Caution: Spoilers ahead!

No stranger to the Green Scare, the latest episode of CBS’s The Mentalist (Season 2, Episode 12 – the appropriately titled “Bleeding Heart“) featured a terra-inducing plot line, complete with a proposed mega-development in the wilderness, government corruption and intrigue, and a graffiti-and-arson-loving eco-terrorist named Jasper.

Here’s what you need to know, via TVOvermind:

The Mentalist “Bleeding Heart” begins with Agent Teresa Lisbon (Robin Tunney) and consultant Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) being interviewed by a camera crew in the CBI office. [...]

Lisbon allows the crew access to the office and bullpen, but not the crime scene. The team is investigating the murder of the mayor’s aide, who was found when the mayor herself broke ground in front of the cameras for a new development project. When they interview Mayor Melba Walker Shannon (Sharon Lawrence of Privileged and NYPD Blue) and her assistant Wilson (Firefly‘s Sean Maher), Jane notices immediately that the mayor seems uncomfortable talking about the victim. When he presses, the mayor asks them to leave.

A possible perpetrator of the crime is an environmental group led by a man named Jasper. Though they’ve burned down buildings on protective land and other drastic measures, they haven’t committed any murder in their past history. Rigsby and Cho pay a visit to the foreman on the building site where the aide’s body was discovered, but while they’re questioning him, the trailer gets firebombed and the door jammed. The foreman is injured and Rigsby and Cho barely make it out with him before the place burns up. It’s clear to them that Jasper is escalating in violence.

Further investigation leads the team to suspect that the mayor was being bribed to approve projects on previously protected lands.

The investigation continues, yada yada yada, Jane takes the news crew out for tacos by way of an apology for exploding at them earlier – and is promptly kidnapped by Jasper and his crew:

Jane is blindfolded and led to a cabin in the woods. His blindfold is removed and he’s confronted by the masked men, one of whom he surmises is eco-terrorist Jasper. Jasper wants Jane to carry a message that he’s not the one who committed murder or attempted to kill the detectives. Unfortunately Jane reveals that he’s figured out Jasper’s identity–the mayor’s assistant Wilson. [...]

While Jasper tries to decide what to do now that Jane knows his identity, Jane tries to talk his way out of his own possible murder, saying he can help Wilson. He succeeds in getting Wilson to a near state of hypnosis, when they’re suddenly interrupted by a loud shout that the house is surrounded by law enforcement personnel. Jane urges Jasper to stay calm. When Lisbon and the cops burst in, Jane is alone and restrained and Jasper has escaped out of a trap door.

On The Mentalist, the most obvious suspect never turns out to be the murderer – and “Bleeding Heart” is no exception. Despite the murderer’s obvious attempts to frame the eco-terrorists, in the end, Jane is onto Martha’s killer:

Mike [the news reporter] confesses that he’d been begging the aide for information about possible corruption in the mayor’s office–that the scoop could make his career. She wouldn’t tell him a thing, but then one day he discovered an expose she was writing about the mayor. Jealous and enraged at her cutting him out of the story, and pushed over the edge when she started mocking him, he killed her.

Jane remained true to his word to help Wilson. Due to the way he handled things, Wilson is able to cut a deal with the DA in exchange for information about the mayor’s corruption.

As with the series’s previous animal rights themed episodes, I was rather unimpressed with The Mentalist‘s treatment of eco-terrorism. While not the killer, Wilson/Jasper is portrayed at turns as a super-spy (infiltrating the enemy’s lair, gaining her trust, and persuading Martha to break the bribery story) and a bumbling fool (committing one crime in a sorry attempt to convince law enforcement that he’s innocent of another, thus revealing his true identity in the process). Additionally, while Jasper is no killer and in fact abhors physical/bodily violence, it’s strongly implied that Jasper is (reluctantly) willing to kill Jane to prevent his secret from getting out. Smart/foolhardy, crafty/sloppy, violent/pacifist – pick a side, we’re at war! (Lazy writing, perhaps?)

Also dubious is how Lisbon manages to track down Jane. CBI hauls in one of Jasper’s known associates for questioning – which basically involves Cho and Rigsby threatening bodily harm. As one reviewer puts it, “he folds like a card table, giving away the location of Jasper’s cabin.” From “green warrior” to snitch in less than 60 seconds. As if. (Possible, yes, but not bloody likely. Government harassment and repression of activists and dissidents is all-too common, such that I have trouble believing that an ELF member wouldn’t be able to withstand a little posturing, at the very least.)

Likewise, at one point during his kidnapping, Jane drops this eye-roller:

It’s a good rule of thumb to avoid doing things that require wearing a mask. And you’re such a handsome fellow too.

Now, Jane’s a smart, astute, observant guy – and in the season and a half that he’s been rolling with the CBI, he’s seen his colleagues do some illegal, unconstitutional shit. He’s enticed them into doing some illegal, unconstitutional shit. Hell, he’s done plenty of illegal, unconstitutional shit himself. Assault, breaking and entering, illegal search and seizure; Jane even wiretapped the CBI. In short, he should know much, much better than this.** Activists choose to remain anonymous for a number of reasons – including protecting themselves from government-sponsored “terrorism.”

So, as with the previous plot lines involving animal advocacy and terrorism, this episode of The Mentalist is a wash. While the show doesn’t buy into popular narratives of activists as misanthropic criminals, it doesn’t upend them, either. Also, only 38 episodes into the series, and 3 have featured animal rights and/or eco-terrorist themes – a rather high percentage, no? Then again, as the husband observed, the show is set in California. Bleeding hearts may be CA’s greatest export!

* While the title is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I’ve no doubt that the entire crew of Serenity qualify as terrorists, even absent today’s uber-”inclusive” definition of the term.

** On a side note, I’ve a similar bone to pick with, ahem, Bones. Booth, the Reaganesque FBI agent / former military sniper, wants desperately to believe in America, “the greatest country on earth.” Acknowledging that the government is at turns immoral – repressing dissidents, oppressing marginalized groups, lying to its citizens, violating the constitution, etc. – might mean acknowledging that the many sacrifices Booth made throughout his career were in the service of evil. Yet, as an FBI agent who oftentimes abuses his power, Booth himself is evidence of that which he does not want to believe.

See, for example, Season 5, Episode 12, “The Proof in the Pudding,” in which shadowy government agents (led by an African-American man named “Mr. White”) put the Jeffersonian on lockdown (effectively kidnapping everyone inside) so that Brennan and her team can examine a set of human remains (whom they are forbidden to identify) for cause of death. Available evidence suggests that the bones are those of John F. Kennedy – and that the gunshot wounds in the man’s skull were inflicted by two shooters. Booth refuses to accept that the remains are indeed JFK’s, since this would indicate a massive government cover-up. In the end, Brennan uses “the proof in the pudding” to assure her partner that the skeleton is not that of JFK – though the audience is left wondering. Yet, the mystery man’s identity is moot, given the rest of the plot line. (I.e., is a government that kidnaps its citizens any more trustworthy than one that rewrites history?)

Crossposted from V for Vegan.

Caution: Major spoilers ahead.

While The Men Who Stare at Goats is by no means an animal rights or overtly anti-vivisection movie, it does (happily!) have a few animal-friendly moments.

Based on a 2004 book of the same name by journalist Jon Ronson, the film is a dramatized account of Ronson’s investigation into “psychic” warfare experiments conducted by the U.S. military in the ’70s and ’80s. Ostensibly a story for the skeptic set (indeed, that’s why the husband and I saw it in the theater), the film also at turns sentimentalizes the “free love,” hippie sensibilities and mysticism of the ’60s and ’70s. (Indeed, it concludes on a disappointingly “anything is possible if you believe” note.)

Anyhow, along with all the “flower power” comes not a little tree- and animal-hugging. Goat-hugging, to be more specific: because the army’s more “practical” experiments involve trauma training carried out on live animals, the medical school’s in-house goats also play a role in the aforementioned psychic experimentation – the purposes of which isn’t nearly as sadistic as the trailers let on.

Lest I get ahead of myself, here’s a brief synopsis, via Wiki:

The film follows Ann Arbor Daily Telegram reporter Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor), who one day interviews Gus Lacey, a man who claims to have psychic abilities. Bob shrugs Lacey off as crazy. Soon after, Bob’s wife leaves him for his one-armed editor. Bob, out of anger, flies to Kuwait to investigate the Iraq War. However, he stumbles onto the story of a lifetime when he meets Special Forces operator, Lyn Cassady (George Clooney). Lyn reveals that he was part of an American army unit training psychic spies (or “Jedi Warriors”), trained to develop a range of parapsychological skills including invisibility, remote viewing, cloud bursting, walking through walls, and intuition.

The founder of this unit, Bill Django (Jeff Bridges), traveled across America in the 1970s for six years exploring a range of New Age movements (including the Human potential movement), because of a vision he received after getting shot during the Vietnam War, and used these experiences to found the New Earth Army. In the 1980s, two of Django’s best recruits were Lyn Cassady and Larry Hooper (Kevin Spacey), who developed a lifelong rivalry because of their opposing views of how to implement the New Earth Army philosophy; Lyn wanted to emphasize the positive side of the teachings, whereas Larry was more interested in the dark side of the philosophy.

In the early 2000s Bob and Lyn embark on a new mission in Iraq, where they are kidnapped by a criminal gang. They escape with fellow kidnapping victim Mahmud Daash (Waleed Zuaiter) and get rescued by a private security firm led by Todd Nixon (Robert Patrick), but get caught up in a firefight between Todd’s security firm and a rival security firm; this would later be known as the “Battle of Ramadi.” Mahmud, Bob and Lyn escape from the firefight and go to Mahmud’s house, which has been shot up by soldiers. From there Bob and Lyn leave to continue on Lyn’s vague mission involving a vision he had of Bill Django.

Here it’s worth noting that Cassady recounts the story of Django and the New Earth Army as his Iraqi adventure with Wilton unfolds in parallel. Both tales begin on a light, humorous note, eventually taking turns for the worse. While the trailers and media interviews done in promotion of the movie tend to emphasize the New Earth Army’s more nefarious projects, Django began the program with the best of intentions: namely, achieving world peace through love and understanding. A laudable goal, to be sure – even if its implementation proved somewhat ridiculous.

However, Hooper eventually betrays Django, assuming control of the New Earth Army in order to corrupt it. (Think of Django as Obi-Wan Kenobi to Cassady’s Luke Sywalker and Hooper’s Darth Vader.) The peace, love and understanding of Django’s ’60s and ’70s give way to the greed, militarization and subjugation of – what? The Reagen ’80s? The Clinton ’90s? The Bush ’00s? All of the above? Take your pick! (The Men Who Stare at Goats is, if not anti-war, at least anti-torture.)

Point being, the original recruits to the New Earthy Army enlisted in order to make love – not war. Whereas the The Men Who Stare at Goats advertising blitz paints the New Earth Army soldiers as hyper-masculine parodies of military men, bent on defeating – nay, annihilating! – the enemy through mind control and super-scary bio-psychic combat, the program’s impetus was the polar opposite of this. The operation’s very name – the New Earth Army – is indicative of this “higher calling.”
 

The struggle between the Light and Dark sides is perhaps most eloquently played out on the body of a goat. After Django’s departure from the military, Hooper is placed in command of the New Earth Army. Under Hooper’s orders, Cassady reluctantly “stares” one of the goats from the trauma lab “to death” – supposedly, he makes her heart explode with his mind. (Groovy, man!) In retelling his story to Wilton, Cassady points to the goat’s needless death as the moment the New Earth Army fell to the Dark Side. Memories of “murdering” the goat evoke feelings of shame and guilt in Cassady. The goat didn’t need to die; she was an innocent. In killing her, Cassady abused his power and violated the tenants of the New Earth Army.

I filed this post under “Intersections” because of the linkages drawn here: the goat’s murder sets off a chain reaction that leads to the abuse, oppression and torture of countless “others” – many of them human. Violence begets violence.

This is only one of two goat-hugging scenes, however. As you were, Wiki:

After their car hits an IED, Bob and Lyn wander in the desert where Lyn reveals a terrible secret to Bob: Lyn was asked to stop a goat’s heart to test the limit of his mental abilities. Lyn had decided against it, but was compelled to try to accomplish the feat and stared at the goat intently. Lyn managed to stop the goat’s heart, but felt that what he did was inhumane and against the entire purpose of the New Earth Army. Lyn left the Army, believing that he and the other New Earth soldiers were cursed and his powers were gone because of that fateful episode. After spending a few days in the desert, Bob and Lyn get rescued and rehabilitated at a camp run by PSIC, a private research firm engaged in psychological and psychic experiments on a herd of goats and some captured locals. To Lyn’s dismay, Larry Hooper runs the firm and employs a now depressed and alcoholic Django.

Bob spends time with Django and learns the ways of the New Earth Army and together they spike the water and food of the base with LSD and free both the goats and captured locals. Following this, Lyn and Django fly off in a Bell JetRanger helicopter, but not before trusting Bob with the duty of making sure his story reaches the public. Bob reveals that neither Lyn nor Django were ever heard from again, believed to have crashed their helicopter.

The audience realizes that Hooper has graduated to human test subjects when Wilton stumbles upon back rooms filled with imprisoned Middle Eastern men. (Unlike the Wiki reviewer, I read them as suspected “terrorists” whose torture was sanctioned by the U.S. military, as opposed to kidnapped locals. Not this this is any better, mind you.) Inside the tiny, barren cells, the men are exposed to a seemingly never-ending loop of violent audiovisual imagery; the experiments appear to involve sleep deprivation and/or sensory over-stimulation of some sort. (Similar to the brainwashing/torture Benjamin Linus visited upon his daughter’s boyfriend Karl in Lost; see Season 3, Episode 7 – Not in Portland. February, you cannot get here soon enough!)

Naturally, both Wilton and Cassady are horrified at this turn of events, not to mention Django’s cooptation by the enemy. High on LSD, they free Hooper’s prisoners – humans and nonhumans alike. While this scene is a bit melodramatic, I couldn’t help but get a little choked up at the liberation of the goats. Sure, the goats were perhaps an afterthought – but at least they were, in the end, deserving of moral consideration.

Before closing this review out, I should add that the animal labs are one aspect of the story that isn’t made up. The U.S. military has a long history of vivisecting nonhuman animals; they still do so, in fact.

As much as I hate linking to PETA:

Every year, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) conducts trauma and chemical-casualty training exercises in which animals are used as “stand-ins” for wounded soldiers. Medical officers at military installations across the nation critically injure thousands of live animals before killing them. In trauma training exercises, live pigs are shot, stabbed, and set on fire and live goats have their legs broken with bolt cutters and cut off with shears. During chemical-casualty training exercises, live monkeys are poisoned with harmful chemicals. These animals are also often forced to suffer through hellish conditions as they are transported to facilities for this training.

The DoD is putting soldiers’ lives at risk by using animals in these experiments. The anatomies and physiologies of pigs, goats, and monkeys are drastically different than those of humans; therefore, these animals will respond differently to treatments than humans would.

There are numerous non-animal training methods available, including rotations in civilian trauma centers; the Combat Trauma Patient Simulation system (CTPS); the Simulab Corporation’s TraumaMan system; and Dr. Emad Aboud’s “living” cadaver model, which Dr. Aboud has personally demonstrated for the Army.

Neither the Air Force Expeditionary Medical Skills Institute’s Center for Sustainment of Trauma and Readiness Skills nor the Navy Trauma Training Center use animals for trauma training—more proof that it is not necessary to use animals in order to teach these treatment skills.

While pigs seem to be the most common victims today, they’re merely the “new goats”; in this vein, then, The Men Who Stare at Goats is spot-on. When we’re first introduced to the goats, a soldier from the animals lab says ruefully, “We used to use dogs, but you try shooting a dog while he’s licking your hand.” Cut to crazy adorable footage of an oversized puppy giving doggy kisses to a manly man soldier wielding a comically large (in comparison to the pup) gun, his eyes welling with tears. The audience is meant to laugh, but the fact remains: pigs are as intelligent as dogs (if not more so), and are quite dog-like in their behavior (as anyone who’s been following the happy tails of Izzy and Morty knows). Besides, be she dog, pig, goat, cow, chicken or girl, all animals are alike in every way that matters: all share the ability to think, feel, bond, relate – and suffer. Trauma training on a pig is no better and no worse than that on a goat, puppy or person.

For more on the military’s use and abuse on nonhuman animals – including opportunities to take action – see:

PCRM: Improving Military Medicine, including Be Part of Citizen Lobbyist Week: Jan. 11-15, 2010

PETA: Trauma Training 101, including this action alert: Tell Congress to End Military Trauma Training on Animals

Kinship Circle: Stop The Military’s War On Innocents and STOP THE U.S. MILITARY FROM USING LIVE ANIMALS

The Petition Site: Ban Military Trauma Exercises on Animals

HSUS: Live Pigs Shot for Military Trauma Exercise and Questions and Answers About Medical Training Using Animals

Finally – and just because, as y’all no doubt are already aware, I have a raging hard-on for everything The Colbert Report – here are a few segments Stephen did on the (fluffyfunpsychic) goat labs back in September.

—————-

Videos in this post

‘Men Who Stare at Goats’ Trailer HD
The story of a secret unit within the US Army called the First Earth Battalion, whose paranormal military ideas mutated over the decades to influence interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay.

The Colbert Report, Thursday, September 17, 2009 – Goat Lab
Stephen resurrects the U.S. military technique of staring at a goat to make its heart explode. (03:35)

The Colbert Report, Thursday, September 17, 2009 – Goat Lab – Jon Ronson
Jon Ronson explains why the U.S. military trained soldiers to use sparkly eyes on the enemy and kill goats with their minds. (04:24)

Caution: Spoilers ahead! (More specifically, after the blockquote.)

Firstly, I’m extremely happy to report that, as promised by Ms. Dushku, Dollhouse has improved by leaps and bounds since last I blogged about it. Not only have we gotten to know Echo – our hero – a bit better, but more importantly, the show has addressed “the consent issue” head-on.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. For those who haven’t seen the show, here’s a brief summary via Wiki:

Eliza Dushku plays a young woman called Echo, a member of a group of people known as “Actives” or “Dolls”. The Dolls have had their personalities wiped clean so they can be imprinted with any number of new personas, including memory, muscle memory, skills, and language, for different assignments (referred to as engagements). The new persona is not an original creation, however, but an amalgam of different, existing personalities. The end result incorporates some of the flaws, not just the strengths, of the people used as templates. The Actives are then hired out for particular jobs – crimes, fantasies, and the occasional good deed. On engagements, Actives are monitored internally (and remotely) by Handlers. In between tasks, they are mind-wiped into a child-like state and live in a futuristic dormitory/laboratory, a hidden facility nicknamed “The Dollhouse”. The story follows Echo, who begins, in her mind-wiped state, to become self-aware.

As I noted before, the Dolls’ lack of agency in both their “wiped” and “programmed” states makes it impossible for them to give meaningful consent – for any of their actions, including sexual relations. When a doll “has sex,” she (or he) is actually being raped. Usually the rapist knows full well that he (or she) is “having sex” with a programmable “doll” – so it’s rape with intent. Occasionally, however, the “doll” is sent on a covert/undercover mission – for example, to seduce a certain FBI agent – and sex becomes a tool she (or he) uses to that end. Such cases still constitute rape, but…well, it’s hard to say who the rapist is when the “doll’s” partner believes that the encounter is consensual. The Rossum Corporation, perhaps?

Dollhouse begins to tackle this issue in later episodes, most interestingly through a series of “(wo)man on the street” interview clips aired on an Los Angeles tv station (Season 1, Episode 6 – “Man on the Street”). A local journalist, reporting on the Dollhouse “urban legend,” asks passerby whether they believe that the Dollhouse is real, what they think of “programmable humans,” etc. The responses, I think, are both humorous and quite realistic: you’ve got your skeptics and conspiracy nuts, outraged social justice advocates and potential johns, and so on. Oftentimes, one extreme response is juxtaposed with another.

My favorite pairing is the conflicting answers offered by a teenage-ish, bubble-gum snapping, seemingly bored and indifferent white woman and a slightly older African American woman when asked if they would “volunteer” as “dolls.” The white woman jumped at the chance to live a new, supposedly exciting and glamorous life, while the black woman properly identified the Dollhouse for what it is: a system of slavery. When pressed, she elaborated: even the most beautifully gilded cage is still just that – a cage.

Being a silly Joss Whedon fangirl, I’m ecstatic that the show – which might have gone either way – takes a feminist bent, clearly identifying the “dolls” as trafficked humans and victims of rape. This theme carries on to the next two episodes (Season 1, Episode 7, “Echoes” and Season 1, Episode 8, “Needs”), during which we learn the back stories of the “dolls,” including how they came to the Dollhouse.

Sierra’s story – in which a spurned admirer “pulls some strings” to have her “admitted” to the Dollhouse against her will, so that he could program, purchase and rape her at will – is the most stunning example of how the “dolls,” who the Rossum Corporation insists are volunteers, are actually recruited against their will. With even this most basic, initial crumb of “consent” set aside, it’s clear that the “dolls” are all victims. (Though, again, they’d still be victims even if they did willingly enter the program; their initial consent is meaningless if they’re never able to revoke it.)

We also learn how Echo – Caroline – was “recruited.”

The Rossum Corporation – the evil megacorp behind the Dollhouse (or rather Dollhouses, plural, as there are multiple such branches located across the globe) – has a research laboratory located at Freemont College…which is the same college Caroline attended. Through a series of flashbacks, we learn that Caroline was a bit of a social justice activist in her pre-Dollhouse days. She suspected that the scientists camped out in the heavily-guarded and highly secretive Rossum Building were up to no good – and was outraged at the idea that they might be engaged in vivisection. After weeks (months?) of research and recon, Caroline finds a way into the building via an underground duct and, with the help of her reluctant boyfriend Matt, the two sneak into the lab late one night in order to shoot some undercover video.

Rossum’s research is more horrific than they expected. In the lab, they discover caged animals – dogs, primates, etc. – but also pickled fetuses and images of human brain scans displayed on the desktop PCs. Before they’re able to complete their mission, however, the two are discovered by a security guard. A chase ensues, during which Matt is fatally shot. Caroline winds up in the hospital, but escapes when she realizes that Rossum has her under surveillance. We’re left to fill in the rest of the blanks; eventually, Rossum captures Caroline a strikes a “deal” of sorts. Caroline “gives” them five years of her life as a “doll,” and Rossum “gives” her the rest of her life “back.” In other words, volunteer as a doll, allow us to wipe all memory of the Rossum Corp. from your memory, and then go on your way…or we’ll kill you. Some “deal.”

The flashbacks of Caroline’s flirtation with “animal rights terrorism” are fairly predictable, similar to what you might see on a cop drama like Law & Order. (All the cop shows seem obligated to include at least one eco- or animal rights- “terrorism” plotline post-2000, am I right?) The lab is predictably industrial and sterile, the kids are predictably idealistic, the dialogue is predictably cheesy, etc. But.

Dollhouse’s storyline differs in one important regard: the animal rights terra-ist isn’t just some stupid but well-meaning college kid, or an evil, science-hating criminal. The animal rights terra-ist is the series’ hero. (Or one of them, anyway.) And her good intentions vis-à-vis non-human animals are the reason why she’s stuck in the Dollhouse to begin with.*

Additionally, Caroline’s animal rights (welfare?) sensibilities are presented as one part of her overall sense of morality and justice. Caroline rescues non-human animals; when given the chance, Echo rescues humans.

In the next episode, “Needs,” Echo’s handlers program her and some of her fellow “problem dolls” to “suddenly” develop a sense of awareness and of their former selves – to remember. The “dolls” (and the audience) don’t know it at the time, of course, but this self-awareness is part of a plan to help the “dolls’” subconscious minds fulfill pressing “needs,” needs which are threatening to break through to their conscious awareness (and “ruin” them as “dolls”). Once the needs are met, a sedative planted within their brains will be triggered (by hormones?) and knock the “dolls” out, so that they may be safely retrieved by Rossum.

Echo’s need isn’t to find love, exact revenge, or grieve her lost love – no. In fact, Echo’s need isn’t selfish or self-centered at all. When given an opportunity to “escape,” Echo chooses to go back to the Dollhouse.

Echo’s greatest need, you see, is to save the other “dolls.”
 
 
Additional Resources

If you’d like to learn more about the show, check out…

The official Fox site, where you can view full episodes

www.fox.com/dollhouse/

The Dollhouse Wiki site, which appears (for the time being) to be plugged into Fox’s site

dollhousewiki.fox.com/

Dollhouse‘s Wiki page

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollhouse_(TV_series)

Dollhouse episode summaries

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dollhouse_episodes

Finally, for a discussion of race and racism in Whedon’s work, see joss whedon and the blurry line between homage and appropriation at Racialicious. While Wedon does an excellent job of addressing (most) gender issues, I agree that he doesn’t appear to devote the same attention to racial politics and representation. Re: Dollhouse, most of the “dolls” are white (with the exception of Victor, who’s Russian), and, while the Dollhouse is decorated in a “midcentury modern motif with a Japanese aesthetic,” East Asian characters have indeed remained “firmly in the background,” as predicted by Thea Lim.
 
 
Notes

* Updated to add: Actually, allow me to rephrase that: “her good intentions vis-à-vis non-human animals are the reason why Rossum discovers Echo and imprisons her in the Dollhouse to begin with.”

Due to sloppy/lazy word choice, I inadvertently blamed the victim in the original sentence. I apologize.

Very minor spoilers ahead.

I’m a few months late on this – for some inexplicable reason, my DVR “forgot” to record this Very Special episode of CSI, and for an even more inexplicable reason, it took the Mr. and I months to notice – but in the interest of closure, I just have to mention it anyway.

Early on in Season 9 of CSI, vegetarian and animal advocate Jorja Fox left the show; a few weeks after her departure, the writers dropped a subtle hint that her character, Sarah Sidle, had joined up with Paul Watson and his band of sometimes-merry eco-terrorist pirates at the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (if you’re not a regular visitor to Sea Shepherd’s website, you probably would have missed the URL).

Fast-forward a few months, to the Season 9 episode “One to Go” (9×10). Sarah’s on-again, off-again, is-he-her-fiance-or-isn’t-he? love interest, Gil Grissom (William Petersen) is quitting CSI as well. Most of the episode focuses on Grissom’s last case with Las Vegas CSI, and also serves to introduce Gil’s replacement, Dr. Langston (Laurence Fishburne!?).

However, in the last few minutes, we see Grissom

walk the halls smiling to himself as he looks in each room at the lab and sees Brass, Hodges and Wendy, other CSIs, Robbins and Riley, Stokes and Greg. He catches Catherine’s eye in one room and she winks at him. He smiles broadly and turns and walks away. The screen blurs, fades to white and cuts to Grissom wandering a jungle, dressed in a hat and sweaty gear examining a GPS marked Costa Rica. His eyes light on a bug for a moment. He walks into a clearing where a woman, whose back is to the camera, is taking a picture of a monkey in a tree. The woman turns and it’s Sara (Jorja Fox). They take each other in for a moment and then embrace and kiss, passionately.

As Cindy pointed out in the comments to a previous post, Sarah mentioned in an earlier episode that she planned to travel to the Galapagos; and indeed, Sea Shepherd’s activities include an effort to save the Galapagos, so that’s probably where she was (or was heading) when we saw her email Grissom. So why on earth are the two now in Costa Rica, hmmmm?

Though Sea Shepherd says that its “flagship, the R/V Farley Mowat officially began her career in the waters off Costa Rica appropriately immersed in controversy over policing actions against illegal fishing activities,” I can’t seem to find any current campaigns or activities they’re conducting in the area. So I can’t say whether Gil and Sarah are still with Sea Shepherd, or have branched out on their own. Maybe the Sea Shepherd crew took a detour or made a pit stop; or perhaps Sarah and Gil are working with another environmental organization, one based in Costa Rica.

We can only hope it’s as radical, kick-ass and militant as the “terra-ist” sea shephards.

As for CSI’s animal-friendliness post-Fox, we haven’t seen any animal exposes this season, however, there was a case in which a good-sized “pet” turtle ended up with blood spatter and a fingerprint on her shell after a homicide/suicide. While other cop shows might merely treat the hapless animal like any other prop (*cough*Law & Order*cough*), the good folks at the LV Crime Lab express concern for her well-being, going so far as to assure one another that the materials used to lift the print will not harm their only witness to the crime.

It was all very cute, maybe even a little silly, but I so loved them for it. Little victories!

Proceed with caution: Spoilers galore!

Ten episodes in, and already The Mentalist has jumped on the animal rights terra-ism bandwagon.

Let me preface this by saying that I’m addicted to cop tv: The X-Files, CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, Criminal Intent, Life, NYPD Blue – I just love ‘em. And my love runs extra-deep for the serialized cop drama/mystery/thrillers with a season/series-long story arc. Throw in a lead character who just so happens to be an atheist, and I’m hooked. Hello, The Mentalist!

That said, the latest installment (Season 1, Episode 10: Red Brick and Ivy) just wasn’t up to snuff.

The plot line is all too familiar: a scientist who experiments on non-human animals is murdered; the prerequisite, SHAC-like animal rights group which has been “terrorizing” said scientist (or said scientist’s university/lab/company/employer) for months is suspect numero uno. Cue the crazy!

In The Mentalist, the scientist in question is an up-and-coming neuroscientist who, along with his colleagues, has been conducting invasive research on animals (most notably, chimpanzees – unfortunately, a baby chimp does have a role in the episode) in order to locate the structures in the human brain which govern morality. The end goal? Finding a way to manipulate these structures and thus, magically, turn all of humanity into moral beings. Whatever that means.

(One question used to judge whether the subject is “good” or “evil,” for example, goes like this: “You and another person are stranded on a desert island. There’s only enough food supply to sustain one person. Do you hoard all the food for yourself, or do you share it?” I’m paraphrasing, but you get the gist. The morally “good” answer is to share the food; this implies that you’d be “evil” to hoard it. But if you share the food, you and your fellow Lostie will both die of hunger, albeit more slowly. The questioner did say that there’s only enough food to feed one person, remember? So why would it be “immoral” or “evil” for each island dweller to try and ensure his or her own survival?

Another question involves eleven people stranded in a life boat made for ten; do you sacrifice the sole 60-year-old man to ensure the survival of the ten children on board, or not? The moral answer is to chuck the older dude overboard. But moral in whose estimation? I’m sure the old dude would take exception with the “moral” choice.

Also of interest is whether the scientists’ own research will put them out of business; if your goal is to make all of humanity moral, won’t the end result be a world in which no one wants to torture animals for a living?

Finally, and I know I digress, but the research involves the ability to “turn” people good – or evil. Hello, anyone see a problem with the applications here? I’m fairly certain that success in this area will not lead to the hoped-for “utopia.”)

In the end, the murderer is not a member of the animal rights group (whose name escapes me now – it’s something generic, like “Animal Equality Now”), but rather the dean of the university which houses and supports the research institution. The animal rights terra-ism angle, in fact, is ditched pretty early on – within the first 15 minutes or so. But not before the CBI (California Bureau of Investigation) hauls in one of its members, who proves to be eccentric at best – in need of mental help, at worst. The guy is a middle-aged, conventionally unattractive white dude, living in a run-down warehouse-like building with twenty-odd cats – your typical gross loser slob. He promptly confesses to killing the Professor (even though he didn’t), and claims that the lead researcher is next. Then he starts ranting about the structure of the animal rights group; nevermind that ALF (which usually serves as a prototype for Hollywood) doesn’t have a hierarchical leadership structure. The “titles” are laughable, and sound like something out of World of Warcraft or Harry Potter: I am the Grand Imperial Wizard of AEN! All bow to my awesome power!

So while the animal rights crazies didn’t do it, the animal rights crazies are still crazy. Bah.

On the flip side, the “scientists” are all depicted as frauds, falsifying their data to prove their cockamamie theories and justify worthless research. Call it a wash, I guess.

The stupid stereotypes surrounding animal advocates isn’t the only reason I disliked this episode, though. Normally, The Mentalist is pretty fastidious with the details. But the psychiatrist/patient relationship as depicted between Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) and Sophie Miller (Elisabeth Röhm) is unrealistic. In real life, fraternizing with a patient – even an ex-patient – like that is highly unethical, if not grounds for having your license revoked. As is allowing Jane to consult on a case in which his ex-psychiatrist is the main murder suspect. It just wouldn’t fly. At least, I hope not. Our justice system is supposed to be just, ya know?

Anyway, I do so hope The Mentalist hasn’t jumped the shark. We need more atheism and skepticism on tv, not less!

Major spoiler warning, people!

I’ve been meaning to blog about a recent episode of Life for weeks now. If you’re not familiar with the show, it’s a kind of cop drama, in which individual cases are presented against the backdrop of a conspiracy-theory story arc which spans the series. Think The X-Files, Alias, Lost or The Mentalist – if you enjoy any of these, you’ll probably *heart* Life, too.

Season 2, Episode 3 of Life, “The Business of Miracles,” involves the murder of a cancer researcher. The main suspects, naturally, are a group of SHAC-like animal rights activists of the anti-vivisection variety. It’s been a few weeks since I watched this ep, so rather than try to offer a plot summary, here’s TV Recap with their recap:

Dr. Auerbach was a scientist who was testing cancer drugs on animals. So his death naturally occurs in the lab and on the window is written, “animal testing is murder.” Something not so natural about his death: He was frozen to death because some one switched his oxygen tank with a liquid nitrogen tank. But who could have done it? Maybe it was the group, BAT [Ban Animal Torture], that has sent Dr. Auerbach death threats?

[The group's moniker, "BAT," was also graffitied on the wall of Hurback's lab. About as subtle as leaving an ELF calling card at the scene of a torched, insured, unsold McMansion, no?]

According to the group’s leader, Betsy, they wouldn’t hurt any soul, even one like Dr. Auerbach’s. She seems sweet enough. She even tells the other member to be quiet when he says it’s good the doctor is dead. So if it wasn’t her, maybe it was the assistant who seems too concerned with the results of the test. Or maybe the janitor? Or the company’s owner? Hmm. I can’t decide, and neither can Crews [Damian Lewis] and Reese [Sarah Shahi] so they do a little more digging and come up with…Betsy, the leader of Ban and the good doctor’s former assistant who left because they were having an affair. Say what?

I know, it’s a crazy little twist but it turns out that Betsy’s real name is Deborah and she and Dr. Auerbach never stopped their affair. And while it seems she has the perfect motive of conflicted emotions, she also has a videotaped alibi. So then Crews and Reese move on to the janitor, who originally said he saw Betsy at the lab that day. Turns out the janitor is stealing pills from the study and selling them. Or so it looks when he gives the box of pills to a woman on a park bench in return for an envelope full of…pictures? When Crews and Reese dig a little deeper they find the janitor’s son has cancer and the pills have been working for him and the woman is his ex-wife. I guess he has a good motive, too. And more importantly, he confesses to the murder. But something isn’t right. Along with the dead doctor, there were lots of dead lab rats. The only dead rats, though, were rats with red tags so why would only those rats be dead and who would want to kill them?

With the help of then now cleared ex-assistant, Crews and Reese learn that the red tagged rats were the control rats and you would want those to be gone if you didn’t want other people to know the experiment was a failure. And who would want that? Yup, the new assistant. Turns out she knew the janitor was stealing pills and blackmailed him. But he wasn’t such a moron that he didn’t have evidence damning her. He had a formula she wrote computing how much liquid nitrogen it would take to kill a man the doctor’s size. So the dedicated assistant killed the doctor after all. She had spent seven years working with him and now her career would be over because the drug was a failure. It was only helping the janitor’s son because he had an extremely rare form of cancer. It wouldn’t work on the mainstream cases. Guess that liar is busted.

Unlike many other cop dramas (the Law & Order franchise, if I recall, has featured its fair share of guilty, stereotyped animal rights extremists), Life doesn’t simply pin the crime on the “obvious suspects” and move on. Rather than get swept up in the Green Scare, Detectives Crews and Reese follow the evidence…which leads them away from the “bad”/”misanthropic” animal rights activists and toward the “good”/”altruistic” cancer researchers.

In the end, the members of BAT prove to be the only suspects whose hands are actually free of blood: the cancer researcher, his assistant, the janitor and the financier of the research – all are guilty of murder. In particular, the show’s portrayal of the lead cancer researcher and his pharmaceutical company employer are damning: neither the individuals nor the business care about an anti-cancer drug that may save lives… just, not enough lives to make manufacturing and marketing the drug a profitable endeavor. In the end, the “bad” activists prove more ethical than the “good” scientists.

Also, I was absolutely tickled by the detectives’ initial meeting with Betsy/Deborah, the “leader” of BAT (scare quotes because leader sounds so patriarchal, yecht). She mentions her veganism, at which point Crews attempts to call her on the hypocrisy of wearing leather shoes:

Crews: If you love animals so much, why are you wearing leather shoes?

Betsy: They’re Jim shoes. They’re made of Jim, our founder. When he died he willed his body for industrial use as a way to raise people’s consciousness about what it means to butcher animals for food and clothing.

(Shades of Ingrid Newkirk, anyone?)

As Elaine notes,

Some people feel threatened by veganism and try to find loopholes. They look for anything. They’re the same people who point to recycled rubber shoes and say, “You’re not a vegan because you’re wearing leather!” and then walk away before you can explain that it’s NOT leather.

I love that Life purposefully jumped into that loophole – and then let Crews choke himself with it.

Of course, the more mainstream Reese is less than impressed by BAT’s consistent ethics:

Reese: They’re wearing people.

Crews: Just dead people!

Reese: It’s the Texas chainsaw massacre, it’s enough for a warrant.

Crews: For a search maybe, not for an arrest. Does it seem weird to you that they’d leave their slogans on the wall?

Reese: They put dead people on their feet, putting slogans on the wall seems pretty normal compared to that.

So there’s a little ribbing on animal rights advocates there, but for the most part the show does a good job of humanizing the activists, treating them as complex, three-dimensional beings instead of silly/scary cliches, and ultimately clearing them of the crimes of which they’re suspected.

The Green Scare came to Life…and failed to scare the life out of anyone. Bravo, NBC, bravo!

Just one thing, though, NBC: please to stop Crews from stalking his ex-wife’s new husband? It’s not cute or quirky; it’s obsessive, controlling and creepy. And asking the new hubby for “permission” to sleep with his wife? Bleh! Way to reduce a woman to a piece of property. Srsly, no want.

On yesterday’s episode of CSI (“Leave Out All the Rest“), recently departed CSI Sara Sidle sends Gil Grissom a .mov file -slash- Dear John “letter” over the internets. Look closely, and you can briefly see her email address flash across the screen: info@seashepherd.org. ZOMG! Sara is sailing with the crew of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society!

Of her adventure with Captain Paul Watson and his band of anti-whaling pirates, Sara says,

Hello from below the equator, in Puerto Ayora. We’ve been at sea for over a month now. Man, you wouldn’t believe the crew – students, activists, scientists – the dinner conversations alone are mindblowing. And there’s even this marine biologist that reminds me a little bit of you. I wish that we could talk in person but this is the best that I can do. I want to apologize for being out of touch. I’ve been thinking about us a lot, though, all the moments. I thought we could survive anything. This trip has given me a lot of clarity. That last year in Vegas, I could barely breathe, let alone think but now, for the first time in a really long time, I’m happy.

When actress Jorja Fox – the vegetarian and PETA supporter who plays Sara Sidle – left CSI last season, I was afraid it would be the end of CSI’s animal-friendly plotlines. In the past, they’ve dealt with canned hunting involving discarded zoo animals, dog fighting, factory farming and chicken slaughter, and Sara’s vegetarianism, of course. The show has been honored by the HSUS’s Genesis Awards for its compassionate storylines; in a multi-episode plotline, Danny Bonaduce played an aging rock star/animal welfare crusader, who targeted said slaughterhouse in a PETA-like PSA.

Given that Jorja Fox is the high-profile veg*n on CSI’s set, I assumed that she was the driving force behind these stories. I wonder whether she managed to convert any of her co-workers, or if one/some of the writers also just happen to be interested in animal advocacy on their own?

Either way, I think it’s totally awesome that Sara Sidle has defected – from Crime Scene Investigator to international, sea-faring, anti-whaling, activist-pirate-terrorist. Welcome to the dark green side, Sara. Just be careful who you extend your vegan potluck invites to.

Keep up with Sara and the crew through Whale Wars, now airing on Animal Planet (Fridays at 9PM).

Update, 11/22/08: Looks like Daryl Hannah is joining the crew, too!