Ugly Betty, 1x??

[oyceter]

I watched three random episodes of Ugly Betty, as determined by whatever was playing and whatever Tivo caught. Um. Spoilers for... the two model sisters at a nightclub episode?

I'm really undecided about this show. I know it's gotten a lot of praise, so possibly I've only caught bad episodes. And even in these three episodes (the Christmas party one, the end of the MYS/Sofia thing one, the two model sisters who turn out to be mother daughter one), the show's been really good at taking unsympathetic characters and making me like them, or turning things around a little.

On the other hand, I was really, really bugged by the Sofia thing. I knew that Betty would end up returning to Mode, given sitcom constraints, but it sort of rubbed me the wrong way to have the head of the supposedly more feminist magazine be a schemer who ends up tearing the heart out of poor unsuspecting me. But they gave Sofia a moment at the end, and while she did an awful thing, you sort of get her.

But then there was the really insane black social worker and the scheming mother/daughter flip on Daniel, and I started getting rather twitchy about the portrayal of women in power or trying to get power. I mean, wow, they are insane. And there's Mandy's perpetual look for a leg up, along with Wilhelmina's many schemes (I actually like them and think they're funny), along with the Scottish fashion designer betraying confidences for a career move. And through it all, there's Betty, who morally disapproves of all of this (well, so far not the social worker or the scheming mother/daughter, but I'm pretty sure she will go ballistic about the mother/daughter), who constantly seems to be selling herself short to stay and babysit Daniel, and she seems to be the only likeable woman.

And she is likeable partially because she isn't power-hungry.

Um. Did I just watch a bad set of episodes or something? So far, the two guys I've seen jockeying for power have been Willy's assistant and Alexis' new assistant, but so far, their jockeying hasn't been a major plot point. And the guys in power (Daniel, Daniel's dad) so far seem reasonable and non-cutthroat, or at least less so compared to the women.

Also, while I like Betty a lot, I am incredibly creeped out by how possessive and protective she is about Daniel. The end of the last episode does seem to indicate that it is unhealthy, but given Daniel being entrapped by the mother/daughter team, it looks like Betty will be pulled right back into that role.

I don't know. I'm just sort of disturbed, a lot by Daniel being one of the least comedic figures on the show and the sympathy I am guessing that he gets, a lot by Betty wanting to stay as his assisstant, a lot by Betty constantly mothering him and getting feedback that has been positive about it for two out of three of the episodes I've seen ("Betty, you've made me grow so much"). And I can see how the show could be a more nuanced look at women and how difficult it is in a largely male corporate environment and how women end up resorting to sex and mothering and not their skills, but for these three episodes, it seems like all the not-Betty women have been portrayed as downright evil, delusional, or just plain scheming.

Comments

[shewhohashope.livejournal.com]

Okay, I've seen some Ugly Betty, and Daniel appears to be a bastard. The show acknowledges this, but not as much as I'd like. He was really out of line when he said he didn't need a baby-sitter and told Betty to punch-out, because he does, and he calls her all hours of the day and night asking for her help and advice, things that go far beyond the duties of an assistant. And while Betty's mothering of him is unhealthy, he fosters this behaviour. I'd like to think that the show is actually acknowledging the situation, but things will probably have returned to the status quo by next week.

- Re: Sofia, I was probably more sympathetic to her than I was supposed to be. She did have a point that Daniel had everything handed to him and she had to work her way up by being ruthless. It's not going to be as easy for a WOC to become the editor of a magazine as it is for the son of the man who owns the magazine (actually, this applies to Wilhelmina too, she's clearly far more competent than Daniel or Alexis). Of course why the editor of a supposedly 'feminist' magazine had to have her first cover be about getting a man to marry, I don't know. Maybe the point was that the feminist magazine was as hollow as Mode, but less honest? It could be an indictment of the media in general.

- While Betty isn't power hungry, she is ambitious, and she has to deal with a lot of crap from Hilda and her boyfriend Walter for following her dreams.

- The black social worker made me rather uncomfortable, because of course, the over-weight black woman is desperate for a man and would go so far as to stalk someone and abuse her position of power over him. The ending made her slightly more sympathetic, but I'm still not okay with it.

I want to like this show because it does try to represent COC and transgendered people as real (fictional) individuals, but it can and does miss the mark.

I may have more thoughts, but I should be getting to my seminar.

[oyceter]

Yeah, I am not very disposed to like Daniel. I went back to read coffeeandink's summary, and I'm wondering if I just stumbled into episodes that don't talk about Daniel's privilege as much. Though in defense of the show, even in these three episodes, there has been mention of Daniel's privilege, particularly in comparison between him and Sofia, who had to work her ass off just to get where she was.

I really liked Sofia, though I had pretty much figured out she wasn't going to stay long, as she was played by Salma Hayek. I was also irritated about the first cover story of her feminist magazine, particularly since Betty did note that Sofia's magazine workforce was much more diverse. Not to say that everything labeled as "feminist" has to be good, but I swear, in the last few things I've watched, things labeled as "feminist" always end up being shown to be hypocritical. This annoys me (esp. given the common criticism that feminism is to blame for the hypersexualization of today's culture and for the greater pressure young women put on themselves and etc.).

Completely ditto your comments on the black social worker.

On the other hand -- show with WOC as main character! And I adore Wilhelmina in all her glorious shallowness, and I am already liking Alexis.

I'd love to hear more thoughts!

[shewhohashope.livejournal.com]

I'd love to hear more thoughts!

Are you sure?

Well, I saw the episode after 'Punch-out' yesterday, and there is a point made of the fact that Daniel has a problem, and I feel a little better about Betty's over-zealousness if I think of it as a friend who recognises that someone has a real problem that needs to be addressed. It wasn't the best way to go about it, but she's more sensible this week.

There was also a mention of Daniel's privilege from Alexis. Alexis and Wilhelmina are both clearly better suited to the Editor-in-chief position than Daniel, but his father prefers him to Wilhelmina because of nepotism and Alexis because she's a woman/transgender.

The feminist issue is why I stopped watching Veronica Mars. How empowering is a show with a strong female lead who looks down on both feminists and feminism? I know that writers should be allowed freedom to make their own decisions with their own books/films/tv series, but I'm not going to act like each individual decision is independent of the larger context, which in this case is that feminist characters and organisations are overtly or covertly disparaged, shown to be hypocritical, or morally bankrupt in mainstream media ALL THE TIME.
Especially when people say that feminists/inter-racial relationships/disabled characters/transgender characters have been over-done. It's not particularly original to portray feminists as slutty, sexually-repressed, man-hating lesbians who don't shave their legs, not to mention the message that this is sending to women/POC/transgender/gay people is that they're nothing more than a fad and now it's time to go back to 'normal people' (read: young-middle-aged white middle-class males).

I went a little off course there, possibly.

But the thing is this show, while not perfect, is about a million times better than most of the stuff out there and really has a lot of 'non-traditional' characters front-and-centre.

[oyceter]

Are you sure?

Hee, yes!

OMG completely agree with you on VMars. That was the one I was not-so-obliquely referring to ;). Just... *sputters* Yup, that's why I stopped watching it.

I think I will keep watching Ugly Betty, just to fill in gaps and see how it's going, because hey... women of color! As opposed to one woman of color!

[almeda.livejournal.com]

The sad thing is that, at least among women younger than me (I'm 31) that I meet and have casual conversations with out in the non-fannish world, 'feminism' MEANS 'shrill man-hating boob-flaunters who think they're so much better than everyone else and have to prove it by putting everyone else down'.

I shit you not.

[oyceter]

Well, I think that definition of feminism holds for most people, not just women under 30, thanks to the general portrayal of feminists in the media and stupid jokes about them. Pretty much everyone I've talked to who isn't my usual LJ crowd seems to have that impression, sigh.

[almeda.livejournal.com]

Mind, I've only seen a few as well (different few), but I get the impression it's intended to be broad, cartoonish farce.

See also "why I can't watch Scrubs or My Name is Earl" ...

[oyceter]

Well, I think it can be farce and still have messages, though I don't actually think it (or Scrubs) are quite farce. They have their farcical moments, but they both do take time to develop characters, even though it's more slowly than in dramas.

[shewhohashope.livejournal.com]

Most of my friends are women aged 18-25, and they seem to have that impression about feminists. One of them referenced all the stereotypes and laughed when I said I'd call myself a feminist, and she's an intelligent woman.

I do really like this show, I'm not sure if that's reflected in my posts. Even though it comes across as (and sometimes is) a broad comedy of the soapish variety, the characters have depth to them. Even the antagonists and comic relief are humanised. There are so many beautiful character moments, and I'd honestly say that I don't wholly dislike any of the characters.

[oyceter]

I'm still wondering if it is age specific or not, largely because it plays uncomfortably into the "those third-wave post-feminist suck!" syndrome that I've seen floating around before. I've got a few forty-some coworkers who say the same thing, and all the guys I know basically do, with the exception of a few, and I think the older generation doesn't even bother rolling their eyes. They just think the feminists (broad catchphrase disclaimer here) are wrong wrong wrong.

*sigh*

Anyway... Ugly Betty! I do get the liking ^_^. Sometimes the frustration is made worse when I actually do like something and respect it, because then I can see how much more awesome it could be (*ahem*Heroes*ahem*). Whereas some things, I just give up on. But even though I rag on Heroes, I feel bad, because it's trying, you know? As opposed to, say, SPN or Buffy with race; I want to push Heroes to do better, but sometimes I forget to acknowledge that it (and Ugly Betty, from the little I've seen) is doing stuff with race and stereotypes, even if not always successfully.