There's a distinction I make, which I'm not sure I can explain properly. It's the difference between when the manipulation comes from the storytelling, and when the storytelling takes a back seat to the manipulation.
This, for me, is the reason why I adore Tolkien's, and hate Jackson's Lord of the Rings. Tolkien tells the story, and tells it in such a way that I feel so many things, so very deeply. Watching the movie (I walked out of "Fellowship" and never looked back) I could SEE the strings Jackson was using to Try to tug on my emotions, and I could SEE the ways he was pulling. Any movie that is so transparent is a failure to me. After all, for me, Conan the Destroyer was a rolicking good time - not deep, but sufficient to keep me in the moment, and in the seat.
With Serenity, I was in the moment, in the movie, THERE, the whole way - stunned by Book and Wash's deaths, I sobbed for Zoe at their funeral like I did not sob at my own father's funeral (because there I had to keep my shit together).
It was someone on the TWOP boards that made this point long long ago, but they brought up one thing about Wash's death: It was the price the crew paid for Mal's use of the Reavers as a weapon. The Reavers aren't just something you should be able to use willy-nilly. They are a savage, chaotic, unstoppable whirlwind of violence. It was Mal's arrogance which made him believe they could be used without consequences for his own crew.
And this brings me to my recent re-evaluation of Mal's character. I've always loved him, and I always will, but I'm not sure I can see him as a hero any longer. Ultimately he is not, as much as I would like him to be, Sam Vimes, my favorite fictional hero of all time, because of one crucial thing: Vimes believes lives are always more important than causes.
Hrm. Writing this now is making me think about a comparison between pTerryian and Jossian existentialism... I'll spare y'all that though.
So Mal can't be a hero because he puts causes before lives? I don't think I agree with that.
eta: I can buy Mal not being a hero, I just don't think this is a compelling reason.
Refrains from trying to distinguish between 'champion' and 'hero' as that never ends well
I think Mal realized that since the Alliance and the Operative found out he had River, they were pretty much screwed. They could either turn River over (sending her to her death) or gamble on finding a way out of the situation.
It was the price the crew paid for Mal's use of the Reavers as a weapon.
Interesting. So what price for using
River
as a weapon? Book? Or none, because River chose to become the weapon? Or did The Alliance pay the price for making RiverWeapon with the loss of men and ships and the newswave about Miranda?
As for the other, TV!Mal put lives before causes. It seemed that he had had an epiphany after the battle of Serenity along those lines. Movie!Mal did put the cause before the lives.
Refrains from trying to distinguish between 'champion' and 'hero' as that never ends well
One is needed by Bonnie Tyler, the other eats Wheaties....
Movie!Mal did put the cause before the lives.
I think Movie!Mal finally found another cause he could privilege that highly.
At a con I was at recently, we had a really interesting panel about Mal, and the way in which you could view the other characters as possessing or representing things Mal had lost. So you have Book and his faith, Wash and his humor, Kaylee and her optimism, etc.
Does it involve jewelry?
Yes, but not the Liz Taylor stuff. Claddagh rings.
