Thor: The Last Days of Midgard - How to Hold onto Hope in a Dying World

How do we save the environment from the seemingly insurmountable forces of capitalism, an ideology determined to destroy the planet as it extracts every last resource from it?

Intro & Context

Regardless of the blatant and apocalyptic detrimental impacts they have on the very planet we live on, unregulated and rampant business interests will be protected by the state. This should be obvious when the political elite are often in the pocket of oil companies, billionaire tech-bros, and industries who profit from the exploitation and pollution of the Earth. 

While the general population suffers and the planet dies as a direct result of their actions, the business class will continue to strip the world of its resources for short-sighted gains at the expense of our long term future.

It is a problem so insurmountable that even a god cannot fight climate change without being confronted by the impenetrable web of corporate greed and a legal system designed to protect the interests of capital and business. That's the lesson that Jason Aaron's Thor learns in the fantastic Thor: The Last Days of Midgard arc from 2012 (Thor: God Of Thunder #19-25).

Who needs Aquaman to save the ocean when Thor can swim?

However, it is not the lesson I learnt from this comic but we'll get to that. First, some backstory.

Backstory (to the Worst Year Ever)

This year, 2020 if you're reading this in the future (presuming there is a future), I had started to fall into despair at the state of the world and my inability to affect change on it. I was wound tight with stress, feeling the weight of the world on my shoulders and starting to crumble under the pressure. 

The resurgence of populist fascism, the enduring destruction of late stage capitalism, gross immoral inequality, a global pandemic, the fact that the world is literally on fire... and all I could do was watch it unfold on a computer screen. 

It feels overwhelming because it is overwhelming. It is too much and it all seems doomed. It is relentless, a constant feed of bad to terrible news, a desolate wasteland where nothing is able to bloom. It is as though you're in the middle of the ocean and dying of thirst. Cut off and alone, unable to connect or contribute to make things better since you can't latch onto anything or see a way forward.

What can you do when confronting destructive giants far greater and more powerful than yourself?

In the face of this unceasing toxicity, I become cut off. I was unable to be present in the here and now, in my own life. I was too consumed by what was happening abroad in other countries or the latest online discourse, the latest injustices committed by this corrupt state, politician or corporation, and so on, that I was unable to be fully present at work, with my friends, or even my family. 

I was tethered to the endless stream of terrible news that unfolded daily on my Twitter timeline...

And I believe I'm not alone in the loneliness caused by the hellscape that is social media. Too many of us feel cut off. Too many of us feel alienated and disillusioned by the constant suffering in the world and the failure of modern liberal democracies to meaningfully address the issues plaguing the world today. 

Issues of rampant corporate greed, the unequal distribution of resources, the gross exploitation of late stage capitalism, the continuing systemic bigotry of our societies, the inept responses to a global pandemic, and the ticking bomb of climate change. I mean, due to the dominance of neoliberal ideology which places the failures of society on the individual, often these democratic systems which are supposed serve the people deliberately make these issues worse when they aren't too busy ignoring them.

So the central question becomes, "How do we hold on to hope in dying world?". 

What if there is no one to smite since capitalism has no face to punch?

Let's Discuss the Comic

In Last Days of Midgard, there are two story-lines that are told in parallel which mirror and comment on one another. 

The first is Present Day Thor as he gets entangled with ROXXON Energy and its CEO Dario Agger, who, as Thor puts it, "seeks to poison Midgard for financial gain". Here Thor faces challenges not only in physical battle and of the magical variety but also of legal red tape and corrupt bureaucracy set up to protect the business elite. 

The second story-line is set millennia in the future, as old King Thor battles Galactus to prevent him from devouring a barren Earth which long ago died and is now just a dusty, hollowed out husk.

I'm sure there's no pointed commentary about our real-life future being made here.

The two story-lines are told simultaneously, mostly with the future plot adding layers of pathos and dramatic irony on the present day story. 

In the Present story-line, antagonist Dario Agger is the perfect embodiment of the modern neoliberal tech-bro, full of empty PR spin to obfuscate exploitative business practices. He also makes Elon Musk-like grandiose proclamations of his company's (modest) accomplishments, and expresses an insatiable desire to privatise vital resources from the public good. 

I mean, this is a man who wanted to establish an interplanetary ice pipeline to mine water from one of Jupiter's moons to "solve" the Earth's water crisis. 

I dunno man, you seem more preoccupied with the taking part...

Thor knows that Agger is actively destroying the planet and polluting the air but as Agger points out that neither he or his company "have never been convicted of any wrongdoing by any court in the world". In the eyes of the law, Agger and ROXXON are innocent and it is Thor who is the aggressor by thwarting ROXXON's enterprise by trying to stop them from destroying the planet. 

To be fair, Thor is deliberately destroying ROXXON facilities which hurts their profit margin and makes their shareholders sad. On the other hand, some of those facilities are so completely toxic that they have to be fully automated since no humans can work there, so yeah. Funnily enough, ROXXON cannot claim insurance since the insurance company is refusing coverage since the damage was caused by an act of god. Cute.

Fittingly, Thor is teamed up with Agent Rosalind 'Roz' Solomon of S.H.I.E.L.D's first ever environmental task force for this arc. Agent Solomon is a pragmatic idealist who wants to save the environment and believes it is possible but fully understands it is an uphill battle where you not only have one hand tied behind your back but also a chain around your ankles while your opponent has had a 20 year head start and more resources than you can imagine.

Of course, S.H.I.E.L.D are an espionage, special law enforcement, and counter-terrorism agency in Marvel comics. They are analogous to the CIA, by which I mean they're basically an arm to enforce American imperialism under the guise of counter-terrorism. So, that sucks and is a mark against Roz but she seems to have her heart in the right place.

However, the real take-away from this Present Day plot is how even the mighty Thor is in some ways powerless to stop the machinations of capitalism. 

Agger relocates ROXXON's floating factories to Broxton, a small town next to where Asgardia (the remnants of Asgard on Earth, home of Thor and the gods) is in an attempt to hurt Thor by buying up most of the town, displacing his friends and neighbours. And when Thor tries to fight Agger directly, he is served with a sue notice for damages done to ROXXON Energy.

What good is a hammer against a court action lawsuit?

It's quite interesting to watch Thor try to attack Agger head on, only to be hit with a lawsuit and restraining order, a fantastic example of how corporations will use the law to their own means in order to stifle criticism and activism. The law is on Agger's side because he has unlimited capital and the law is always on the side of those with capital, largely because it was written by people with capital. Funny that. 

Naturally, since this is a superhero comic, Agger turns out to be a Minotaur and hires trolls to kill Thor, which means Thor can smack his face with his hammer. Unfortunately, the town of Broxton is destroyed in the ensuing battle, showing how it is always average everyday people who suffer under capitalism.

Moving to the Future story-line, old King Thor, having seen the millennia since the events of the present day plot, as well as the death of all his friends and allies from that time period, stands in the dust of a dead Earth. Lamenting the loss of his beloved Midgard, who should arrive but Galactus, the devourer of worlds.

Galactus is a perfect metaphor for the unceasing need for perpetual growth and expansion, not to mention the destruction left in its wake, fundamental to the functions of capitalism. Galactus is famously always hungry. No planet, no matter how large or rich in resources, can satiate his burning desire to consume more and more and more until the end of time. He must always have more, constantly travelling the galaxy forever consuming. Just like capital, Galactus must feed.

But Thor says thee nay!

Visually, they made the rather deliberate choice to have Galactus give off bellows of smoke and ash, polluting the air with his mere presence. Oh well, sure there's no wider meaning to be read here.

Before they begin their battle, Galactus and King Thor discuss the Earth and why they want to devour or save it, respectively. Thor points out that the Earth is already half dead, and asks why he would even want to eat a world such as this. However, Galactus turns the question back on Thor, questioning why would he want to defend it. Their answers are quite illuminating.

Thor responds that the Earth has saved him more times than he can count while he hasn't saved it nearly enough. Galactus similarly states that the Earth has defied him more times than he can count and no matter its current state, the taste of it will be sweet.

Thor's response points out our duty to the world we live on, to nurture it and take care of it as it provides for us, while Galactus' reply highlights the pettiness and desire for conquest inherent in capitalism's need for perpetual growth and consumption.

It is interesting, that Thor then thinks to himself that it would so easy to let it slip away just by doing nothing. Perhaps it would be a mercy to let the planet be consumed... however, Thor is not the god of Mercy and stands his ground against a being far larger and more powerful than he is.

When standing up to a giant, simply breaking his hand is a victory of immense proportions.

I won't retell all the events of their battle here since it would take too long and distract from the point I'm trying to make but suffice to say, it is epic and a tale worthy of being told. 

Fittingly, Thor's granddaughters, the Girls of Thunder join the battle when Thor is knocked out and attack Galactus, causing some significant damage, even if they ultimately are unable to defeat him without their grandfather's help. It's almost like in order to defeat a monster like Galactus or capitalism, we cannot do it on our own but only if we work together.

Again, this is a superhero comic and Thor retrieves an all-powerful weapon that helps him defeat Galactus, although it is one which corrupts his soul as he uses it. What is fascinating is that during this part of the battle, Thor reveals that it was he that caused the destruction of the Earth by standing by and allowing it to fall. It was his inaction that lead to the death of the planet.

However, at the end of the battle, Thor bleeds from his wounds onto the ground, causing it to grow anew. 

I hope the message isn't too subtle...

But rewinding to the end of the Present Day plot, following the destruction of the town of Broxton, Thor and the Asgardians ask to help the people of Broxton on their terms to rebuild the town, acknowledging the townspeople's agency to determine the type of aid they require rather than it being assigned to them from on high. 

However, they don't completely fix the town before they have to leave since, to avoid further retribution or collateral damage to their neighbours, Asgardia is relocated to space. Lacking homes to live in among the rubble, the people of Broxton ask where they are to live since this land is their home...

Only for Thor to give them a castle from Asgardia to live in, the greatest of all halls in Asgard - his castle.

They lost their home so he gave them his, while acknowledging it cannot replace what they lost...

The Lesson I Learnt From Thor

All of this leads me to the lesson I personally learnt from Thor's struggle to save the planet against capitalism's never-ending desire to consume and expand, regardless of the damage it causes. The lesson was not a major revelation or startling epiphany but it was reaffirming and meaningful. 

It was simply to hope again. That, even though the struggle is seemingly insurmountable, it must still be fought. That, even if you will not win, you need to continue to do what is right. 

Furthermore, I learnt from this comic about a Norse god with a hammer flying through space that, even though I as an individual cannot hope to create the change I want to see in the world, I must do all I can to help better my immediate environment and community. 

That even though a god is sometimes helpless in the face of a system that will always prioritise corporations and profit over people, there can still be hope in the minor victories gained, no matter how small. 

Even if this fight is one long defeat, it is a fight worth fighting.

In conclusion, I realised that although you may not be able to change the world alone but you can collectivise with others to nudge it in the right direction. 

Do what you can while always remembering the Marxist maxim, "to each according to their ability". 

Try to focus on what can be done to improve your local community, connect with your friends, join a union if you haven't, petition your representative on issues you believe in, protest injustice, listen to others, support or join an activist group if you are able, log off social media sometimes, and look after yourself.

We are all we have and a better world is possible.

Happy New Year. Here's to the ongoing struggle in 2021.

Thanks

Jason Aaron and Esad Ribic for creating Thor: Last Days of Midgard.

Matt Draper for his video on Mad Max: Fury Road which inspired the tone of this article - https://youtu.be/OzHDjMPFI-g.

Family Ties in Legend of Korra - Book 2

Book 2 is often seen as the weakest season of Legend of Korra with some valid reasons. While it's not really the goal of this series of posts to examine the narrative or other elements of the show but rather to focus on the interpersonal relationships, I do want to address those critiques of Korra's second season and defend it a little.

Now, this might not be a popular opinion but I actually like Book 2 over Book 1. When I rewatched it, I noticed there was a lot more to be mined from a rewatch than when I watched Book 1 again. A lot of this has to do with the deepening relationships between the characters which I'll get into but also because Book 2 has some simply amazing moments.

The problem is that is an uneven season. The writers had written themselves into a bit of a corner with the end of Book 1 (since they didn't know they would get a second season) and started the season seeming with a number of interesting ideas, half of which they never explored.

They also had to dial back some of Korra's character development in the beginning of Book 2 becase of how they worked themselves into that corner, although as I have argued before

this is how real people behave. We expect and want our fictional characters to grow and develop, learning from their mistakes and developing, but often people in the real world don't. Not because they don't want to or can't, but because change is hard and habits of behaviour are difficult to break.

I understand that this a bit of honeypot on my part, trying to explain away a flaw in the writing but I still stand by it to some degree. Honestly on the rewatch, while Korra does appear to be just as brash as she was in the first season and reacts to things in a confrontational way, most of the time she is justified in the way she feels, if not in her reaction.

"My father and my mentor purposely lied to me because of their overprotective paternal desire to 'keep me safe' despite the fact I'm the Avatar, while my boyfriend is seemingly supportive but passive aggressively undermines me due to his own ego issues.
So yes, I'm a little pissed, why'd you ask?"

Korra is frustrated at the sense of betrayal and lack of trust from the father figures in her life who are more concerned with controlling or shielding her in the name of keeping her safe than they are about letting her become her own person.

Korra had spent her whole life up to this point believing that Avatar Aang had decided it was best for her to live and train isolated in the Southern Water Tribe with the White Lotus but learns it was actually her father and Tenzin who made the call.

Add to this her frustration at her inability to develop spiritually is misdirected at Tenzin's teachings, it is no wonder that she responds positively to the first male authority figure in her life who tells her that he has faith in her and treats her as an adult instead of a child that he must shield from the world.

The fact Korra doesn't pick up that he is totally evil from the first second she meets him is understandable in those circumstances.

People forget but Korra is around 18 at the time of Book 2, she's a young adult who wants to establish her own identity but feels as though she is still treated like a child by the men in her life, especially by her father. In that context, while she definitely reacts far too angrily at times, there is a real cause behind those emotions that I think is often dismissed.

Most criticisms of Book 2 revolve around the retread of character developments from Book 1, Tumblr blogger beccatoria argues that the show repeats those beats to first deconstruct and then reform them,

"The latter half of the series began to rebuild itself in new and fascinating ways, but it was here that the series made a radical, handbrake turn. This was where Korra’s queer origin and radical future were expressly clarified."

For the second season is when the interpersonal relationships and familial drama between characters becomes incredibly intertwined and complex. The foundations of those relationships were laid in the first season but Book 2 steps it up massively.

Now it doesn't always work and the narrative occasionally presents some unintentionally problematic relationships without realising it (which we'll get to), but when it gets it right, it is some of the most touching and effective storytelling on television.

Pictured here.

I'm sorry but every scene with Tenzin's family and his siblings Bumi and Kya is golden. While other aspects of the story might have been uneven or even annoying (like the incompetent dumb detectives who were supposed to be foils to Mako), the fact that Book 2 had the familial drama of Tenzin's siblings more than balances out the missteps elsewhere.

There is so much to get into that it's hard to know where to start but I suppose a good place is with Aang. Aang, the beloved bald protagonist of The Last Airbender, wasn't a good father. He wasn't a terrible father but he wasn't there for all his children the way a good father is. And that is important.

It's a nice deconstruction of the idealisation of fatherhood, which is an important narrative to tell. Not in a "I never knew my father!" way, or even in villainous "he was an arsehole" way, but rather showing that although Aang was the protagonist of the previous season, he had aspects of his personality that didn't make for a great father.

Which was a bold move for the writers to make simply because of how much Aang was as a character, not to mention as the hero of the previous series. It would have been easy for them to depict Aang as a perfect dad. But his failures as a father are clear in the obvious favouritism he had towards Tenzin as his only child who could airbend, something which caused lingering resentment from Bumi and Kya.

Pictured here.

This isn't mentioning just how heavy Aang's legacy as the Avatar weighs down on his children. It affects each of his children but let's spare a tear for Bumi. As Aang's oldest child he felt a massive responsibility to uphold his father's legacy but as a non-bender he felt he let his father down.

I think LoK Gifs & Musings put this better than I ever could so I'll just quote her here,

"Bumi may well be one of the most tragic characters in the show. Though Aang and Katara likely wanted children, I’m sure given Aang’s status as the last airbender, they also felt a great responsibility to do so. Though I am sure Aang or Katara loved Bumi, the fact that their eldest was a nonbender had to have been a bit of a blow for them. And even though they seemed to let Bumi be free to follow his own passions (joining the military and drinking a lot of cactus juice, from what I can tell), there was a part of him that internalized the guilt of not being “enough” for his parents." 

Bumi's juvenile behaviour (especially for a man into his 60s) is his way of standing out even though he can't bend. Considering both his siblings are benders and formed bonds with their parents that he couldn't, it's no wonder he plays the clown to mask the internal sense of inadequacy he feels.

All of which is crystalises in the scene where Bumi talks to Aan's stature.

"Uh, hey there, dad. You're looking well.. Look, I'm sorry I didn't turn out to be an airbender like you hoped, but I've tried my best to make the world safe. Hope I made you proud." - Actual, heartbreaking, dialogue.

I think we have to move on to Tenzin now. Tenzin may be Aang and Katara's youngest child but as the only airbender, he felt a particular responsibility to uphold his father's legacy, even more so than Bumi.

Tenzin was so dedicated to preserving Aang's legacy as the Avatar that he created an idealisation of his father which glossed over Aang's real flaws as a parent. Also, this dedication meant he focused all his attention on being like his father instead of accepting that he is his father's son, not his father.

I don't want to go into this too much since LoK Gifs & Musings basically covered everything I want to say in her "I Am Tenzin" article. The only thing I will say is how Tenzin's journey to let go of his internalised guilt as a failed spiritual leader is combined with learning to let his daughter Jinora come into her own as the spiritual leader he couldn't be is something else. He escapes the spectre of his father at the same time that he, as a father, allows his own child to grow.

Awww...

I don't want to seem like I'm neglecting Kya but she isn't given as much attention in the narrative as her brothers. That said, she has to deal with the emotional baggage of their less than ideal childhood as well and actually seems the most bitter of the siblings despite her empathetic caring nature.

For example, she is the one who snaps at Tenzin for idealising their father. While Bumi was definitely upset by the special attention Aang gave Tenzin, Kya seems genuinely hurt by it and became defensive as a result.

She tried to escape her family's legacy in her youth, travelling across the world while Bumi joined the military and Tenzin join the council in Republic City. However, she then went back to the Southern Water Tribe to look after their elderly mother after Aang died, which is something she chastises her brothers for failing to do.

On the other hand, after Bumi has his confessional moment talking to Aang's statue wondering if his father would be proud of him, Kya overhears and immediately says that of course Aang would be proud. She then gives him a hug as Bumi tells her she always knows when he needs one. It's a touching moment.

Sibling huggery.

Jumping back to Tenzin for a second, in light of the emotional journey that he goes through over the course the season  it's not surprising how constricting he is as Korra's teacher in the beginning of Book 2 and why she bristles against that.

I covered in my previous Korra post how the differences in their personalities make them the perfect teacher/student combination but only by adapting to each other. Now, although I can totally see where Korra is coming from, at times the anger she flashes at Tenzin seems unfair in light of his transgressions.

Regardless, their reunion in the second half of Book 2 and the fruition of their relationship as it blossoms by the end of the season is completely worth the (only) slightly contrived nature of their parting of ways in the beginning of the season.

Did I mention that Tenzin is the one who helps Korra complete her spiritual journey?
With hugs!

But before we celebrate the wonderfulness that is the familial drama of Tenzin's family and the blossoming of his relationship with Korra, I mentioned there were some problematic relationships in this season, so let's look at the most problematic - Bolin and his love interests, Eska and Ginger.

There's no other way to say this, Bolin is in an abusive relationship with Eska. She forces him to do things he doesn't want through intimidation, fear, and the threat of violence, isn't interested in his well-being, only in how he can better serve her. He isn't her boyfriend, he's her victim.

And yet the show presents this as something funny in a 'Oh, look at how Bolin can't get out of this abusive relationship, isn't it hilarious how Eska, a girl, dominates him and he just whimpers?' way. It's not like they ever examine the destructive nature of their relationship in a meaningful way, it's only depicted as a gag.

The fact they immediately follow this up by having Bolin sexually harass his co-worker Ginger on the set of their movers (old-timey film reels) is rather tone deaf, especially for a show that gets so many other things so right.

And let's be clear, Bolin is sexually harassing her. They're at their workplace, she told him that she wasn't interested and that he is confusing "Ginger the actress with Ginger the character" but he still continues to flirt inappropriately and make unwanted advances.

The difference between their facial expressions says it all.

And so we come to Mako and Korra. I discussed before how their relationship had a sense of contrivance to it since there never seemed to be any reason for them to get together aside from the fact that they were the male and female protagonists.

However, there is a lot wrong with Mako's behaviour and how he treats Korra that I didn't notice until this rewatch. The reason I didn't notice it the first time around was that I used to be a lot like Mako in terms of the type of boyfriend he is.

Therefore, I didn't see anything wrong with his actions despite the fact that they are only superficially supportive and actually quite defensive in nature. For example,

Korra: What do you think I should do?
Mako: I guess you should do what you think is right. I support whatever decision you make.
Korra: Oh thanks. That’s a big help.
Mako: I thought you wanted me to be supportive? Now you want me to tell you what I think? Make up your mind!
Korra: Just forget it.

I originally sided with Mako in this argument because it hit home with what I would likely would have said in the same position but then I realised that he isn't being supportive by withholding his opinion, he's avoiding conflict. Korra expressively asked him for advice and his response was to give an empty declaration of support for fear of her disapproval.

Like Mako, I wanted to place myself as the protector and feel useful to, or even needed by, the person I was with. This is something that's subsided now and I don't feel that same need to be a 'protector'. because I figured it's not necessary, and even more than that, it's infantilizing. If you see your partner as someone who needs to be protected constantly, you're not treating them as an equal but like a child in your care.

She really doesn't need anyone's protection.

However, I didn't have the same anxiety Mako has in regards to being dominated by Korra since I came more from a "white knight" place and didn't feel threatened by the accomplishments of my partner. Because Mako's ego does bristle at the fact Korra is the Avatar, with more responsibility and power than he will ever have.

At one point before their break up, Korra apologizes to Mako for her inconsistent behaviour and blowing up with him due to the stresses of her role as the world's protector,

Korra: By the way, I'm really sorry for being a total pain. Things were really stressful and pretty confusing. It's hard being the Avatar.
Mako: (jokingly) It’s harder being the Avatar’s boyfriend.

Mmmhmm, really? It's harder being the boyfriend of the most powerful person on the planet with the weight of innumerable political, social, spiritual, military pressures than being that person? I know, Mako's cracking a joke here but it does seem to indicate where his head's at.

I mean, he doesn't offer any substantial response or support to address the stress that Korra's feeling, he just makes a joke about how hard things are for him.

"Yeeeaah... not quite the supportive response I needed there, Mako." - Korra, probably.

So yeah, its't not at all surprising that once they get back to Republic City and Mako is able to go back to his job as a police officer that even his pretense of support for Korra kinda evaporates. It's like as soon he is back into his role as a 'protector' in an official capacity, he's freed himself from having to support Korra.

He practically blames her for the civil war between the Water Tribes even though in the previous episode he helped her break her father out of prison, an inciting incident for the war in the first place. After Korra visits the President of Republic City to ask for his help in the war and he refuses, she complains to Mako who agrees with the President.

He eventually betrays Korra's plan to get the Republic fleet without the President's permission which leads to their breakup. All because he felt his job was more important than their relationship due to the insecurity he felt at being 'dominated' by Korra. While he loved her as a person, he couldn't accept her role as the Avatar.

This is more obvious when later in the season he is willing to risk his job to be a protector for Asami, setting up a sting mission without proper approval. Unlike with Korra, Mako doesn't feel threatened by Asami's power (she is a wealthy industrialist after all) in the same way and therefore doesn't need to hold on to his official police officer role as 'protector' with her.

To be fair to Mako, I would want to protect Asami as well if she looked at me like this.
Then I remember that she is a highly intelligent and capable person who holds her own in a team of benders.

In regards to the whole Mako/Korra thing, I'm glad they showed the dissolution of their relationship. It really seems like a deconstruction of the 'inevitability' of them getting together in Book 1 simply because they were the male and female protagonists and highlighted why they shouldn't be a couple.

I'm going to have to end it here but again there were things I didn't get to touch on, like the retread of brother vs brother with Unalaq and Tonraq, Korra's relationship with her parents, the dynamics of Tenzin's children, or Bolin and Asami's wonderful bromance.

This gif is everything.

Oh, well. Maybe next time.

Book 3 in this series will come out whenever I manage to finish the season. I should probably get on to that.

References:

The Legend of Korra: Deliberately Deconstructed - beccatoria

Korra's Relationships - Avatar Wiki

Bolin's Relationships - Avatar Wiki

Meta: Mako’s Castration Anxiety - LoK Gifs & Musings

Bumi, Kya, and Tenzin: Analysis - LoK Gifs & Musings

I Am Tenzin - LoK Gifs & Musings

Family Ties in Legend of Korra - Book 1

Alright, I've finally settled down to write on Avatar: Legend of Korra. This is something I've been wanting to write for a couple of weeks but couldn't seem to get started. I'm not sure why, it just is one of those things where I just needed time to get my head around what I want to say.

I have already written about Legend of Korra before looking at its steampunk inspirations, its narrative and character development (up to Book 3), and how it functioned as a sequel to Avatar: The Last Airbender. However, I wanted to focus on something a little different here, family. Specifically I want to trace all the familial relations through Legend of Korra book by book.

This includes all the relationships Korra forms throughout the series as well as other family dynamics like Aang's children, Tenzin, Kya, and Bumi, and those of the antagonists like Amon. I might have bitten off more than I can digest but there's nothing like rushing headfirst into something when it comes to Legend of Korra.

Yeah, I got this.

In my previous post on Korra, I discussed the much maligned love triangle between Korra, Mako, and Asami. Now for anyone not aware, the love triangle is a depressingly common trope found in television and movie writing.

For a succinct definition, please see TV Tropes,

Alice is in love with Bob, but Bob is in love with Charlie, while Charlie is in love with Alice. Well, that's one of them. A Love Triangle commonly involves three people, love, and decisions. It can be dramatic, or it can result in Wacky Hijinx. Sometimes a fourth person is brought in to make it right, sometimes somebody might be kicked out.

You can see this trope used relative well in things like The Hunger Games or terribly forced like in Twilight and it nearly always revolves around a choice where the primary protagonist has to decide between two love interests.

This dilemma is supposed to be dramatic but often is just boring since the decision is usually obvious (Edward, of course she's gonna pick Edward, everything screams Edward!) so the 'drama' created is pandering at best.

Asami isn't in for that pandering nonsense.

I had said that the love triangle in Book 1 was very high school teen drama, which I stand by. These are teenage characters so it makes sense that they would behave like teenagers, even if that behaviour is frustrating to literally anyone who is not a teenager.

Unlike a number of people, I don't have that much of an issue with it. Or at least, it doesn't distract too much from the overall narrative. But something I always wonder is why people forget this love triangle started out as a love square with Bolin in tow.

People often dismiss Bolin but I think this underestimates his role in the group dynamic. His levity and amiable nature offers a contrast to Korra's brashness and Mako's brooding. When they first met, Bolin was quite smitten by Korra and wanted to go out with her. They even went on a date where they had a great time and seemed to have perfect chemistry.

However Korra just isn't attracted to Bolin that way and while he didn't react to seeing Korra kiss Mako all that well, he quickly accepted that Korra wasn't in to him and remained her friend with no animosity towards her. When I first watched Book 1, I was always a little disappointed Korra and Bolin didn't date since they did seem to be perfect for one another.

Like seriously.

But then I realised they made much better friends than they would have as romantic partners. They're too alike in a number of ways, both are friendly but struggle to read people and often rush into things without thinking.

They work as friends since they share the same sense of humour and are there for each other but as LoK Gifs & Musings puts it, "their similarities allow for a mutual understanding, they don’t provide the emotional support or the push towards growth that either one needs".

On the other end of the spectrum, we get Mako and Asami. Now I honestly can't tell why Asami is dating Mako. They do have a nice meet-cute when she nearly runs him over with her moped which leads to a date that she orchestrated but I never understood just quite why she had a thing for him aside of the fact he was there and like, oh so hot, you guys.

I mean, just look at the man brood. He's got some serious brooding game.

There's almost a kind of contrived inevitability that they have to end up together because she's the spunky rich girl with a fabulous head of hair and he's the brooding good-looking jock. It seems to more a relationship of societal expectations than a real romance.

To be fair, Asami is real supportive of Mako and cares for him. Once they are in a relationship, it is obvious that she has feelings for him and when she finds out that he likes Korra, she is legitimately hurt. On his end, Mako seems to really like Asami and play the masculine protector role for her, a role she is happy to let him play.

However it just seems to be taken for granted that they would be dating after their meet-cute and so they are, even though I couldn't say why they would have started a relationship aside from the fact they are both young and attractive.

I wasn't joking about her fabulous hair.

But moving past that, Asami finds out that Mako has feelings for Korra (he was doing a terrible job of hiding it) and while she is hurt by the betrayal, she's such a classy lady that she doesn't flip out on him, although they do break off their relationship for obvious reasons.

However, I agree with Tumblr user beccatoria that the best thing about the love triangle subplot is that "Asami’s character was not demonised, and that the show specifically allowed her to reject the idea that she should blame Korra". Instead of Asami becoming catty towards Korra for 'stealing her man', she instead is rightly angry at Mako for his open attraction for another person when they are supposed to be in a relationship.

I'll get to Mako and Korra in a bit but as I'm sure you're all aware, at the end of the series, Korra and Asami get together and there are the slightest hints of attraction between them in Book 1. At least on Asami's end. She thinks Korra is amazing right from the get-go and wants her to like her. Korra for her part initially see Asami as a romantic rival but is shortly won over by her confidence and class.

What can I say, Korra likes a lady who can handle fast cars.

There isn't anything necessarily romantic between the two but they are quite attracted to each other as people and don't let the love triangle nonsense ruin their attitudes toward each other. Which I really like since so often the two 'rivals' in  love triangle are pitted against each other so this is a nice change.

But then we come to Mako and Korra. I'm going to analyse this relationship in more depth with Book 2 but here even more than with Mako and Asami I have no idea why these two would start a romantic relationship. To be fair, it's clear from the second episode after they meet that Korra has developed a crush on Mako and why not? He's good-looking and brooding after all.

However kinda like how Mako and Asami get together because it seems the thing to do by societal expectations, Mako and Korra seem to get together because of narrative convention.They are the male and female leads so they should get together, right? The fact Korra had more chemistry with Bolin, someone she wasn't interested in romantically, should speak volumes about how this doesn't quite work.

And if we're being really real here, Mako is kinda selfish and insecure. His primary focus is on himself and what is best for him. This is why he continues to be in a relationship with Asami while harbouring feelings for Korra. He says he is confused but really what he should have done was break it off with Asami until he sorted his shit out.

Let's move on to Tenzin.

I'm gonna put it out there for full disclosure, I love Tenzin. He honestly might be my favourite character in Legend of Korra. Firstly he is a badass Airbender and just a badass period. So often when the gang is getting taken down by a bunch of bad guys, Tenzin is nearly always the last man standing. And the fact he is voiced by an unrecognisable J.K. Simmons is just the cherry on the top.

I'll get into this more as the series progresses but Tenzin's relationship with Korra is fascinatingly complex. They both learn so much about each other and themselves through their relationship. Tenzin is not only a mentor and teacher to Korra but a surrogate father-figure away from home. Similarly, Tenzin sees Korra as much as a daughter as he sees her as his student or charge.

Tenzin's controlled and stoic demeanor belies his sometimes controlling and anxiety-ridden manner, which is something Korra, just by being her stubborn headstrong self, bristles. Tenzin has a lot of internalised anxiety in regards to upholding his father Aang's legacy as well as being the father of the next generation of Airbenders.

So sometimes he loses his cool.

Tenzin initially imposes strict restrictions on Korra since he sees structure and discipline as key to teaching. However he didn't give much consideration of the best way to adapt his teaching technique to nurture Korra and help her learn considering her rebellious nature.

However he eventually realises that by giving Korra the tools she needs and letting her use those tools in a practical setting she thrives. He also offers support for her emotionally, telling her he is always there if she needs to talk. He is truly proud of Korra, not only as his student but for who she is and as the Avatar.

For her own part, Korra is resistant to Tenzin's style of teaching and takes a lot of the frustration she feels at not being able to Airbend out on him. She also doesn't take well to his slightly patronising paternal instincts and desire to protect her at the cost of her freedom. But at that same time she respects him greatly as a mentor and confidant, eventually opens up to him about her fears.

Her complex feelings towards Tenzin sets up a breakdown in their relationship in Book 2 that blossoms into something truly wonderful by Book 3 but we'll get there when we get there.

We've got some bloodbending brothers to talk about in the meantime.

The antagonists of Book 1, Noatak and Tarrlok, have a complicated sibling rivalry. In "Skeletons in the Closet", the penultimate episode of the season, we learn from Tarrlok that Amon, the Equalist leader and Big Bad of the season, is actually his brother Noatak and from the Northern Water Tribe like himself.

He then goes into their tragic backstory. They are the sons of Yakone, a bloodbending crime boss who was escaped from Republic City after Aang took away his bending. When their father finds out that his sons are both Waterbenders, he starts training them in the taboo art of bloodbending. His training is intense and harsh as he wants to use his sons as a means to get back the criminal empire that was taken from him.

Tarrlok doesn't like bloodbending because of the unease he feels forcibly manipulating living creatures although Noatak is a prodigy. Throughout their training Tarrlok and his brother drift apart as Noatak becomes increasingly detached. Eventually Noatak turns on their father and leaves.

As an adult, Tarrlok makes a decision to go to Republic City, not to control it the way his father did through crime but lead it through legitimate channels. He works his way onto the City Council and sets up the task force charged with taking down Amon (who he doesn't know is his brother yet).

It doesn't go that well for him.

The Brothers Bad offer an interesting examination of the perils of parental pressure. Yakone pushes his sons to excel in a field he has chosen for them with little to no consideration of their own desires. He envisions who they want to be in order to vicariously get his own vengeance on Republic City.

Both of his sons reject what he wanted them to become. However due to their own ambitions, they end up becoming exactly what their father wanted anyway- the antagonists of the story instead of the heroes they wanted to become.

This is clear in Tarrlok's apology to Korra (for the whole bloodbending and kidnapping her thing),

"Avatar Korra. I am truly sorry for all that I did to you. I thought I was better than my father, but his ghost still shaped me. I became a soldier of revenge, just like he wanted me to be. And so did my brother."

So he decides to end their sad tale with murder-suicide. You know, for kids.

Now I've only begun to scratch the surface of the network of relationships within the series. I didn't get to mention Asami's highly complicated relationship with her father (who turned out to be an Equalist and not at all the man she thought he was), Tenzin's family and his wife Pema, or even Lin as Tenzin's old flame and her interactions with Korra.

Legend of Korra didn't always handle things perfectly. It made missteps here or there where the wider implications of the story they were telling wasn't considered and some elements didn't quite work but it did present a rich and varied text full of complicated and nuanced interpersonal relationships worth exploring.

The next one of these Korra posts will come out once I finished Book 2 so don't hold your breath since it might be a while. Don't worry though, I'm sure I'll find something else to write about in the meantime.


References:

Love Triangle - TV Tropes

The Legend of Korra: Deliberately Deconstructed - beccatoria

Korra's Relationships - Avatar Wiki

Borra: The Greatest Bromance Ever Told - LoK Gifs & Musings

Bald Mentor Appreciation Day - Nerdswole

Tarrlok's Relationships - Avatar Wiki

High Fantasy Versus Low Reality: What Makes Fiction Real

This wasn't the thing I was going to write about this week. I was going to write about Avatar: The Legend of Korra but then I saw an article on the latest episode of Game of Thrones which made me want to write about something completely different instead.

The article in question was by Fandom Following and argued that the show doesn't deserve critical analysis examining the motivations of its characters or whether it is providing commentary worthy of discussion.

The primary reason for this is because Game of Thrones doesn't have a consistent internal logic since the writing continually breaks the established rules of its own world.

"Listen to them, son. It doesn't make sense how one episode you needed to hold a root of the weirwood tree to have a vision but the next you stay in a vision long after letting go of the root. And no, 'because magic' is not an acceptable answer."

Game of Thrones often tries to have it both ways. The show writers defend the use of rape for drama, explaining it is part of "the reality of this particular world" of brutal patriarchy. However they still want to have ladies occasionally be sassy or talk back to men for a fist-pumping moment which makes no sense in a toxic misogynistic environment.

Or as Fandom Following explains,

Because you absolutely cannot pretend that in a world where Talla is not allowed to express that her future husband isn’t appealing to her without being silenced, her mother would even think to speak out against Randyll in order to defend a wildling that mothered the illegitimate child of her disinherited son. Yet not only did she speak out, she did so in front of others, and in such a manner that was meant to shame him.

Why would a blatant and violent sexist like Randyll allow his wife to publicly shame him like this?

But I don't want to focus on Game of Thrones since I wrote about the show last week. Rather I want to examine the critique that since fantasy novels have a vaguely medieval setting, they should therefore be 'historically accurate' or gritty. This is often a criticism leveled against high fantasy works, things like The Lord of the Rings or The Wheel of Time in contrast to 'realistic' fantasy series like A Song of Ice and Fire.

The critique often follows something along the lines that it is unrealistic the main protagonists of a highly dangerous epic adventure are likable and all survive. How can it be taken seriously unless there is the real danger that any character could possibly die? Essentially, the real Middle Ages were a brutal place and since fantasy novels superficially reflect the Middles Ages, they should reflect that brutality in order to have real merit.

I'm sorry but I call bullshit. There is no reason why a quote/unquote gritty fantasy world should be considered more seriously than a high fantasy world. Darkness can exist in well-lit worlds, characters don't have to be anti-heroes in order to be nuanced or complicated, and compelling storytelling doesn't have to rely on a gritty setting full of death.

Captain America: Civil War dealt with complex themes of privacy vs security, agency vs accountability, freedom versus governance, and loyalty versus betrayal but I don't know if the setting was gritty enough for me to take it seriously.

Let's focus on death for a moment since so many shows nowadays follow the 'anyone can die' mould as way of showing how realistic their fictional world is. Todd VanDerWerff wrote an in-depth and brilliant article for Vox on how the proliferation of death on our television screens in recent years has actually diluted its narrative or emotional impact.

When you rely on death as a plot point, it becomes reduced to shock value and cheapens the narrative. A fictional world doesn't need to rely on the death of one or more of its main characters to raise the stakes in order for us to be invested.

For example, Harry Potter is a high stakes tale where a bespectacled boy battles wizard Hitler but we all knew going in that Harry, Ron, and Hermoine were going to survive. We didn't need their deaths to become invested in the world.

I can't possibly invest in this. They're laughing and none of them die.

Death can and should happen in fiction but it needs to matter. I mean there was death in Harry Potter but it had a purpose. The first character of any worth to die was Cedric Diggory but that was in the fourth book in the series and he was a minor secondary character. J.K. Rowling spent the three previous books developed a rich world inhabited by identifiable characters we related to and used his death to mark the severe consequences of Voldemort's return in a real way.

And Cedric's death had an effect. It signaled a change in the series as the tone become more adult and dark. One that heralded later more significant character deaths like Sirius Black in Order of the Phoenix. As Harry's godfather, Sirius' death was dramatically significant as he lost one more link to his parents and his sense of family.

This leads to Harry's first real emotional breakdown in the series as it all becomes to much for him to handle and he calls Dumbledore, his other father-figure, out on his bullshit. But Harry then learns from this what makes him different from Voldemort and how he will inevitably defeat the Dark Lord - he has the capacity to love.

I know it hurts Harry but at least his death wasn't a cheap shock.

Of course, there is Dumbledore's own death in The Half-Blood Prince but yet again, that wasn't an attempt to show the reality of this particular world so much as it served an emotional and narrative function. Dumbledore's death was effective emotionally not only because he was a beloved character but because his death was handled with sensitivity.

And thematically it made sense for him to die. Over the course of the story Harry lost his adoptive father-figures in order to become his own man and face He-Who-Was-Already-Named-In-This-Post. It could be seen as a metaphor for growing up since he could no longer rely on his 'father' to swoop in and save him.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that fantasy doesn't have to mimic the real world or be dark and gritty in order to be realistic. It just needs to establish the rules of its own fictional world and follow them. As Tumblr user Lindira puts it:

Fantasy does NOT have to follow real world rules. Fantasy does NOT have to relate to some real world event, country, concept, law, or history. Fantasy does NOT have to mirror any particular time period or country, even if you’re basing your world on a real world one. There is NO SUCH THING as “historical accuracy” in fantasy as it relates to the real world. 

THE ONLY THING Fantasy has to do to be believable is follow the established rules OF ITS OWN WORLD. Fantasy can literally be anything you imagine it to be.

This is why we all accept that Superman can fly and shoot laser beams out of his eyes but get upset when writers pull shit like this out of their arse:

Nothing in Superman's list of powers in the movies (or comics) ever mentioned or hinted at being able to throw cellophane S shields at his enemies. It is obvious that the writers didn't care this flew in the face of Superman's established powers.

In fact, the final act of Superman II is unfortunately riddled with this lack of care, which is a shame because I love that movie. Like Superman can suddenly make holographic copies of himself because that is somehow a thing.

And then there is the kiss. You know the one. Where Superman kisses Lois so hard she forgets all the events of the movie. There are so many things wrong with that that I don't even want to touch it.

You can't just make up things whenever you feel like it if they go against the rules of the fictional world. It just doesn't work. The only thing it shows is that the writer either doesn't care about either the fictional world they have created or their audience.

Now that I've established that, let's discuss The Wheel of Time for a bit. I am currently reading the series for the first time and have only finished the first three books so far but since that's a trilogy, it's as good a place as any to provide some reserved analysis.

I mentioned up top that due to the fact that The Wheel of Time is a high fantasy series where (as far as I've read) none of the main characters die and lacks the 'anyone can die' approach which is all the rage nowadays, it somehow is less serious than a work like A Song of Ice and Fire.

That argument seems to be based on the false premise that grim = realistic, one I've spent some time diffusing. It also ignores the fact that Robert Jordan was going for something completely different to George R.R. Martin. Now bear in mind that I am by no means well versed the works of either author but here's how I see the distinction between the two series.

To my mind Jordan is more interested in exploring notions of prophecy and determinism, the resistance between who the characters believe themselves to be and who they were fated to become, with an emphasis on duality. There's also a focus on the cyclical nature of time for some reason.

Hmm, an ouroboros entwined with a wheel. Whatever could it mean?

Jordan used his richly imagined fantasy world as a backdrop to explore those ideas in a manner which couldn't have been done in quite the same way if the story was set in a more 'realistic' setting. On the other hand, while Martin's fictional world is home to magic and mystical creatures like dragons, his focus is more on the medieval aspect of fantasy.

Martin uses fantasy to create as an a brutal, patriarchal feudal world and used the medieval values of that setting to explore the workings of sexism and ableism (and to a lesser extent racism), the expression of masculinity, and personal identification.

In A Song of Ice and Fire, rape is a very real thing since it is a symptom of the toxic patriarchal world Martin built and exploring, but it would seem quite anachronistic in a series like The Wheel of Time. This isn't to say that the regularity of rape within his narrative is completely necessary for the 'realism' of Martin's fictional world but it does make sense within its internal logic.

But just because his world is more brutal doesn't necessarily make it more serious. Both A Song of Ice and Fire and The Wheel of Time deal with gender politics and both have explored the cruelty of slavery or bondage to some degree for example.

It might not be clear but the lady in green is Egwene and she has a leash around her neck that the lady in red and blue is holding to control her. This is from the less serious The Wheel of Time series by the way.

Furthermore, while The Wheel of Time could be said to have a lighter tone overall than A Song of Ice and Fire, the historical backstory that lays the foundation for the series is undeniably dark. From Wikipedia,

A century after the initial breach of the Dark One's prison, open warfare occurs between the forces of the Dark One and those of the Light, until the chieftain Lews Therin Telamon, known as the Dragon, leads a force of channelers and soldiers to reseal the prison; whereupon the Dark One inflicts a malediction that drives male channelers of the One Power insane. 

Thus affected, the male channelers create earthquakes and tsunamis altering numerous landscapes in an event that comes to be called "The Breaking of the World." Lews Therin himself kills his friends and family, and is known afterwards as "Kinslayer." Given a moment of sanity by Ishamael, chief among the Dark One's servants, Lews Therin commits suicide.

Remember this is the story which some dismiss as 'high fantasy' like that's a bad thing and less worthy of attention. And that's my point. Fantasy can be whatever it wants to be. It doesn't have to be 'adult' in tone to handle some heavy stuff and it doesn't have mimic the real world to be realistic.

It just has to follow its own rules. Even if those rules include magic.


References:

Stop Pretending Game of Thrones is Worthy of Analysis - Fandom Following

Game of Thrones writer defends Sansa scene in heartfelt new commentary - Entertainment Weekly

Fantasy Does Not Have To Follow Real World Rules - Lindira

TV is killing off so many characters that death is losing its punch - Vox

A'dam - The Wheel of Time Wiki

The Wheel of Time Wikipedia page