16815--Zen and the Art of TV Archery

Taking another shot at adapting an A-list superhero from comic books to TV, executive producer Marc Guggenheim has launched a new visioning of Green Arrow at audiences. Some might debate my assignation of A-list status to a low-tech hero with no superhuman abilities, but I’ll argue that he’s carried his own title, been a long-time member of the Justice League and has a name that the average citizen-at-large won’t respond to with “Who?”. Even without a version of him appearing on the now-defunct “Smallville” for several seasons, he’s a well-known quantity who has never been shy about working in the ranks of the comic universe’s heavyweights. Like his fellow mere mortal Batman, that similar list of credentials is more than enough to qualify his Tough Guy status.

Like others of his costumed stalwarts, the details of his backstory have been tweaked as much as any urban legend. This time around, he’s been presented with a live mother and a dead father, the circumstances behind that being only a part of making him into the heroic figure he has had to become. Still a part of the Gilligan’s Island travel plan, wealthy young socialite Oliver Queen was stranded on a remote island that would serve as the crucible in which he would be tempered. Marooned as the result of sabotage to his yacht this time around, the playboy-reborn-as-Tough-Guy has come back to civilization with an attitude and a secret agenda worthy of the Count of Monte Cristo. Add in the fitful sleep of a troubled soul and they are clearly making the effort of presenting a nuanced protagonist intriguing enough to hold everyone’s attention. Certainly, that’s something the Green Arrow who first appeared in More Fun Comics back in 1941 could not have done in the modern era.

While the hero of “Arrow” may take on gangs of thugs, loose arrows with skill enough to make an Olympic archer go slack-jawed and Parkour like a monkey on Red Bull, executive producer Guggenheim is nothing less than adamant that superpowered heroes like Superman and Green Lantern won't have a place on the show. Wow. What happened to helping your buddies share in the wealth? Courtney Cox may have had plenty of her old co-stars show their faces on “Cougartown”, but it looks like Guggenheim has other ideas about how “Arrow” will play out. Conversely, he also says the show will try to utilize as much of the DC Comics universe as humanly possible:



Sorry, pal, they said...uh...our greens would clash.



"We've got a lot of different characters and then there are characters you may not recognize unless you're a diehard comic book fan. One of the things we've done, mainly because we're fans, is we've thrown in a lot of Easter eggs for the hardcore fans. If you're a big fan of the DC Comics universe, you'll see a lot of familiar names and places: Big Belly Burger, which is a hamburger chain from the Superman comic books, makes a regular appearance on our show and we have a Big Belly Burger franchise as one of our standing sets. You'll still hear about characters from those worlds and from those cities. We're imagining a DC universe without super-powered characters, but that doesn't mean that in our parallel universe that there isn't a Metropolis or a Gotham City. There are references to places like Corto Maltese (a war-torn island) and Markovia. I would listen and watch carefully if you're a comic book fan because some of the references are really subtle and will go past a lot of people."

Now my opinion on this is if they're imagining a DCU without super-powered characters, they‘re not imagining the DCU.  If you’re going to piss away the unique infrastructure that goes along with Green Arrow, why bother building a show around that character?  It seems ridiculous to waste elements of story that others can't offer in the midst of such a competitive market.  The audience may as well go watch “Nikita”, “Revenge” or “Person of Interest”.  Or the evening news.  Why spend time on a another new series when we already have proven products who've passed their first season hurdles?  Oh, it's Green Arrow, you say?  Hey, there's a quantity with some potential!  Oh, just Green Arrow?  You know, we already have plenty of non-super action and drama.  We live in it. 

Green Arrow lives in a different reality and has the opportunity to explore themes using levels of depth denied to mundane genres.  Ignoring that reality sounds like the same error “Smallville” started with when the ultimately ousted producers insisted that “no tights, no flights” was the only cool way to present Superman to the 21^st century and a generation that had outgrown such heroes.  In time, the people making the show got over themselves and “Smallville“ improved. One of the notable additions to the show, ironically, was Green Arrow (though I hear they really wanted a young Bruce Wayne, but were denied such lofty access). After all these years of adaptations, you would think TV producers would’ve learned by now that acknowledging the integrated universe of such characters works far better than yanking a single thread from a tapestry and pretending that their chosen hero is the only one. I’m waiting for the day someone brings us an adaptation of some popular vampire story, but without all the silliness of biting and fangs and supernatural stuff.

Meanwhile, “Arrow” doesn't have to show people leaping tall buildings, but could slip in references to superhuman activities in newscasts and the odd urban legend mention without letting the idea overrun the show. That sort of thing would certainly put a bigger smile on my mug than a trip through Big Belly’s “drive-thru” lane. I trust “Arrow” and Oliver Queen will prove tough enough to endure creator egos and the rigors of TV ratings to become even better than the better than average showing it has already given us.

16374--Fantasy Suggests, Reality Dictates and Household Maintenance Endures

I'd say the dishes are done, but that wouldn't really be true.  I don't think any cleaning is ever done.  It's a cyclical thing.  You can have low points in the cycle, but it never has an end.  That's a basic reality.  This is probably why some people find it so appealing to thrive on take-out food.  That feeds the fantasy of avoiding the persistent drudgery of household maintenance.

As a dad, domestication is more of a requirement.  Household maintenance doesn't just mean taking care of the trash and yard work.  Today, it was taking care of dishes and laundry and sick wife and cooking everyone a breakfast they would eat.  Finicky kids are funny: they'll eat any sweet processed crap a cereal company stuffs into a colorful box, but when someone upon whom their life depends goes into the kitchen and lovingly prepares a custom meal for them they get picky.  Part of being a domesticated dad is learning to fight the urge to unleash swift and blinding violence against the people around you when they become annoying.

"Awww...I don't like this."
"Yes, you do."
"No, I don't."
"You ate it yesterday.  You loved it."
"I'm not hungry."
"You said you were hungry five minutes ago."
"I'm not hungry."
"Just eat it."
*unintelligible grunt* accompanied by a pronounced slouch
"Fine, just pout then."

Noise?  That's just the sound of my internal conflict becoming external, why?  It only sounds like my forehead bouncing off the wall. 

Back when I was single, I had absolutely no responsibility to feed people who annoyed me or even just couldn't decide what they wanted to eat.  If my friends and I got together on the weekends and my turn came up to make a food run, the guys learned quickly to make decisions on what they wanted.  When I got on my feet and pointed my finger, I asked the question "What do you want?" and expected an answer from these people who claimed to be hungry and had me going to get them food.  "Uh..." earned a response of "Nothing for you" and I moved on to the next guy in the poll.  Imminent starvation does wonders for reactivating a society-addled survival instinct.

I'm not a fan of coddling children.  "I don't want spoiled milk," I've always said, "why would I want spoiled kids?"  I've been assured there's a law against throwing them out when they go bad on you.  I trust my mom, so I'm willing to take her at her word, but I also recognize that she carries some bias.  Still, she knows how I feel.  Hey, she took part in raising me, so she's responsible for some of it.  In fact, on my birthdays, I call her to wish her a "Happy Mother's Day" and thank her for not caving in the back of my head with a rock when she had the chance.  Still, we all want our kids to be able to survive out of the nest, but we also want them to have a reasonably comfortable path getting to that point.  Some of them appreciate it and others don't.  A lot of them are clueless.

I've got one video game junkie who's halfway through teenage.  He seems to have decided that I need to teach him humility.  I wouldn't say he has much of an interest in it and he doesn't seem to enjoy it, but at least it makes me laugh.  Like many teens, he seems to think he's smarter, stronger, tougher, etc. than he is.  I think they go through that sort of thing because their growth has them more developed than they've ever been.  It goes to their teen heads, swelling them.  That really seems to make mine hate facing that dad actually is smarter, stronger, tougher, etc. than he is.  The stark reality threatens the gossamer edges of his bubble made from fantasy and denial. 

What can I do, though?  We're like the BEFORE and AFTER pictures in the old Charles Atlas ads.  I can count his ribs, weigh more than twice what he does, can bench press more than three times what he can and my shirts fit him like bedsheets.  When we watch Jeopardy!, his favorite answer is "Uh..."  and I can certainly do his homework better than he can (not that I would do it for him).  I'm a writer, but I get up and do things, too.  He's a kid and he'll stay in bed till noon if he's allowed to.  There's no part of my mind that says my acting like Clark Kent for the sake of his ego is a good idea.

As long as he can keep them to himself, I'm easy-going enough to let him have his fantasies most days.  Kids use fantasy as part of their growth process.  It helps them deal with reality in controlled doses.  It's similar to the way we grown-ups shield them from certain things till we feel they're old enough to deal with them.  So I let him have his fantasies...to a point.  I try to restrain myself from crushing fragile little egos (we want them out of the nest, not curled in a ball in the corner), so I try not to rub his nose in too much reality as long as he doesn't get out of line.  Sometimes, though...well, teenage boy.  Which means, he asks for it.  He doesn't always realize he's doing it, but he does ask for it.

One of the ways a lot of kids learn the limits between their delicate fantasies and our collective reality is to push at the borders.  When that becomes dangerous or just irksome (which I think most parents are probably familiar with), the "teachable moment" flag goes up and parenting time starts.  I used to have a plan for my rambunctious charge to dig himself a hole in the back yard that was deep enough for him to stand in, then have him stand in it while I filled it back in up to his neck.  The last part involved waiting to see how long it took him to break.  Mom, again, said I wouldn't be allowed to do that either.  Another dream fell, shattered.  Well, not really shattered, since I keep it tucked away in one of my happy places.  That means I have to be creative when the parenting balloon goes up.  It also means the kid is not going to enjoy it, but there's no reason for me (the parent) to miss an opportunity for some fun.  When it's your turn, trust me, run with it.  It's part of household maintenance.  It helps keep you, the parent, happy.  Plus, the earlier you deal with...whatever, the happier you'll be in the long run.

Was I ever that bad?  Mom says I wasn't and we've already established that, despite her bias, I trust her.  I was an odd child, preferring to stay in reading and writing even after being licensed to drive.  I grew into an odd adult, but my wife says she's happier that I do this rather than eat pork rinds, drink beer and watch sports.  Admittedly, it means that I do lack some of the exact experiences to draw upon for ammunition, but I've managed to learn a few things about human nature.  For one thing, I'm waiting for the day when each boy will decide it's time to do the Man Dance.  Not all boys have that day, but I've heard that many do.  As a coming-of-age moment, the Man Dance is that special time in a young one's life when he decides it's his time to stand up and challenge his dad, usually because that swelled teen head has gotten the better of him.  It usually ends up with a boy's bubble being burst by reality.

Children also seem to have the ability to poke at my love and compassion in a way that triggers my concern for their lack of developed sensibilities.  Sadly, the kids don't seem to have developed a sense of appreciation for my sarcastic wit.  It can make the life lessons take a little longer and I have to deal with "Huh?" a lot.  I've gotten pretty good at sighing...and shaking my head...and communicating with a stern stare.  Still, I persist.  My brain clings to the idea that it will someday be able to awaken our children's brains.  It has something to do with there being a joy to teaching that brings satisfaction to the soul, I think.  Did I mention the part where it's funny, too?  When I hear the words "Thanks, dad," couched in a distinctive tone of exasperation, I know my work is done.

And when I say "done", I recognize that it's a cyclical thing.  Kids can only handle so much teaching at once and I don't think there's ever an end.  That's just the reality.  Of course, there are days when the teaching/learning part seems that it might be the fantasy.

I feel a sigh coming.