![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elenchusTomorrow I leave Portland, so my posting once a day commitment is complete. Well done me? I’m going to try to keep to some kind of a regular schedule over the summer – maybe a once a week minimum? – but that may not pan out. One thing I’ve learned over the past two and half weeks is that babbling about Romans online helps keep me from talking about them non-stop irl. So for the sanity of those around me if nothing else I may be forced to post regularly.
Nearly done with S1 of Rome the series, and still enjoying it. My biggest gripe is that I keep being distracted by how much the female characters sound, to me at least, like they’re being written by men. They keep doing and saying things that seem more like what men think women do than what women actually do. Particularly Atia, Cleopatra and Servilia – but then those are also the three characters I feel are most OOC, so that could be influencing my analysis of them as characters. From what I’ve heard of the histories, Atia begged Octavian not to take the Caesar name out of fear for his safety, Cleopatra was the first of the Ptolemaic line to learn Egyptian and was popular among the common people, and Servilia and Julius Caesar remained lovers (or at least friends) until his death. There are rumors that when his passion for her began to wane, she suggested that he marry her daughter. I can’t picture any of their fictional counterparts doing any of those things.
Not that I really know all that much about the historical figures – you have to dig deeper than I have as of yet to get much on the women of Rome – it’s just that they feel...off. So does Ptolemy, actually, and to much lesser extent Pompey (although he’s grown on me quite a bit), but aside from that I’ve really been enjoying the male historical characters. I don’t mind reworking historical characters for the sake of good drama, but a lot of the stuff with the female characters feels forced and contrived. And very written by men. There’s a lot of misogyny and female stereotyping in Roman history already, so it bugs me to see women who for the most part don’t come preloaded with all that baggage sucked in to the trite clichés of scheming, power hungry or revenge obsessed matrons who use their sexual wiles to get what they want. Cleopatra’s historical baggage is complex I grant you, but I guess I was hoping for a little more Octavian-ness from her.
I'm not really looking for historical accuracy in this series, but I wish the changes felt a) more evenly distributed across gender lines and b) less like they played into misogynistic tropes. There is a lot of historical attention to detail and character in Rome. I love laughing at Cato or going "Oh Cicero," and I wish I could have that with Cleopatra too :( Or barring that, at least be left with a character I can like.
But on the whole I really am enjoying the series, I swear! It just hits a few of my cranky buttons.
Nearly done with S1 of Rome the series, and still enjoying it. My biggest gripe is that I keep being distracted by how much the female characters sound, to me at least, like they’re being written by men. They keep doing and saying things that seem more like what men think women do than what women actually do. Particularly Atia, Cleopatra and Servilia – but then those are also the three characters I feel are most OOC, so that could be influencing my analysis of them as characters. From what I’ve heard of the histories, Atia begged Octavian not to take the Caesar name out of fear for his safety, Cleopatra was the first of the Ptolemaic line to learn Egyptian and was popular among the common people, and Servilia and Julius Caesar remained lovers (or at least friends) until his death. There are rumors that when his passion for her began to wane, she suggested that he marry her daughter. I can’t picture any of their fictional counterparts doing any of those things.
Not that I really know all that much about the historical figures – you have to dig deeper than I have as of yet to get much on the women of Rome – it’s just that they feel...off. So does Ptolemy, actually, and to much lesser extent Pompey (although he’s grown on me quite a bit), but aside from that I’ve really been enjoying the male historical characters. I don’t mind reworking historical characters for the sake of good drama, but a lot of the stuff with the female characters feels forced and contrived. And very written by men. There’s a lot of misogyny and female stereotyping in Roman history already, so it bugs me to see women who for the most part don’t come preloaded with all that baggage sucked in to the trite clichés of scheming, power hungry or revenge obsessed matrons who use their sexual wiles to get what they want. Cleopatra’s historical baggage is complex I grant you, but I guess I was hoping for a little more Octavian-ness from her.
I'm not really looking for historical accuracy in this series, but I wish the changes felt a) more evenly distributed across gender lines and b) less like they played into misogynistic tropes. There is a lot of historical attention to detail and character in Rome. I love laughing at Cato or going "Oh Cicero," and I wish I could have that with Cleopatra too :( Or barring that, at least be left with a character I can like.
But on the whole I really am enjoying the series, I swear! It just hits a few of my cranky buttons.