Griffyn, I'm sure you're not trying to patronize the rest of us. But you're hardly the only member of this board who's been reading history books since the 6th grade.

But I'm with Nutty and Micole on this issue: I don't think there's enough support for the more generous interpretation yet. It's simple thoughtlessness, I think.

So, yes, my mileage does vary. I'm still on board with the show, but I'm concerned about the depth of thought that went into the Companion concept and gender issues in general (extra-textual commentary aside).

Not trying to be patronizing, or sugget that others havn't been reading history books before the 6th grade. I meant in that to say the history books (and classes) that I got in the 6th grade included Geisha, Courtesans, Noble Mistresses and the like as part of the political science studies. Something that I have found in my adult years was not introduced in most school systems until much later if at all. I apologize if it came off as being in any way offensive.

As for the rest, I see nothing to either support or contradict the matter of Companions and/or gender role conflicts as being well or poorly thought out. Just saying that the first 13 episodes of a TV show is hardly enough of a sample to make any sort of claim one way or the other. Give me a full 26 episode season of Firefly (Please?) and there might be enough information to support an argument.

I'm with Griffyn. I mean, sure, I've extrapolated stuff -- but I don't feel that I'm having to fanwank the Companion idea. What has been presented on screen seems reasonable enough to me -- not a full picture, any more than Book's personal history or the nature of his Order have been explained in detail, or indeed Blue Sun or the scary Blue Hand men. It's only a partial picture, but I really haven't found it jarring or incredible.

I agree that it's not been realized as well as one might hope, and that things like Male Companions remain hypothetical (since we've only seen 1 1/2 actual Companions on the show), but I am totally not having the problem with the basic concept that it seems some people here are. There are enough sincere remarks along the lines of "What, the difference is just they make tea?" to suggest that many/most people here are having serious difficulties seeing sex workers as having any social niches other than those of 20th Century America.

I'm not saying that everyone who objects to the portrayal of the Companions is objecting because they can't wrap their heads around the idea of a group of sex workers having high social status and/or a quasi religious role, but my impression is that some people are balking at that concept, regardless of how well or badly ME have portrayed it.

I may have misunderstood.

What has been presented on screen seems reasonable enough to me -- not a full picture, any more than Book's personal history or the nature of his Order have been explained in detail, or indeed Blue Sun or the scary Blue Hand men. It's only a partial picture, but I really haven't found it jarring or incredible.

My problem is that what's been presented on the screen does not match what's being told to us. In only one instance have we actually seen a Companion receive the respect which we are constantly told they command, and that one instance occurred one of the least sophisticated planets they visited. The statement that they are probably respected in the core planets just doesn't wash for me, because we never saw it. For that matter, a higher level of sophistication doesn't necessarily mean that Companions would be treated any differently than we've seen out on the fringe. That the series was cut short I can't argue with. OTOH, in thirteen episodes we found out enough hints about Book to know that he does command respect in the Alliance.

I've seen it twice, but I can't remember offhand - how was Inara treated by the alliance in Bushwacked?

IIRC, Doug Savant was surprised that someone in her position would be associating with the Serenity crew.

Sorry - I know about Geishas, noble mistresses and the rest. And Companions are not an exact parallel. Geishas for example were part of a "floating world" that had a great deal of influence. But the power of the floating world was held by the people who owned the Geishas - not the Geishas themselves.

I'm not saying such a guild couldn't exist. But we are not really given enough clues as to how it works.

Ok I know the whole "not enough episodes" excuse. But the thing is - even though I don't know how the Blue Hand works, I get the feeling that the writers do. Even though I like to speculate on the nature of the Reavers (and in fact have a suspicion that the detials were never worked out) the role reavers play in the Fireflyverse society is pretty clear. What they are to othes - even if we don't know what they are to themselves. (And of course there is room for some hddien depths to be there for them to be related to others.)

When it comes to companions - I don't get the feeling that there role in any of the societies was really thought out. I suspect it was more - "Gee Gunsmoke had Miss Kitty; the great Westerns had whores. So our space western needs one too.. Plus isn't it neat to be able to say 'and there's a whore'."

I think that has been the problem with Inara all along. I actually think Inara is played by a decent actress, and has a reasonably consistent and convicing character. I think it is the social role she fills, the role of companion that is neither convincing nor consistent. I think the weird and unconvincing profession, sometimes rubs off on peoples view of the character.

And again, it is not the idea that there could be some such role as companion that fails to convince me. There have been several good fanwanks about what it could be. The idea of Companions as an arm of the govenrments is an interesting take. Or (to do my own fanwank) it could be an indenpent power like Revernend Mothers were in Dune.

But they have not shown us (well me at least) any of this. They haven't shown me that they have thought out any of this. I get the feeling that ME may have gone as far as doing a little historical research to get some quick comparisons. But I don't subjectively get an impression that they used any of this research to decide what companions actually are.

Sorry - I know about Geishas, noble mistresses and the rest. And Companions are not an exact parallel

I hear what you're saying, but, Gar, afaik nobody has said that Companions are an exact parallel for Geishas. Indeed, the roles of the high-class sex workers cited in Japan, India and Ancient Greece all sound pretty damn different, so an exact parallel is a nonsensical idea.

Like you, I've taken something not unlike Herbert's Bene Gesserit as a reference point, although whether that was ME's intention is anyone's guess. And I agree that the rationale for including this character was undoubtedly "Hey, wouldn't it be neat to have a whore?" rather than any dry planning of the social structures. But for the most part I haven't found it jarring, and I haven't found it disturbing that attitudes to Inara's role varied from place to place. In my limited experience, cultural attitudes and expectations do vary from place to place.

The Companion thing works well enough for me based on what we've got in the 13 episodes. Whether the ME folks were winging it madly for Companions, Reavers, Blue Hand blokes et al, we just don't know. I'd tend to hazard a 'yes', certainly for the first two -- but we just don't know. I'm happy that I don't find the question of Companions particularly problematic, because I could see that might have marred my enjoyment.

I think the Bene Gesserit parallel has the potential to be cool; so too, I like my own "cultural propaganda wing" idea. Neither of these have been shown, although neither one has been given evidence against. I'm not objecting to the multitude of cool ideas that can be overlaid on the companion concept: I'm objecting to the fact that we can overlay whatever we want on the companion concept, because we have been given so little evidence, and all of that contradictory.

In the absence of defining evidence, and in the presence of an episode full of all the idiot stereotypes I expect M.E. -- Joss especially -- to reject, all I can do is assume the worst: companions as a concept are something that basically fell out of Maxim magazine, akin to the gigantically endowed Vulcan and that catsuit-wearing Borg chick on Star Trek.

Sex work and sexual exploitation --- not necessarily the same thing, though often enough they are -- are topics too ambiguous and too revealing of deeply-seated attitudes to be thrown around casually. If M.E. wanted to sit down and talk about sex-work, fine, but they sort of have a responsibility not to make a surface-level dumbshow about the topic.

"Hey, wouldn't it be neat to have a whore?"

I'd add "and make her more respected than the preacher" to this statement. I doubt they worked through all the implications, given that ME doesn't seem to like setting up show "bibles" - see also Vampires in the ME-verse.

Given that the major arc for the season seems to have been the whole River situation (easier to discern with the original running order), I'm not bothered that they haven't fleshed out the companion concept more in 13 episodes.