I have not sat behind the helm of teaching for very long but I already have a few tricks up my sleeve. One of them is that I assign some of my favorite readings at the end of the semester so as to counter the downtrodden and tepid spirit and mood (not to mention attention) of my students, which drops precipitously with each passing day. Let’s face it post Thanksgiving, we are all a little tired and I try to find the readings, which
uplift,
intrigue, and
challenge cherished assumptions about marriage and sex.
So far it seems to pay off and I often can tell because the conversational pitch and excitement in class is high and the student writings are good, great, even exceptional, which, again, is hard to produce/induce this late in the semester. Readers of this blog would probably be most interested in one of these lively readings, Ben Nugent’s
American Nerd (and it might be interesting to hear how the European Nerd story would diverge or converge with this one).
One of my students, an audio geek and Free Culture President/Free Software junkie, by the name of
John Randall produced a very nice little response (not research) paper on the Nugent reading as well as a short piece
by Sarah Seltzer from Bitch Magazine
The(Girl) Geek Stands Alone (and thanks to
Joe> for cluing me into this piece). Seltzer piece basically argues, in her own words, the following:
Imagine this scene from a comedy: a group of female friends sit around smoking a bowl and working on the Wikipedia page for Lord of the Rings. Their fashion sense is decidedly iconoclastic and several sport thick-rimmed glasses. Without a trace of self-consciousness, they have a hilariously ribald discussion on the relative traits of elves and orcs.
Awesome as it is, you’ll never see this scene onscreen. No mainstream movie or TV series would dare group so many female nerds together, or celebrate them so unabashedly
So John’s whole response paper is
here and here is the
pdf. In the paper, he makes a number of excellent points but what I loved most about it was his very geeky move at the end of the paper to prove Sarah (somewhat wrong) by listing all the girl geeks that
do and have appeared in mainstream (and not-so mainstream) entertainment venues/shows, etc. They are as follows and in his own words:
I will now showcase my own geekiness through my knowledge of geeky female characters. Why? Because I can. But also because I want to demonstrate that if you look hard enough for representations of female geekyiness in pop culture, you will find plenty. Moreover, if you pick the right ones, you can make them support your argument about gender relations, whatever that argument might be.
Some of these charters and personalities are hardly gendered, some are hyper-sexual. Some are incredibly attractive but completely asexual. Some undergo a transformation into/out of geekiness, while others to not. Some are powerful, while some are powerless. Some (most?) celebrate their geekiness, others are tortured by it. They are all geeks take your pick:
Aeon Flux, a sexy geek who’s technological gadgets give her super powers (Comic drawings then Charlize TheronAeon Flux)
Wonder Woman, attractive pilot of an invisible plane
Lara Croft, a female Indiana Jones in short shorts, wielding guns and cracking computer codes (CGI and then Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider)
She-Ra, who was way smarter than He-Man (Masters of the Universe cartoons)
Gadget Hackwrench, beautiful chipmonk technician for Chip and Dale (Rescue Rangers cartoon)
Velma, featuring eyeglasses, awkwardness and brains (Scooby Doo),
Hermonie Granger, a geek who is temporarily rejected because she is a geek, remains a geek, and finds love and happiness (Harry Potter)
Barbarella, who, through comic strips and a 1968 film, helped introduce science fiction and sex to young women (Barbarella)
La Femme Nikita, a skillful, savvy, and very feminine girl who doubles as a covert spy
Kate Libby, aka ‘Acid Burn’, uber-sexualized hacker (played by Angelina Jolie in Hackers)
Kathryn Janeway, smart and powerful captain of the USS Voyager (Star Trek Voyager)
Starbuck (Battlestar Galactica),
Dana Scully, FBI agent with encyclopedic media knowledge. The bizzare subtex of non-realized sexual tension was part of the magic The X-Files.
Willow Rosenberg, geeky sidekick turned geeky supervillian (Alyson Hannigan in buffy the Vampire Slayer)
Michelle Flaherty, hyper-sexual band geek (Alyson Hannigan in American Pie series)
Dr Ellie Sattler, heroniene scientist (Jurrasic Park)
Ellie, scientis hero (played by both Jenna Malone and Jodi Foster in Carl Sagan’s Contact)
Dawn Wiener (Heather Matarazzo in Welcome to the Dollhouse
Enid and Rebecca (Thora Birch and Scarlett Johanson in Ghost World)
just about every charater ever played by Jenna Malone (Donie Darko, The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys, The United States of Leland, Saved!, etc)
half of the charaters played within the last decade by Jodi Foster (Panic Room, The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys, Flightplan, The Addams Family
half of the charaters played by Christina Ricci (Mermaids, The Addams Family, Little Red Riding Hood, The Ice Storm, Buffalo ‘66, Prozac Nation, Pumpkin, Speed Racer)
half of the characters played by Natalie Portman (The Professional, Mars Attacks!, Star Wars, V for Vendette, The Darjeeling Limited, Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium, Garden State)
Molly Ringwald. characters played by Molly Ringwald.
Rock musician Ani DiFranco and geeky Riot Grrls everywhere.
Sarah Vowell, NPR commentator celebrating her geeky life. Voiceover for geeky cartoon characters.
Rachel Maddow, for being Rachel Maddow.
First, awesome list, though he forgot a few (like one of my favorites, Bionic Woman and a more recent one, Juno) and it is nice to have it in one compact place. But, I have to say, I still agree to some degree with Sarah Setlzer, though I also agree with John. On the one hand there are representations and it is as important just to strut this stuff publicly as it is to claim that there is not enough female geeky representations in mainstream media. This is what John has done quite nicely.
One the other hand, as he himself says ” if you look hard enough for representations of female geekyiness in pop culture, you will find plenty.” I think those words, “if you look hard enough” also speaks volumes of the continued disparity that does exist. One should not have to look “hard,” and the only blockbusters, so to speak, which feature a female geek, is Tomb Raider, which for being so hyper-sexualized is not so geeky to me, no matter how good she is with the gadgets.
That said, what I find so important, and have emphasized in different contexts, is the need for what I think of simultaneous positive and negative form of critique, the former being about pointing to already exisitng examples to get people jazzed and excited and to put things in perspective. The later form of critique, negative critique, identifies a lack, a void to fill, just the type of excellent commentary in the Seltzer piece…
But now for the most important question, who has John overlooked?