S03.E03: Zari

[johntfs]

On 10/24/2017 at 10:20 PM, KirkB said:

Zari is interesting. I like having another woman on the Waverider but I'm not sure why two of them need to have magic necklaces.

Given that Kuasa also has a totem (for manipulating water) it's pretty clear to me that the totems are likely going to be the big MacGuffin this season like the Spear of Destiny was last season.  I recall a mention during the fourth season of Arrow that there were five of the things.  Since we have on each for Air, Animals and Water, there'll probably be a scavenger hunt for one for Earth and Fire (maybe Mick'll get that one).

I really like Zari and they way she was introduced.  I also like that they've already planted seeds for future conflict involving her.  While Zari is a pretty skilled criminals, her criminality clearly arises out of disrespect for unjust laws/authority.  She wants to make life better for people.  And now she's on what she likely sees as the ultimate vehicle for bringing change for the better - an actual time machine.  Jax has a kind of moral certitude and Ray is something of an idealist.  I could see Jax, Ray and Zari forming a kind of mini-bloc within the Legends to not just remove anachronisms but actively try to change history for the better.

As for as a possible romance for Mick and Zari, I don't really see it.  I think if it did happen it would have to come from Zari.  When he hasn't said it out loud, I get the idea that Mick has a pretty strong bias against "fishing in the company pool."  He clearly didn't have a problem hitting on Supergirl and collected his "impressive number of STDs" through S.  Snart might have had a rule about mixing crime and pleasure that Mick has kind of internalized.

Edited October 26, 2017 by johntfs

[immortalfrieza]

18 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I will take subtlety in a characters religious and cultural background over making a huge deal, or not acknowledging that such backgrounds either exist. In general, TV takes two approaches to religious characters. Either its brought up once or twice a season (like when a character is Jewish only during the yearly holiday episode) or its all there is to the whole entire character and its all they ever talk about. I dont think its them trying to be PC, it was used to quickly build up the awfulness of the future world Zari if from, where people are not free to practice their beliefs, and showed her connection with her lost family. They could end up not using her well, but its a good introduction to a character using her background, and while I dont know how much it will be relevant in the future, I think its always good to show a wide variety of characters of different backgrounds and beliefs. Legends is based all around people of different skills sets, backgrounds, and personality types afterall. 

There's subtlety and then there's attaching something to a character for the sheer sake of having it and that's far far worse than shoving something in our faces. Intentional or not it comes off as tokenism to have a character who effectively just goes "Oh BTW, I'm Muslim" then does absolutely nothing that gives any indication that she is Muslim whatsoever if that mention of it were removed, and no, using a random Arabic word for no reason when she just as well could have used the actual english word, or saying that she's been convicted of "religious crimes" without even clarifying what that means isn't it. While it might become relevant in future episodes, the fact that Zari was Muslim shouldn't have been mentioned until those future episodes, when there was an event that demonstrates that she is Muslim, even if it's incidental. For instance, say the Legends are sitting down to eat engaging in their usual banter, and then at some point someone offered Zari some pork and she said "Nah, I'm Muslim" THAT would have been just fine. In fact, preferably the fact that Zari is Muslim shouldn't have been mentioned at all, just have Zari do things associated with being Muslim and let the audience figure it out. If the only way a writer can demonstrate that a character has a trait is to say outright that they have it they shouldn't have that trait, and for all intents and purposes don't anyway. A trait should not exist for a character unless it directly effects either their appearance or their actions. The only time mentioning a character has a trait is good is when the audience has already witnessed an event that gives evidence of that trait and at most clarifies what was seen previously and informs another character who hadn't witnessed that evidence of that trait.

A good example from this show itself how something like this should be handled would be Sara Lance herself. Sara is Bisexual, but she never says anything like "Oh, BTW, I'm Bisexual," she's simply seen flirting and sleeping with men in the backstory, occasionally seen doing or at least mentioning it while on screen, the fact that she sleeps with women is first brought up by her then lesbian lover thus establishing that she's bisexual, and she's sometimes seen flirting and sleeping with women afterward. Sara being Bisexual is an actual trait that effects who she is, not just there because the writers want to check off a box on their political correctness checklist as Zari being Muslim has been thus far, even if that wasn't the intention.

In short, Show, Don't Tell.

Edited October 26, 2017 by immortalfrieza

[kismet]

11 hours ago, Lady Calypso said:

I might have to go back and rewatch the bar scene, but was Zari drinking when the Legends found her, or was she just sitting there?

I believe she was drinking a clear substance in a large glass, which I assumed was water. Bars generally serve non-alcoholic drinks in large glasses and alcoholic beverages in shorter glasses.

[call me ishmael]

3 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

Not sure how they're going to connect Amaya, Zari and Kuasa but I'm looking forward to finding out. Also, Zari's an Airbender!! And Kuasa's a waterbender! Does that make Amaya the Avatar?

Am i the only one who thought thar Amaya might have misunderstood what the ancestor told her and the other one who she needed to prepare for is the time-traveling assassin rather than Zari?

I think it is possible--although i'm not holding my breath--that they introduced Zari as Muslim just to show that the Legends didn't care.  It's a way to make a point by denying that there is a political point.  If they had reacted (or even if Argus had reacted) it would have suggested that religion was more important than power and personality.

[Sakura12]

3 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

Not sure how they're going to connect Amaya, Zari and Kuasa but I'm looking forward to finding out. Also, Zari's an Airbender!! And Kuasa's a waterbender! Does that make Amaya the Avatar?

The great thing is this episode was actually written by a guy that wrote for Avatar: The Last Airbender. The firebender was on the Vixen series, I think he was the one killed Kuasa. Of course since their are 5 totems, Earth, Air, Fire, Water and Spirit (which is Amaya's) it also makes me think of another cartoon, Captain Planet. Lol. 

[johntfs]

1 hour ago, immortalfrieza said:

Intentional or not it comes off as tokenism to have a character who effectively just goes "Oh BTW, I'm Muslim" then does absolutely nothing that gives any indication that she is Muslim whatsoever if that mention of it were removed, and no, using a random Arabic word for no reason when she just as well could have used the actual english word, or saying that she's been convicted of "religious crimes" without even clarifying what that means isn't it.

I rather liked the way they did it.  We could have otherwise drawn a conclusion that ARGUS was kind of overzealous but that they had their reasons for doing what they did and perhaps they were right after all.  Maybe the meta-human threat was just that bad.  The fact that religion has been outlawed, however, makes it clear that ARGUS is the bad guy here and that something truly, deeply fucked up has been going down since 2021 or so.

As for other indications, they're fairly subtle, but they're there.  We see Zari drinking water (or a non-alcoholic beverage) from one of the large drinking glasses reserved for non-alcoholic drinks when she's in the bar.  We see the genetic heritage of the actress playing her.  We see a picture of her with her family.  I didn't mind the Arabic word.  A kibbutz is a kind of (originally) farming community in Israel, but that word has deeper cultural meanings than simply that of "farming community."  Presumably the word Zari used basically means sanctuary, but it likely also has deeper cultural and personal meaning for her.  If I had an objection to that bit it was that she didn't use a word in Farsi instead.  Tala Ashe is Persian, born in Iran, so she'd far more likely to have Farsi as her main/native language.  However, the show probably used Arabic because they feared that a good portion of their American audience wouldn't actually know what Farsi was.

Edited October 27, 2017 by johntfs

[Starfish35]

There's my show!!! Where ya been the last couple episodes? 

This. Was.  Awesome.   I loved all of it.  They even made me like Nate, and that's a TV miracle.  Well, unfortunately there was still Ava, but she was the only sour note, and I loved Sara facing her down and making her blink.  :)  Welcome Zari!  I'm looking forward to having you as part of the team.

 I did wonder why no Firestorm- it seems like he would the logical choice against water powers, but I guess maybe they used up all their budget on the water and air effects, and Amaya's spider. 

I also expected Ray to recognize Kuasa, since he mentioned her earlier in the episode.  I'll have to go back and watch Vixen - maybe he never got that close to her?

I do like that they didn't draw out the reveal about Kuasa being one of Amaya's descendants, though.  Although Amaya probably doesn't realize how she's connected to Mari.  With all this, they have to bring Mari on at some point, right? 

Anyway, glad to have my show back, and very much looking forward to next week.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Starfish35

[BkWurm1]

On 10/25/2017 at 8:58 PM, Cthulhudrew said:

I am not impressed by the Time Bureau, and don't see what they bring to the show other than being mild placeholders for the season's real Big Bad.

Anyone else wondering if Rip's Time Bureau is what actually eventually turned into the Time Masters?  

[Starfish35]

1 minute ago, BkWurm1 said:

Anyone else wondering if Rip's Time Bureau is what actually eventually turned into the Time Masters?  

Well. Now I am. :)

[Sakura12]

1 hour ago, BkWurm1 said:

Anyone else wondering if Rip's Time Bureau is what actually eventually turned into the Time Masters?  

I was thinking that is what will happen too. 

[jhlipton]

20 hours ago, Maelstrom said:

Zari's an Airbender!! And Kuasa's a waterbender! Does that make Amaya the Avatar?

Amaya is a CritterBender!

[bmoore4026]

I know I'm late on commenting, but the banning of religion in twenty years was the biggest load of horseshit I ever heard.  Who wrote this, the Left Behind writers?

[Miss Dee]

I thought it made for a nice change; dystopian societies caused by religion are a dime a dozen in fiction. And I think any society where the authorities try to control what its citizens think and how they act by force is dystopian, no matter what the preferred thoughts or actions are. You don't have to be super-religious to think forcing people not to practice religion is a bad idea. Lots of athiests and agnostics I know would be horrified by that kind of fascism.

[Sakura12]

It's a police state, I could see them outlawing religon.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Sakura12

[legaleagle53]

4 hours ago, Miss Dee said:

I thought it made for a nice change; dystopian societies caused by religion are a dime a dozen in fiction. And I think any society where the authorities try to control what its citizens think and how they act by force is dystopian, no matter what the preferred thoughts or actions are. You don't have to be super-religious to think forcing people not to practice religion is a bad idea. Lots of athiests and agnostics I know would be horrified by that kind of fascism.

3 hours ago, Sakura12 said:

It's a police state, I could see them outlawing religon.

Indeed.  Anyone over the age of about 40 remembers the Soviet Era in Europe and also remembers that the first thing the Communists did after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 put them into power was to outlaw ALL religion and religious expression.  And France did the same thing during the first ten years following the French Revolution of 1789. So you'd better believe that it can happen here!

[kismet]

Banning religion makes sense in a police or dystopian state. For many people, religion is how they identify as a person. It is integral to their identity. To strip somebody of their religion or ability to practice their religion, is an effective way to achieve an authoritarian or police state's goals. It strips a person of their identity and hopefully makes them more pliable to follow whatever the "states" goals are. It also logistically bans a formalized way people come together as a community. Therefore eliminating one of the means for people to communicate with each other and discuss ideas or ways to change the current system. Religious freedom is also a way many groups have moved to another area or found a way to make substantial change in their community. Religion has always been a powerful force of change, to allow people to practice freely would leave a police state vulnerable.

[legaleagle53]

3 hours ago, kismet said:

Banning religion makes sense in a police or dystopian state. For many people, religion is how they identify as a person. It is integral to their identity. To strip somebody of their religion or ability to practice their religion, is an effective way to achieve an authoritarian or police state's goals. It strips a person of their identity and hopefully makes them more pliable to follow whatever the "states" goals are. It also logistically bans a formalized way people come together as a community. Therefore eliminating one of the means for people to communicate with each other and discuss ideas or ways to change the current system. Religious freedom is also a way many groups have moved to another area or found a way to make substantial change in their community. Religion has always been a powerful force of change, to allow people to practice freely would leave a police state vulnerable.

Which is why the anti-religionists who would ban it always frame their argument in terms of blaming religion for all forms of social injustice.  That was exactly the argument used in 1789 and in 1917 -- that religion is "the opiate of the people" because it blinds them to the reality of how bad off they are by convincing them that their current socioeconomic situation is by divine decree which they have no power to challenge or authority to question.  In other words, the Bolsheviks and the French revolutionaries before them told the masses to reject religion because instead offering hope to them, it prolonged their suffering by telling them, in essence, "You're poor, illiterate, sick, discriminated against, and dying because that's the way God wants you to be -- so shut up and accept it as God's will for you!"  That's how the bans on religion and religious expression passed in France in 1789 and in Russia in 1917 with nary a word of protest from anyone.

Edited October 29, 2017 by legaleagle53

[Miss Dee]

In a more modern Western society, it'd probably be argued along the lines of, "Religion is the cause of all war, violence and ignorance; get rid of religion and all that will come to an end and humankind will forever be gentler and more enlightened." That argument is going around in some circles today; I can think of at least one TV personality that comes damned close to saying it publicly, especially about Zari's religion in particular.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Miss Dee

[legaleagle53]

1 hour ago, Miss Dee said:

In a more modern Western society, it'd probably be argued along the lines of, "Religion is the cause of all war, violence and ignorance; get rid of religion and all that will come to an end and humankind will forever be gentler and more enlightened." That argument is going around in some circles today; I can think of at least one TV personality that comes damned close to saying it publicly, especially about Zari's religion in particular.

That's still the same argument that formed the reasoning for the bans in 1789 and in 1917 -- that religion is the root of all social injustice and is an evil that enslaves people by robbing them of the freedom to determine their own course of action.  It was as wrong in 1789 and in 1917 as it is in 2017 and as it would be in Zari's time, 2042, and for the same reasons that it was wrong in 1789 and in 1917.  It's not religion that is the root of all social injustice, war, violence, and ignorance; it's man's failure to live up to the religious ideal that is the cause of those things.  In other words, religion has never been the problem -- man has.

[jhlipton]

7 hours ago, kismet said:

Religious freedom is also a way many groups have moved to another area or found a way to make substantial change in their community.

Almost always followed by restricting frredom (see "Puritans") but oh well.

3 hours ago, Miss Dee said:

In a more modern Western society, it'd probably be argued along the lines of, "Religion is the cause of all war, violence and ignorance; get rid of religion and all that will come to an end and humankind will forever be gentler and more enlightened."

More than a few of my atheist friends of friends have said this.  Total hogwash, of course.

1 hour ago, legaleagle53 said:

In other words, religion has never been the problem -- man has.

Thus reminds me of the Twain quote: "God invented man in his own image; and man returned the favor." 

[Miss Dee]

Believing it is not the issue, @jhlipton. People should be free to believe what they want to believe, including the belief that religion is the scourge of the earth, if they want.

What causes the descent into dystopian society is when freedom is taken away, as you so rightly pointed out. I myself would pose that the Puritan era in the U.S. and what it resulted in (witchcraft trials, etc.) is a good microcosm of a dystopian society based on religious beliefs. Lots of science fiction has pursued that thought experiment to its logical ends, especially recently.

Thus I find it interesting that Legends chose to go in the other direction, with outlawing religion altogether in the dystopian future it showed - it's, shall we say, not in vogue with the zeitgeist? Although as @legaleagle53 and others have pointed out, history also has dystopian societies based on outlawing all religion. Humankind as yet has not found the ideology that is immune from dreadful perversion by those who would wield it for their own ends.

Getting back to Legends specifically: I imagine the choice to demonstrate the dystopia via outlawing religion was due to current politics - people wanting to get rid of Muslims regardless of how they practice their faith in current society is, sadly, all too apropos.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Miss Dee

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 10/26/2017 at 7:49 PM, call me ishmael said:

Am i the only one who thought thar Amaya might have misunderstood what the ancestor told her and the other one who she needed to prepare for is the time-traveling assassin rather than Zari?

I thought she was going to inform Amaya that she (Amaya) is a Slayer.

Edited October 30, 2017 by ItCouldBeWorse

[jhlipton]

11 hours ago, Miss Dee said:

Believing it is not the issue, @jhlipton@legaleagle53. People should be free to believe what they want to believe, including the belief that religion is the scourge of the earth, if they want.

 

True enough. 

[Miss Dee]

Is anyone else sort of blown away by the fact we're having deep conversations about Legends, of all shows?!

[jhlipton]

10 minutes ago, Miss Dee said:

Is anyone else sort of blown away by the fact we're having deep conversations about Legends, of all shows?!

LOL. 

[mac123x]

Of course since their are 5 totems, Earth, Air, Fire, Water and Spirit (which is Amaya's) it also makes me think of another cartoon, Captain Planet. Lol.

So Amaya is Ma-Ti? 

[johntfs]

57 minutes ago, mac123x said:

 

So Amaya is Ma-Ti? 

Possibly.  Of course Amaya isn't a pacifist.  If she can control/influence animals, consider that humans are also animals.  Amaya could be fucking terrifying.