be wondering where this intro is going.  It hasn't mentioned the article yet at all, and I apologize for that; I will get right to the point now.  This article might be PF's best yet, though admittedly the Liz one could arguably be his best.  I will tell you right now that this article is on Emily.  For all you Emily-haters out there, prepare to have your view on Emily changed forever.  Well, if you are a really stubborn Emily-hater, this article may not change your view completely, but it sure makes a good argument for the brilliance of Emily's character.  So I will now present you with: an article that could cause an earthquake.  (Metaphorically speaking, of course)

    

          Pound Foolish Wisdom

               Where AIO Characters Are Put Beneath the Microscope 

#3:  Emily
     In Defense of Goin’ Green

“Some characters…. Won’t do much, and they fade out of the strip. Others, like Snoopy, just take off, and will do anything. These are the characters that stay.”
Charles Schulz, the Peanuts Golden Collection

    Such a character is Emily. She can do anything. She behaves terrifically, recklessly, then sadly and humbly regrets it. And, one of the most amazing moments of Emily is… she giggles lovingly with Buck… then, with a clearing of her throat, assumes a business manner of authority as she begins her case of Buck’s missing phone.
    Some months ago, I made this remark (here it’s a bit shortened):
    "I'm a bit sad as I find that so many AIO Soda Shop Board Members look down on Emily. She is charming and wonderful. The very things so many despise about her are the things that make her amazing: her passion, her boldness, her incredible natural talent for knowledge and deduction, her forcefulness, yes, even her rudeness. Emily is all that a woman should be, and possibly the best role-model of all the female characters in the show today. YES, she is forceful. YES, she outspoken. YES, she speaks her mind. And that is what a female should be.I cannot say it passionately enough. Thank you, AIO, for Emily Jones."
Mr. Thinker – err, that’s a pet name my friend “Suzylou” came up with for CreativeThinker101, aka “Alex Jefferson.” You know, the guy who runs this awesome blog. Anyhow, here’s a bit from an article he wrote, in which he used my remark to represent the side for Emily, and then tried to debunk it:

     “Sorry Pound, but I think your hearing aid needs to be adjusted. (No offense, if you're reading this! :) Emily is by no means the best of the new child characters… And I wouldn't call Emily 'naturally talented'… a small sense of deduction does not mean you are at the same level as Mozart. And in episodes like 'Game For A Mystery' and 'Stage Fright', she almost seems to just stumble upon the solution without doing a whole lot to solve the case. And she even got the wrong culprit in 'The Malted Milkball Falcon'. For someone who's a naturally talented detective, that's bad.) And you said that Emily was rude, so how does that make her the best role-model?
     Emily is very complex. She is stubborn, bossy, ambitious, perceptive, helpful, and a normal girl all at the same time. I like that AIO has an incredibly complex character, and I like that we get to see a lot of different sides of Emily. But her voice is rather annoying, and all that complexity gets to be too much. And so, Emily is my least favorite AIO kid character, though she's not too horrible.”
     Oh, did you notice he said she’s “not too horrible”? Isn’t Mr. Thinker so kind? Anyhow…
     The debate, as all you Soda Shoppers know, rages on. Mostly, it has evolved into a ridiculous everlasting showdown of shamelessly absurd remarks and fake insults. On a whim, I formed the club  E.R.K. on the Soda Shop. (the Emily RULES! Klub.) Which led to… well, mayhem, including a barrage of people starting their own “Emily Klubs” as they unsurprisingly came to be called, particularly the E.S.K. (Emily Stinks Klub) and both E.R.K. and E.S.K.  now have their own separate, independent site!  http://emilyrulesklub.wordpress.com/ http://emilystinks.webs.com/
      Months later, E.R.K. and E.S.K. are still consistently towards the top of the first page of the Character forum.

     The battle still rages and new miniature character wars, about Mitch and Camilla, are springing up, but so far nothing has challenged the Emily monstrosity that reigns continuously over the character section. But this is all just the tip of the iceberg. Just about every single big AIO blog has snapped at Emily, revised their opinion of Emily, and praised Emily, and condemned Emily to death. Everyone, for some reason, has something to say about Emily (!):
     “In previous episodes, such as "Stage Fright" and "The Malted Milkball Falcon", she's been the bossy, know-it-all. I'm surprised she didn't flaunt her test results in front of everyone's faces or tell Matthew or Barrett they could be as smart as she was if only they worked a little harder. And yet, today's episode takes the stronger and more attractive sides of her personality--her dedication, her willingness to persevere--and combines it with a dash of much needed humility, giving someone I could easily empathize with for 25 minutes.”

Ben Warren in a review of Emily’s first title-episode, Emily the Genius
“… disliking Emily Jones (She grows on me)…”

The Josh and Ally Company, Out of Control in Odyssey
“…to me, Emily Jones has been the most annoying new character. This episode made me change my mind about her. She was embarrassed by all the attention she was getting for being a "genius" and then when she was told that she wasn't, she brushed it off and took the advanced placement test anyway. I really admire that in a person.”

Odyssey Thoughts
So, why all the controversy? Just what exactly makes people get so insanely and irreversibly opinionated about Emily, with others lost in the middle unsure what to think?

      Before we answer that question, we must understand Emily herself.
     How mysterious Emily is. She falls in love and giggles, then clears her throat and calmly sets about piecing together clues and investigating. She bosses Matthew around, yet values him as her best friend and closest companion. She is everlastingly confident, yet doubts herself.
     Mr. Thinker complains she is “too complex.” SS moderator T.S. suggest we cannot understand her, cannot see where she is going, cannot piece together who she is or what God may wish for her.
     Nor can she. She is soul searching. Wandering. Are we meant to understand Emily? Or is she to be mysterious, (an interesting idea, since then, her cases could be seen as a metaphor for her own being.)     However, before we assume Emily to be impenetrable, let’s take a careful look at her. That’s my job with these, after all.
     One of the most basic, everyone-knows-this elements of making a character is there has to be something they want. They have to desire something. After all, it’s what we want that so often determines our destinies, and what we sometimes must sadly abandon when called in the opposite direction. So, what does Emily want?

1.    She wants love.
We know that from Buck and the lengths she went to maintain Matthew’s friendship. She goes about trying to make her peace with Matthew, desperately.
    Emily Hater Interruption: “But she blackmailed him!”
     Yes, but that’s the point. She did things she knew were unkind to get what was important to her heart. That’s how badly she wanted it. Now, I’ll conveniently move on.

2.    She wants meaning.
     As I said, T.S. once was wisely pointed out: “She is… like pieces of gravel or sand. I know that God must have a plan for her, that these pieces, however small, fit together to form a creation of determination and flame for God, but I cannot see how the pieces fit to form that being. I wonder whether Emily knows that that being could one day exist.”
     It’s true. She doesn’t know who she is. But she wants to. She needs significance. All she does can be seen as striving for significance. Every case, every time assertion of her opinion over another’s, every argument and bossy remark.  Every time she asserts herself. She wants to have direction. Purpose.
Emily Hater Interruption: “But all that means is she’s bossy! She’s out to control everyone! She’s overbearing to Matthew! She’s a BRAT! Argh.”
     No it doesn’t. Emily is seeking who she wants to be. She is trying to have an impact on the world. Her forcefulness shows her desire to head in particular direction. In her heart, she wants to make a difference. If you think she’s doing it the wrong way, fine. The point is she’s trying.

3.    She want to be heard
     She wants this so badly. She just can’t contain herself. Her own emotions and thoughts explode out of her. Her energy has to get out. She knows her opinions have worth and shouldn’t be ignored.
Emily Hater Interruption: “I  think they should be ignored!”
     I’ll ignore that.

4.    She wants to love
     Maybe tonight, true love will show-owww, under the mistletoe… sorry. Ahem. You may be rolling your eyes right now, but it’s true. Emily wants to show love to people. She doesn’t just do things for her own benefit. In fact, to quote myself (ahem) we “People accuse her of doing things for her own benefit, yet we never see her doing a deed that only she benefits from.”
    Emily Hater: “Yes we do! Who else benefits from all her griping!? Huh?”
     She thinks she’s right. She’s trying to fit the world into her view of perfect. Yes, mostly she just can’t shut up. But she does care about others.

     So, there’s Emily in a nutshell. She’s wandering. She doesn’t know who she is. She’s a growing, changing girl. Emily wants love, importance, other people to pay attention and know what she thinks, and she wants to love.
     Does that seem all that unlikable to you?
     If you really just can’t like Emily, then you just can’t. But maybe we just can’t get passed what at first seems brattishness and her “annoying” voice. Maybe we haven’t really tried to care about Emily. Maybe… dare we admit it… we’re not really listening to her?
     Emily is all a woman should be. Her rudeness is one of her ways of being strong. We aren’t meant to constrain ourselves. Emily dares to show us this.
     She’s Emily.
     In closing… how can I resist? Emily RULES!
 “She stinks! She stinks! You hear me!? STINKS I tell you!”
     Oh, shut up.
    
     My view on Emily was, in truth, not completely changed after reading this article.  I still think she has an obnoxious voice and attitude, but I can see her more clearly now.  I suppose that's the point of "putting AIO characters beneath the microscope": so you can see them clearer.  So that's it. 
     Thanks for reading!

AIO Article: The Land of the Free 11/5/12

    Sorry this took so long, (I should've had it up 6 days ago) but here's PF's latest edition:

Hi, all! This is Pound Foolish. I realize I’ve been long away, but as you are reading this, I assume you all
survived with your lives.
Therefore, I shall skip the formalities of corny jokes and apologies about my horrendous lack of
glorious words
enliven your lives, and get to the article.
Mr. Thinker hinted I’d be doing an article breaking the “Pound Foolish Wisdom” routine. Indeed, my
article is on a rather touchy subject...

Politics in AIO

The Presidential Debates left me excited, fascinated, worried, and hopeful.
Mitt Romney, winning the debate according to most, kept on the offensive and enthusiastically
communicated his vision, while Barack Obama spent much time defending “Obamacare”,
that dangerous act which threatens to destroy all private insurance companies.

And yet, the Oddysians seem to ignore all this.

Is everyone in Odyssey a completely irresponsible American, uninterested in voting
the future of their country?
Such a pity, and Whit seems so great.

Somehow, Odyssey remains a place whose only politics, election –wise, are its next mayor.
A place of wonder, excitement, and discovery, and of absolutely no talk about any guys
named Obama or Romney.

We know this to be because Odyssey must remain as timeless as possible. (Insert joke
about Connie’s aging here.)  
In this way, Odyssey seems as if everything could have happened recently.
And the characters seem to live in their own world,
free of many of our own changing concerns, occupied instead with timeless ones such
as heartache, death, and being attacked by doves.

Yet, occasionally, Odyssey has stepped beyond that boundary of political neutrality.
And, sometimes, when it does, storm clouds brew.

By Any Other Name

Attacks the sadly growing corruption and misuse of our legal system.

You Go to School Where?

This tale wasn’t meant to send a political message so much, perhaps, as to satisfy listeners
who wondered why there were no homeschoolers on AIO, it sounds like, to hear
Dave Arnold introduce it on the Official Adventures in Odyssey Podcast.
However, many frowned upon it politically. And it did indeed have many political assumptions,
such as that homeschooling is a good option in the first place. With it becoming more and
more popular to assume public school is best, one can’t help being fascinated by this
forgotten AIO homeschooling tale that’s sunk beneath the surface.

Another episode about schooling is Subject Yourself.

This delightful little comedy about Laurence Hodges camouflages a very serious sub-plot
with the his mother struggling with the school system. She is tentatively butting heads
with them because the textbooks overlook religion “except in the most negative way.”

The situation the in the subplot with the textbooks only grows worse. Today, not only
are there no positive references of any kind to Christianity in textbooks, but children
are punished if they so much as wear a T-shirt with Christ’s name on it.
http://www.clubhousemagazine.com/truth-pursuer/god-in-school

Not only that, even worse problems overrun it. The teachers union donates millions that
could be advancing education and schools to Planned Parenthood. Thus… Taking money
from children and using it to kill children.

The Forgotten Deed

Ah yes, this beautiful work. Many of their absolute best characters come together in this special
episode. Tom, Connie and Eugene, Whit, Jack, Bernard, and the fantastically annoying Cryin
Bryan Dern in a role that’s unforgettably hilarious even for him. There’s also a couple of
enjoyable smaller side characters who appear in enjoyable roles: Mrs. McCallister and Mayor
Faye. It examines the gripping subject of the separation of church and state. And even though
it only lasts a few seconds, it’s sheer Odyssey candy to see Bernard with Dern.
The episode’s plot: Whit’s End may be shut down because it is openly religious, but is built on
Government land. The show provokes such questions as “Just what does separation of church
and state mean?”  “If this clause really does carry such weight as politicians pin on it, why can
government continually make laws forcing religion to do things and restricting them from doing
things?” “Why from that phrase do so many draw the idea that our religion shouldn’t influence
our political opinions?”

Historically, Thomas Jefferson began the phrase “separation of church and state”, because he was
concerned with preventing the creation of a governmentally appointed official church. He wanted
all religions to be equally respected by the government and the people.

That’s it.

There’s room for doubt that he never woke up one morning and decided to make it so religion and
government could never have anything to do with each other. Especially considering he was
religious.

Yet, today, this idea is so prevalent; many religious accept it without a blink. And, let’s make
no mistake; Christianity is by far getting the worst of this. Obamacare, anyone? How can we
have a free country if we’re going to force Christian doctors to perform abortions?

And further… How can we have a free country if children are punished for praying school? How
can we have a free country when peaceful protestors outside of abortion clinics are terribly
physically harmed by police and dragged to jail?

Well?

Pamela has a problem

My sister first heard this when she was ten. We were on my bed, and Pamela and Connie
were upset over Pamela’s teen pregnancy. My sister asked a very good question. “What’s
wrong with being pregnant?” I paused, and blandly remarked, “You’re too young to
understand.” Sad. I promised myself so many times I’d never say that to a child. Because,
“You’re too young to understand” is a lie. The main reason we really say that time-honored
phrase is, though the older person always has a myriad of reasons why they think they are
really saying it, that when we speak to children, we are talking on a level higher than our own.
To put words in terms simple enough for a child’s pure, uncomplicated understanding, we
must simplify our thoughts, understand them well enough  put them in plain terms.

To talk to a child, we elevate our speech. We must understand the painting well enough to
communicate its meaning in a few mere brushstrokes.

A child understands this. We have lost the wisdom.

And so it was with my sister’s question, brilliant in its seeming naiveté. “What’s wrong with
being pregnant?”

I shall try to put the answer in as simple terms as her simple question. To become pregnant
when married is because you fell in love. True love. And stayed there. To become pregnant
when you’re not married is the result of losing love. Of both giving, but neither receiving.

But here’s where so many go wrong. So many believe that a child that comes out of such
a relationship is a mistake. A problem. It’s “…like having an ingrown toenail removed,” a
woman in the clinic tells Pamela. Is it?

How can that be when you’re “removing” a baby? The media and Planned Parenthood argue
it’s not a baby. It’s rather sad our country buys this. It seems we haven’t been paying
attention in biology class.

We should be America the beautiful. Not America the Land of Dead Babies.

This is part of the reason I’m proud that I’m still partly a kid. We stand up.
We were thrown in jail and attacked during the protests of segregation. We are forced to
completely abandon our Christian identity in school, but we continue to defy this.

And yet…

We are adopted by gays, and live in bizarre, sexually twisted atmospheres. We are watching
our future be sold away to abortion. Sold to shameless spending skyrocketing the deficit,
plunging our country deeper and deeper in debt, that our children, our children’s children,
and our children’s children’s children, um, and so forth, couldn’t hope to pay. Sold to
“separation of church and state”, which is being used to crack down on religion everywhere
it shows its face like religion is the plague.

But Odyssey reminds us some still dare to show the truth. Some still dare not to lie.

So here’s what I’d like to say, from a kid, to all adults who believe in the smothering of religion,
in gay marriage, in baby killing: You can’t get rid of us. True adults, who believe what’s correct,
not what’s popular, still have the audacity to speak common sense. Things like Odyssey are
still here to remind us what sanity is. What God is. What’s right.

And, just FYI, abortion supporters….

A kid already defeated you two thousand years ago.

    Thanks for reading!

AIO Article: Pound Foolish Wisdom #2 9/11/12

     Well, everyone, it's September 11th. 12 years ago, this would have seemed unimportant, but after the events of 2001, this is, of course, a day for remembering the loss of so many lives on that fateful day. But that's not what this blog post is about. I just figured I should commemorate the day somehow. Anyway, PF has an article on Liz for you today! I hope you enjoy it:

Pound Foolish Wisdom
Where AIO Characters Are Put Beneath the Microscope#2:  Liz
by Pound Foolish
Femininity exists only in the mind.
A surprising statement, yes. There is no intended implication here that certain qualities, talents, and traits are unique to woman and, or instead, more common in women. However, to be feminine, that is, to actively attempt to reach femininity as a goal, by definition, means to “act like a lady.”
Well, if a girl acts like herself, seeking to do what she believes she must, she must, then, be acting like a female. Women are different from one another, are they not? If women act like themselves, they must then act very differently, must they not? How, then, can we generalize femininity, and call it being “ladylike” or “feminine” or “womanly”?
Perhaps seeking to define humans, saying they need to behave certain ways to fit into their certain groups, qualifies as one of the most foolish things people do, (well, it might be in the top five billion, anyway.)
But it’s not just young women. Of course, they’re the first that come to mind. Yet, society obsesses with classification of the human race. Another toy of society is men’s identity. Men are supposed to be masculine, manly, emotionally reserved, and conquest women.
There is a great deal of bleariness in the political swamp of defining the male identity when it comes to politically correct gender identity. Why, for instance, is it that women can wear men’s clothes without anyone raising an eyebrow, but men are assumed gay if they don any female habits? In actuality, men in general have some rather feminine tendencies. I won’t pretend to be an exception. I enjoy chic flicks, my philosophy in regards to books is the more romantic the better, I enjoy gardening, and I’ve even, with some interest, hidden myself away to secretly read bits of one of my sister’s books on cosmetology! After all, both genders are humans.
Supposedly, culture is about not stereotyping, not classifying, letting people be who they want to be. Being tolerant, accepting different races, religions, and behaviors.
Truth is, modern culture practically revolves around the opposite of all that. Stereotyping.
Brave liberated divorced women. Cool gay guys in neat clothes who give women “manly” affection without the danger of attraction. Party-happy, oh-so-glamorous teen revolutionaries.
This isn’t anything new. Our culture has never been about all that, and hopefully never will be. We are America, and America means individualism, capitalism, be who you can be and all you can be.
Wonderful speech, Mister Deep and Serious. I know you’re extremely busy trying to be sophisticated, but how about giving us that stupid Liz character analysis!?
Okay, okay, patience, that was all leading up to it. Liz breaths fire into her episodes. Her snappy, confident, bold voice strides aside her sharp, biting attitude. Ah! Her voice and attitude. As so often happens in AIO, they are as pearls and an oyster.
On the other hand, all good characters must be flawed. And Liz’s flaws lead to interesting contradictions in her character. Liz’s assertive frame of mind leads her to see her brother’s new fiancée as a rival and the fiancée’s relationship with him as a power struggle, after feeling replaced by the new woman. Her bold newspaper reporting springs a trap on her own behavior in Lost by a Nose, and we see even Liz can be wiled by recognition.
Liz speaks out with an admirable boldness. She takes action with toughness and caprice.
Many characters behave in a way known as passive aggressive. That is, they are shy of direct confrontation. Liz stands as the opposite.
Indeed, she can be seen as the opposite of many of the other well-beloved AIO girls. Such as the sweet, gentle Lucy, mild if at times somewhat grouchy or plucky Robyn, or… interestingly enough, Liz’s closest friend, Mandy.
How does a brave, outspoken girl like Liz work so well with a friend like Mandy? People often say opposites make for the best friendships. The contrast remains curious, still… and interesting. How come AIO once tended to focus on all sugar and spice girls? Why is Liz’s fire balanced in so many of her episodes by Mandy’s femaleness and reasoning?
Were writers and directors in the past more hesitant about grrrrl characters than today? One feels tempted to believe so when one observes the biggest AIO girl of today, the forceful Emily Jones, and the also recurring Olivia, with her occasional temper. Admittedly, such characters then had nowhere near as much popularity as they do today.
But perhaps, rather than seeing Mandy as the feminine voice of reason trying to steady Liz’s un-girlyness, she plays more the role of caution alongside strength. Strength that constantly wants out.
Strength is not folly, nor caution strength’s master.
Yes, Liz has her moments of timidity. For instance, why oh why did Liz have to be so helpless in Hindsight? Couldn’t she have displayed just a little of her forcefulness when the thief appeared when she was behind the counter? However, that took place in Liz’s relatively early years. One may be tempted to think if the thief showed his face to the later Liz, he would have been the one worried about a hurt head.
But that is one aggravating kink in the armor of Liz’s character. We never see her in any real danger. She got left out of the Nova Com Saga, along with a few other characters, like Bernard for the most part, and no episode can be heard where Liz has to do any true heroics.
But perhaps she has no need to.
Perhaps strength lies in strength.
Perhaps Liz’s strength lies in her ability to be Liz.
She stands out through her belief in herself. Her ability to say what she thinks. Her fierceness. Her open love of God. Her kindness.
That she dares to be herself.
You can tell Liz doesn’t try to be more tough than she really is naturally. Nor less good than she can be. She strives to reach her potential. By the end of her run, she stood as a changed and changing character.
And she’s still Liz.
For, when she changes, she changes more into herself. Who she is meant to be. Who she wants to be. Who she can be.
…. Well, apart from the fact she seems to have dyed her red hair super dark brown.
She refuses to be stereotyped.

     I hope you enjoyed that fascinating and insightful article not only on Liz, but on women and feminity in general. Be watching for more articles from PF, possibly breaking out of the PF Wisdom realm. I'll try to get Installment 9 of AIC out very soon, but no promises.
     Thanks for reading!

AIO Article: Pound Foolish Wisdom #1 8/21/12

     Well, thankfully, PF saved me at the last minute from having to write an article. We decided to do an ongoing series exploring characters further pretty early on, and PF suggested it be called Closer Look, but once I saw Freddy Jay's feature exploring characters further called Deeper Look, I realized this PF feature would look like an unintentional ripoff of Freddy Jay's articles. So, he gave me many, many suggestions for names, but in the end I decided on Pound Foolish Wisdom. You will hopefully be seeing #2 in the future, so enjoy this fantastic article! It's really a masterpiece, possibly even better than his last one! (If that's possible.)

     POUND FOOLISH WISDOM:
     Where AIO Characters Are Put Beneath the Microscope
    

by Pound Foolish

     Hi, it’s the nutty, the deep, the weird Pound Foolish. (Call me PF at your peril; it’s not necessary to abbreviate every single online name that’s more than one word.) I didn’t introduce myself in my first post. As, arguably, giving an in-depth look at a hot AIO topic is the best way for an AIO “dreamer”, as Alex calls us, to introduce themselves, I didn’t introduce myself on my first article. But now, I’ll say a few words on myself for you to skip over at your earliest convenience. I’ve been an avid AIO listener for years. As Alex said, I’m the founder of the Emily RULES! Klub. That is, ERK. Yes, it sounds just like “irk.” We’re here to irk the Emily Haters! Well, I’m occasionally mentioned in the AIO blogging community, as I am a moderator on The Soda Shop, and a controversial, somewhat popular one. And, like all dreamers, I aspire to my own AIO blog!
     Alright here we go…

     Many really just hate the new era. The way they talk, they are ready to ring Andre Stojka’s throat, join a CCCW protest, fill Kathy Buchanan’s office with dead cats, and form an Emily Stinks club. I used to feel the same way. (Well, not the Emily Stinks club, but most of it.)
     I yawned at Matthew in Target of the Week. I only sort-of became endeared to him and the rest of the Parkers in Grandma’s Visit; as the cacophony of Mexican accents and music seemed positively alien in AIO. And while I enjoyed Priscilla in Stage Fright, she seemed rather bland in The Malted Milkball Falcon, and I thought she’d proven unsuited to the larger role. Perhaps the worst of it was Vance, insufferably awful at times, especially as my mind inevitably compared him to Rodney. I enjoy those episodes now, but at the time, it practically infuriated me.
     But two characters seemed to be making up for a lot, and they rapidly won my heart over. One happened to be a girl with a pleasantly cartoony voice who fearlessly barked orders to males and solved cases with clever logic. The other was a fascinating oddball who, at first glance, seemed to be a bad-guy… and yet turned out to be more interesting than that. He always acted unpleasant, yet he seemed to like the other AIO kids pretty well, and enjoy being with them.
     I will talk about the former, Emily, later. She’s become a RIDICULOUSLY controversial topic online, so I won’t talk about her till I feel like I’m ready to tackle a bomb. This article is about Jay Smouse.
    Why do we think a bully is a bully? Because he picks on people? No, because, more specifically, he picks on people you like. Consider Tybalt in Romeo and Juliet. To him, his fury was righteous, a deep hate against sworn enemies of his family that bred a longing for violence and terror. When he drew his sword on      Mercutio and slayed him, to Romeo, Tybalt showed evil. (Romeo would’ve been even more mad if he knew Bart would make the event into a funny Electric Palace commercial.)
     Mercutio loved Romeo. Tybalt hated Romeo.
     Romeo learned to hate Tybalt. Tybalt believed himself in the right.
    A villain is the product of point of view.

     We are so easily wrong about a person’s behavior, because we can know so little of the circumstances surrounding a situation. In The Importance of Being Earnest, and Lady Windermere’s Fan, both plays by Oscar Wilde, the entire plot revolves around misunderstandings. A complete misconception of how good, and… and complexly, darkly bad, the characters are.
     Lady Windermere’s Fan begins with her discovering, it seems, her husband is having an affair with a strange, elegant woman recently arrived the community. A woman interested in him because of money.
    Lady Windermere, some hours after meeting the woman at a ball in Lady Windermere’s home, says
“You talk as if you had a heart. Women like you have no hearts. Heart is not in you. You are bought and sold.”
    She later discovers the woman to indeed have past, and despicable in society’s eyes, but a brave, loving woman, with no attachments to her husband. In the final act, she has a significant discourse with her husband on the woman.
    Lord Windermere: “Child, you and she belong to different worlds. Into your world, evil has never entered.”
    Lady Windermere: “Don’t say that, Arthur. There is the same world for all of us, and good and evil, sin and innocence, go through it hand in hand. To shut one’s eyes to half of life that one may live securely is as though one blinded oneself that one might walk with more safety in a land of pit and precipice.”
    Thus, through such a strange glass, partially clean, partially filthy and distorting, we must view Jay. Jay, in his first appearance, seems merely Vance’s rotten, meanness loving side-kick. It’s only later we discover he can do a rockathon for charity alongside Matthew, the very kid he picked on, and never once, as far as we see, even consider bullying him. He sides with Valerie, in How to Sink a Sub, and yet turns around becomes helpful. And, while, in Sub, he indirectly upsets Olivia, the main character of the episode, he talks to her. Not to say mean things to her, just to talk… and, well, yes, complain. But he never tries to bother her. As for Barrett, yes, Jay always throws insults and pranks at Barrett, but only through his sense of competition.
(What do we make of such a character? What do we do with Jay?)
    Yet, when we again see Vance with Jay, in the much talked of Mistaken for Good, Jay moaningly goes along with him to do the dishonorable. It’s as if, away from Vance’s influence, Jay is just a fairly annoying, goofy, somewhat rude, oddball kid. One can’t help wondering if Vance led jay astray in the first place.
    But, we all already knew this. Because many of us like him. Sure, we all like Rodney’s funny, slightly menacing character, but how many of us like him as a person? How many of us would like him as a friend? All who want Rodney Rathbone as a friend, show their hands!... Hmm, yes, that’s about the expected statistic.
    What shall we make of Jay? Just what do we do with him?
    Back to what I was saying, Jay, unlike Rodney, some of us do like. He’s a silly, sometimes friendly, even kind, (in Mistaken for Good), person who’s misguided and too competitive.
    On the other hand, is Jay, when it comes right down to it, a bad person? No, because there’s no such thing. All people have the capacity for good.
     Sin, then, is an action in which we open an absence of God and his goodness in ourselves, in the world, and, often, other people. However, in fiction, this is not the case. In fiction, there are antagonists and protagonists. The bad guy and the good guy. Part of the fun of fiction is we are able to absolutely despise people, something we cannot do in real life without some guilt.
     Jay occasionally fits somewhat into this role. He’s the antagonist in Unbecoming Jay, How to Sink a Sub and The Amazing Loser.
     In all of them, Jay does fabulously as a villain. And is a villain. We route for the “good” character, and hope Jay is going to be defeated. Well, perhaps not so much in The Amazing Loser. One may easily fail to care whether Emily’s addiction prone older brother is going to win a scavenger hunt. Especially as Matthew was really the one who would be the winner, as Jay was just a useless tag-along. They tried to center the conflict on Jay and Barrett, and have Matthew in the background, but Jay, in the end, was nothing but a baddie-wannabe. However, it worked. One may not be in suspense, necessarily, but Jay is both funny and a pain, as he should be. So the listener wants Jay to lose, getting a well-earned whop.
     In How to Sink a Sub, Jay warns Olivia of oncoming trouble for them both. He is worried for himself, yet he seems worried for the other also, as he warns her. His worries are also justifiable. Some teachers are just no good, and being stuck with such a one is maddening. And, as it turned out, Katrina truly came off as authoritarian. One can’t help but sympathize with his and Valerie’s gleeful rebellion against Katrina’s new, strange, controlling ways.
     Speaking of Valerie, is it a coincidence Jay, when he is the villain, is always either competing against Barrett, or in league with someone else? Let’s examine the former point first.
     Just what is it with Jay and Barrett? How long have they been determinedly rivals, and why? I’m not suggesting AIO should devote an entire episode to how years ago Jay and Barrett’s glorious rivalry sprang to dramatic, furious life, but a few hints would be nice. We can assume it might have something to do with music, but it’s all up to our imaginations… Why does Barrett bring out a sometimes out of control sense of competition in Jay? The significance of this is… if it wasn’t for Jay’s competing with Barrett, Jay would only have been cast as the likeable, goofy villain… once.
     Next, the latter part of the question. Jay being in league with other villains. As I said, Eugene comments Valerie and Jay “… influence each other in all the wrong ways.” Could it be influence is one of Jay’s key problems? We already saw Jay’s being led astray by Vance. Here, again, another baddie pulls Jay into questionable action. Valerie also brings out the worst in Olivia. Understandably so. Indeed, Valerie casts grows a frozen ice covering of chilly meanness and negativity over the lake of every show she’s in. She’s an affective, well rounded character that way, doing exactly what she’s supposed to do. She’s the sort of person, who, if on really knew her, one might despise but would also, in ways, admire. But we may talk more on Valerie later.
      For now… it’s enough to observe this control has gone over onto Jay. She frees Jay to be mean, negative, and pull at first harmless enough but increasingly problematic pranks. Around her, he can be, well, his worst self. Give into his whims.
     With Vance and Valerie, then, and with Barrett, Jay becomes, as we saw, just a misled, somewhat rude, goofy kid.
     Could it be we’ve misjudged him?
     Moving on, in the Soda Shop, people speculate on Jay’s beliefs. Suzylou, a writer on the Unofficial AIO Blog, says…
     “… People can say they are Christians, but being a true Christian also means we desire to live a life like Christ...and we can't live a life like Christ if we aren't acting like one. And, while I don't think Jay is evil, he certainly isn't a kind person very often- therefore his isn't acting very Christ like, which is probably what is leading people to believe he isn't a real, true Christian under God's leading. Oh, and I also believe that a true, born-again Christian can and will stumble and fall at times- but he can be forgiven, but I also hope that person will try and learn from his mistakes to become a better person.”
     I know, I quoted Suzy in my last article. I didn’t mean to do that, but she can be quite smart, and the quote fit perfectly, so what the hey.
     Technically, a Christian, as far as the bare-bones definition goes, is just someone who believes in God and that Jesus Christ was our savior. Being Christian is an entirely different matter. For instance, Jay acts mean, but he seems to long to be a good person. One, by contrast, might act as a follower of Christ, but inwardly dwell unnecessarily on dark thoughts and desires, such as lust or imagining vengeance on someone.
Is Jay a Christian at heart?
     Who can say?
     We can’t see his heart.
     If he is Christian, he’s AIO’s first major character to be Christian, and yet behave greatly questionably as a trademark. If he believes something other than Christianity, he is AIO’s first major character to belong to another religion. If he belongs to a different religion, he’s a somewhat poor bad start to representing other groups.
     It would be a fascinating development, as well as a new and important one. How come AIO acknowledges racial diversity, (the Parkers, the Washingtons), but never religious diversity? Only minor characters have ever subscribed to a religion other than Christianity. Yes, Seth’s weirdo mom, for example, practiced a philosophy contradictory to philosophy. But she was little more than a walk-on.
     A religious program need not focus entirely on religious characters to be religious. In fact, if used properly, religious diversity brings out the Christian messages still more. Acknowledging other’s belief’s, allows fiction to point out where they are right and wrong, thus strengthening the case for Christianity.
What’s the point of coming to a conclusion in fiction if no one ever truly challenges the conclusion?
     Perhaps it’s time Odyssey gave up its habit of being inhabited entirely either by poor, drifting, clueless non-Christians without any religion who need us to “save” them, and sweet, “church-going” Christians.
So, either way, Jay is something new. He already stands out. I imagine we shall never discover Jay is, say, Mormon or a follower of Islam. Most likely, if he were to believe in a religion, just be something he’s going along with because, say, his parents believe it. All the same, it could be more fresh, complicated, and show more new sides of Jay’s character than just having him be another poor doesn’t-know-Jesus casualty.
     So, who’s Jay? He’s never really given us reason to think he is Christian, or a religion other than Christian. Is he a mostly-good-person, or a mostly-bad-person?
     Is he, in the end, a villain or an oddball, less than perfect good-guy?
     Well, it depends. Is a person their actions’ in public? Or is a person their thoughts… their dreams… their hopes… Who they are at home?
     We’ve never see Jay at home.
     Perhaps, until we do, we cannot be sure who he is. That’s because he is so much like a real person. What makes him a good character is that we do not know what to make of him. What to do with him. He has something called soul. Heart. Being. Such things are complicated.
     Perhaps we should instead ask what shall Jay do with himself.

     Amazing, wasn't it? I look forward to more Pound Foolish Wisdoms, don't you? Anyway, that's it for today. But considering if PF hadn't saved me with this amazing piece of art, you would have had to endure no article at all or a short article from me.
     Thanks for reading!