Not much changes in Scotland. It’s desolate and full of the decedents of violent, clannish sorts that speak with an unappealing brogue. It always has been that way. It is also the original place of far too many Americans. Little wonder, then, that Starz would pick up “Outlander” for a premium treatment.
And premium treatment it is! We have battles, romance, and impressive cinematography. Perhaps most important, we also have a something of feminist narrative. Our protagonist, Claire Randall (Caitriona Balfe), is the generic TV heroine with a heart of gold. She’s drop dead gorgeous, affluent, and volunteers as a nurse. Think Lady Sybil Branson of “Downton Abbey.”
Claire Randall is a product of the World War II and “Outlander” is lackadaisical in communicating the suffocation and sexism that entails. We get a glimpse of a rebel but without the society she rebels against. What starts as “Downton Abbey” lite soon becomes a tale of turmoil. If you’re thinking 1950s post-colonialism, though, then you’re sorely mistaken. Our protagonist instead time travels to 18th century Scotland. Why? God. Fairies. White denial.
What does matter is that she meets the “love of her life,” Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan). At the series start he’s a bovine redhead on the verge of inheriting a grand estate. He’s also a warrior poet with a knack for learning different languages. Do I mention he’s exquisitely handsome with a big chest? Because he’s that too.
The most notable bits of “Outlander” is the sex. Guys go down on Claire Randall, she tells us about it, etc. A good change of pace. However, circumstance becomes part of the foreplay. This is realistic, granted. Since when has context and scenario not been apart of romance? Without going too far into detail, Jaime makes tremendous sacrifices for Claire.
The only problem? This interaction conforms to expectations -dalliances of the privileged few and all that. Again we see the world from a perspective that few people enjoy but that many aspire towards. Ironic then, that this is also crux of both seasons.
“Outlander” takes place during the Jacobite uprising that culminates in the Battle of Culloden. For those unaware, it was an absolute disaster. 2000 Scots died compared to 50 English. Why? Capability of the Scottish force. And to be fair the uprising in “Outlander” is full of flawed characters. Nowhere, though, do we see the laughable incompetence that pervaded the Jacobite army in real life.
Perhaps this is to draw the viewer into the show. The target demographic of “Outlander,” even if better read than most, are not experts of early modern Scottish-English conflict. The history itself is part of the surprise and narrative. For those in the know, “Outlander” also goes the way of Dr. Who. We really do not know if Claire can avert history. Spoiler alert -she doesn’t.
“Outlander” is unsettling for many reasons. Perhaps most of all is the fact that it exists. This show is about savages -noble white savages. The same savages that would move on to press their own clannish xenophobia, oppression, and insanity onto Native Americans and African slaves in the new world. The same savages that would create that god-awful, and endemic, barbarism that we predominantly see in the American south.
White people want to feel good about their pasts. The truth, however, is that they shouldn’t. They should feel bewildered and horrified. That’s a healthy reaction. “Outlander,” instead, taps into the denial that many Americans feel. I guess there’s always Culloden.
"Jumping the shark" happens. Six seasons in, though, and "The Venture Bros." is still fresh. There are plenty of reasons…read more →
"Riviera" has an oozing, vicious heart full of ridicule, contempt, and...loyalty. One of the most stunning shows of 2017, this…read more →
You are a bitter, bitter, sad little man. You mad bro? Didn’t get a writing gig? A spot on the show? They turned down your boyfriend. I’m so sorry.
Confession time -you can’t watch “Stranger Things” on cable. Nope. Those looking for the 80’s era throwback will require a Netflix subscription. So why is CATV covering it? Because it makes no sense that “Stranger Things” is on Netflix. Yet…it makes all the sense of the world. We’re looking at you, cable broadcasters!
Cable is risk averse. We’ve already covered that a lot. Doesn’t matter if it’s swords and castles or ethnocentric caricatures or all three. Whatever the setting, count on conformity from the likes of FX and co. Such is the necessity of attracting airtime from commercials. Abstractions, selective information, and populist schemas that celebrate jocular irreverence are great for selling any product!
Netflix, however, only answers to its subscribers. They create shows that actually take risks. Sometimes this is the limits of our disbelief -just look at the likes of “House of Cards.” Other times, it’s the limits of our sanity. “Bojack Horseman,” anyone?
None, though, compare to “Stranger Things.” This show is fantastic as it is exploitative. It’s everything a late 20 to 30-something could hope for. ET. Poltergeist. The Clash. Even the intro focuses on the “S” and “Ing,” which in turn is an obvious play-on-words for “Stephen King.” Damn and half a jar of Jesus, does that title ring!
The content itself does not disappoint. Much like 80’s era pop fiction, we do not care about the characters… but we want to know what happens to them. Victims in the show, meanwhile, are easily forgotten. Not because they’re flat or because of the show’s immediacy. Instead, “Stranger Things” uses culture to inform craft. In truth, anyone familiar with 80’s era fiction and entertainment are already familiar with the tropes.
Best of all? The threat is myopic. An individual menace haunting a small town in the middle of Bumfuck Middle America. The allegory towards taxpayer’s culpability for the weird shit during the Cold War is obvious. So, too, is the question of mass media and its growing influence on everywhere.
Proverbially speaking, our main victim steps into a bad trip that, according to populist neoliberal notions, only a pragmatist male figure and his mom can pull him out from. The final scene to the series showcases how no matter if someone is saved, they are affected all the same…and ready to spread an inter-dimensional organism. Is it an allegory for the growing cynicism and consumer outlets that gained sway in the post-Vientnam era? Maybe. That’s part of what makes the show interesting.
Cultural merit aside, there are some things to gripe about. First and foremost is the age group of our focal protagonists. The 80’s was a more innocent time yet its adolescents were more mature. “Stranger Things” showcases that in so many ways that its absurd.
But the air time our twelve-year old protagonists receive is perturbing. Not because it’s bad unto itself, mind you. Only because the target audience is much older. It’s probably not an oversight. The main effects “Stranger Things” is probably looking for are cute factor and nostalgic catharsis. There’s also no sexualized components in interactions between the adolescents and their adult figures. So yes, “Stranger Things” is a far cry from Larry Clark or Roman Polanski wackiness…but it’s still enough to raise eyebrows. After all, this is a show pandering to adults that features kids.
But, thankfully, there is little to no sexual focus on their trials and tribulations. “Stranger Things,” instead, is leveraging the 80’s forever-cult status thanks to the likes of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. These are the goofy haircuts and histrionics of the post-disco generation. These are the hijinks and confusion of their kids…and these kids are now Netflix subscribers.
Wrapped in its nostalgic shell is such a sense of governmental betrayal and hopelessness that it hurts. Perhaps that is the one defining factor of 80’s era pop fiction, its legacy, that lives on -never trust the establishment and always fight back. “Stranger Things” might not have it right. But when did the 80’s? It’ll be interesting to see if cable jumps on the nostalgic bandwagon of this (unsurprising) smash hit.
Caxton Books is a specialised book supplier to various markets throughout southern Africa. These include primary, secondary and tertiary educational institutions, academic, corporate, city and provincial libraries, government departments, courts of law from magistrates to the appeal and constitutional courts and private sector business from mining houses, legal firms, investment banks and hospitals to medical practices.
Our supply process is controlled from source through our worldwide network of publishers, wholesalers and distributors. We obtain our requirements from the most competitive point of supply in the USA, Europe or South Africa to provide the most effective service. Our approach is flexible and we will tailor our service to your order for one copy of any book, one copy of many books or many copies of one book.
2018 Books - We have removed the 2018 booklists, please email your 2018 requirements to info@caxtonbooks.co.za and we will send you a quote as most prices have changed since the lists were compiled last year. We continue to stock your 2018 requirements.
E-Books - Please select View / Download Price-lists and then Textbook Prices if you require e-book instructions. This will not include a voucher code which we will only email you once you have made a purchase. E-books ordered with the bulk delivery will receive vouchers at that time.