VOLUME V Main Discussion

(Helping out during the mini-Tour)

Here is the discussion thread for Sandman Vol. V: A Game of You!

Spoiler-free discussion here up to Vol. V!  Take extra care with wikipedia links etc. to warn people if they might read more than they intend to.

I would ask that writers be aware that there are sensitive topics going on here, and if you are unsure of anything, please take a look at the Ground Rules here: http://mariancall.com/vanilla/discussion/3/enter-sandman-read-me-first#Item_1 "Be excellent to each other"

I would ask that the readers be aware that everything that happened in the book is up for discussion, and it certainly will be talked about at some point.
«1

Comments

  • edited March 2014
    Daniel, thanks for starting off this discussion thread. I just happened to wake up & check in to the list. Being a semi-pro insomniac has it's advantages (& when I find out what they are I'll let people know.)

    Wow. What a set of stories & set of ideas! From how people with difference are treated to key Freudian principles.

    The change in (artistic) treatment of Wanda - how she was drawn when first introduced as a sort of awkward, not looking too right woman through to Barbie's dream at the end when she's a sort of elegant, graceful woman - is great and gives a view into how perceptions of people change over time. Not that we're looking at her with Barbie's eyes, but the eyes of society or the average person. You notice first what's off about the other person & then find her/his humanity & grace. Initially Wanda's face is too big for the rest of her. She's drawn gangly & big.

    I've had experience in my past work with people who grew up in small middle American towns & have to hide their "difference" when they go home for their parents' as well as their own sake, the same as Wanda's aunt asks Barbie to call Wanda "Alvin" because it would cause his parents too much pain to think of him as "Wanda." They go home to a "standard" "man's life," e.g. hunting, fishing, but never mention that the life lived here in NY is a gay one. They even know that people in the town engage in man-on-man & woman-on-woman sex but no one is "gay." It's just not talked about & not admitted to because to admit to it would lead to ostracism of themselves and their parents, which is death in a small community. At most the women who live together are just considered "spinsters" and that's the end of it. Sort of a very archaic view but one that's "necessary" by the rules of the society in which they live (small town mind-set.)

    It strikes me as sad that anyone has to his his/her nature, even though we all wear masks of some sort to get through the day. What we choose to show or hide isn't always determined solely by us & this seems to be one of the principles being explored in this set of stories. Wanda is in New York where she doesn't have to hide who she (I started to type "he" at both of those pronouns in this sentence) is. When she does home, which she does, though it's in a box, she is hidden by her parents who have to think of her as "him." Wanda chose not to go home. The choice was taken from her by Dream's sister, Death, who took her away as Wanda, not Alvin.
  • I saw the main theme of this volume as being a question of identity.

    Obviously the fact that the enemy is a cuckoo feeds directly into that, given its strategy of laying its eggs in other birds' nests and its hatchlings killing the other young around it.

    And at the same time, there's the way Wanda is handled. She's accepted as being female by her fellow tenants, but the moon refuses to, as does her family.

    I wonder if the moon and its magic are just stuck in an old way of thinking to deny Wanda her femininity, or if Thessaly was making an assumption about how the moon would treat her.

    I don't know. There's a lot about how most of the plot treats Wanda that makes me wonder. I do believe that Neil Gaiman respected her as being a her, though, given the way Barbie thinks of Wanda at the end, and the way Death takes her away, fully feminine.
  • There's more to the theme of identity than just those few points. It feeds a lot into Barbie's two identities, the power of the Cuckoo, her friends in the dreamscape (which also reminded me of Labyrinth, as they're inspired by toys in Barbie's room, much like Sarah's experiences in the Labyrinth are drawn from the toys and decorations in hers).

    Hazel seems to briefly question her own sexual identity as a lesbian, given the circumstances and results of her one-night stand, ultimately coming to the conclusion that it doesn't matter, as she loves Foxglove and they're happy together.

    Though, I suppose that the main theme being one of identity is unsurprising given that the story is called A Game of You...
  • This is another one of those books that read very differently for me after the years (Like with Vol I  http://mariancall.com/vanilla/discussion/comment/169#Comment_169) 

    The first time I read this, I was really confused about the end of this book, and why everyone was calling Wanda Alvin - I though that something the Cuckoo did had messed with the real world, and Barbie was the only one of a few that knew what the truth was. "You've got a thingie."? I thought Hazel was being rude in pointing out that Wanda was in her underwear without a bathrobe, like the rest of them. (My head is a very strange place.)

    Once the idea of magic in the real world was introduced, well, I thought that the reason the other three could take the moon road and Wanda couldn't was because "3" is a special number, and Wanda's totem/tribe didn't align with theirs. (An idea from other fantasy stories, which looking back, likely had other gender issues that I missed, as well.) And Wanda's dream really didn't seem any odder than the ones already presented in the series.

    I will say that Wanda's face isn't just drawn different at the end, it's constantly drawn differently. But I don't think it's random. Her art style seems to change based on how many people are around her, and what she's thinking/the topic of discussion. (Again, something I didn't find odd, it's rare to find a good comic book artist that can do women's faces - or at least, it was rare then)

    Now, speaking as to the second read-though - I don't think Death chose anything. In fact, she's told several people now "It's your choice". If there's any choice removed by Death, it's the reader's choice on how to perceive Wanda that Death took away.   
      


  • edited March 2014
    First of all, for those curious, the monolith that is the hierogram reads "Dreaming" (do-ree-min-gu) in Japanese; why Japanese, I couldn't say. "Porpentine," meanwhile, means "porcupine." This one is a bit more of a puzzle—it does appear spiky, like a radiant star, when we first see it in volume II—but to me, it has the familiar sense of a child coming upon a new word, liking the sound of it, and deciding it must be the name of something important. Very like how Barbie thinks the names of towns she passes on the bus "sound like the names of magic kingdoms." The source of "porpentine": HAMLET, Act I, Scene V, in which his father's ghost appears to the prince:
    But that I am forbid / to tell the secrets of my prison-house, / I could a tale unfold whose lightest word / would harrow up thy soul, freeze thy young blood, / make thy two eyes, like stars, start from their spheres, / thy knotted and combined locks to part / and each particular hair to stand an end, / like quills upon the fretful porpentine.
    The maiden-mother-crone motif appears again in this volume, as it has in every volume thus far. That will be something worth discussing at some point.

    What I really want to delve into right now is the WIZARD OF OZ imagery used in this volume. I mean, really, the whole thing is essentially an OZ tribute.

    The story calls out OZ directly several times, of course: Wanda name-drops Margaret Hamilton, who played the Wicked Witch of the West in the 1939 movie, in reference to Thessaly. Barbie recalls "follow the yellow brick road" taking the path through the forest. She chooses the "Dorothy option" for her boon. She winds up in Kansas. Wanda, in death, reminds her of Glinda.

    In many ways, Barbie's adventure is like OZ in reverse. Her not-so-little dog dies. She parts the curtain to enter the fantasy. She begins her adventure with three companions, losing them one by one. There's a cyclone, but at the end rather than the beginning, and it drops a house, but upon the good rather than the wicked.

    OZ is a natural place for SANDMAN to draw material from; it's an iconic adventure in a dream land. But as Samuel Delany points out in the preface, recalling Clive Barker's preface to volume II:
    Gaiman's tales tend to take place not in a world where fantasy invades the real, but rather in what Barker called a "far more delirious" form…

    Consider: in a world that we—certainly—start to read as real, … this is a fantasy world, too.
    Whereas OZ has a clear delineation between Oz and Kansas, dream and reality, SANDMAN blurs the lines completely.

    Anyway, that's all unedited and probably poorly phrased and almost certainly incomplete, so I hope it makes some modicum of sense when I read it back to myself in the morning. But I do believe that it was important to get that out near the start, since it informs so much of the structure of the story in this volume, and may give insight into why certain decisions were made.

    Not to be ignored in our discussion, either, is the role of OZ in queer culture and Judy Garland as a gay icon. Volume II touched on that aspect even more explicitly, when Judy appeared to Hal in his dream and devolved into a series of masks: Dorothy, the Wicked Witch, the Wizard. ("Hal. You'll have to help me. I'm running out of hands.") SANDMAN was going to take us to OZ at some point; the choice of what story to tell while there was, I believe, deliberate.
  • To continue the thoughts on identity - 

    Many identify themselves though the roles the portray. The Protector, the Thief, The Witch, The Coward, The Princess, The Child.

    What is this saying about the ability to change your role, your identity?

    Wilkinson starts as The Cynic, but after Martin is gone, he becomes The Protector
    Luz goes from The Faithful to The Betrayer, which is another kind of Faithful.

    Maisie Hill -  Many would chose to paint her as selfish and lazy, just from seeing her - but her identity was one of compassion and sacrifice.

    George appeared to be normal - but he was hollow inside, it isn't even his brain that's involved in the after-life (not afterlife), just his face and other parts of outward appearance.

    We get a good look at what Nuala is like, and what she wants. She want to do good, to be useful.

    I'm sorry, I've lost where I was heading with this - going to wonder around for a bit, see if I can catch it again.
  • To add another OZ reference - Book IV, as Morpheus is getting the wine from the dream "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" 

    Which honestly, I feel that could be the title of a paper written on any of the books, from the ideas of authorship, to the roles of man in society. 
  • In the first comic/chapter, Wanda goes through a full hero's journey, complete with the refusal at the start - granted, the quest is to obtain a cup of coffee with cream, but it takes her to far off lands, full of conflict and challenges. The quest ends with Princess Barbie kissing a frog....to turn our hero into a princess?

    (sidenote - Hero was a priestess of Aphrodite)
  • edited March 2014
    We also see further softening of Morpheus's personality in this volume.

    First is when he turns back and tells Nuala that she did the right thing. It takes him a moment to realize that she needs it, but he's able to empathize with the fact that she's new to the Dreaming, was forced to remain there (given away by her people, and unwanted by Morpheus), and feels alone and uncertain. She also witnessed what Morpheus did to Azazel, and that he can be cruel to those who disappoint him, so she's more than a little scared about screwing up. That he recognizes at least some of those things and thinks to reassure her reflects a growing maturity.

    The other time comes at the end when he chooses not to mete out serious and immediate punishment to Thessaly, Hazel and Foxglove. He's mad that they trespassed in his domain, but he understands that Hazel and Foxglove meant no harm, and only meant to help their friend. It's still a punishment to leave them there, but they could have survived in the dreaming, and found their own place as residents of it. Rather lenient compared to earlier punishments.
  • I am not sure how to take Wanda's story in this book.  Her overall story certainly reflected reality at the time the story was written (and even some now).  Her family and old friends could not accept it, her new friends do.  While the people I know who have changed have not had to suffer through this, I know that even now it happens.  The story draws that kind of hatred into sharp focus and I was happy with how that part was resolved.

    The super-natural world, however, seemed to reject the concept of gender change.  The moon (the goddess?) in this story (and in many pantheons) represented "true" femininity.  What does it mean if the universe cannot accept who you are?

    In the Sandman universe there is no single god that owns any aspect of the human world (save the endless, who seem to own human experience, but not nature).  So it is possible the Moon is just another aspect who is also a douche.  Other female aspects may be more encompassing.

    But the moon's view on femininity are thrown into Wanda's face (and hours) quite strongly, so I can't help but think a point is being made.  I just can't think of a good version of what that could be.

  • One of my favourite bits from this whole storyline is the confrontation between Hazel and Foxglove regarding the pregnancy:

    Foxglove: What kind of relationship did we have, for Chrissakes? You're dumb, you know that? Dumb and selfish and, and deceitful, and secretive, and — and — and — dumb. *pause* Oh... shit. *pause* Do you know how much a baby's going to cost us? For a start we have to buy one of those dumb books full of names...
    Hazel: Fox? Fox, I do love you.
    Foxglove: Damn straight you do. Jerk.


  • I never picked up on the "Oz in Reverse" thing. (Very cool Svithrir and Daniel.)

    What I noticed was how it Barbie's loyalists (who seemed male to me) all sacrificed their lives for her (their queen). Most of the female characters lived. Wanda and the old woman died protecting Barbie. And I think that is one of the big points of this story. That is it the role of men and very old women to protect younger women and children when the chips are down. Yes, it is sexist. I am old school. Sue me.

    In the "Sandman Companion" there is a bit that Mr Gaiman wanted to point out to the practitioners of the white washed pagan movement that was going around in the early 90's what real witchcraft was about: old gods, blood, and very strict rules. It's nice that Barbie has a dream where Wanda is female: an appropriate reward for that hero(ine).

    Hazel & Foxglove turn up in a later story about Death. "The Time of Your Life". I like their characters there too.
  • Well, Luz is referred to several times as female, but I'm curious - so much of this story is about identity and roles, can you talk about why the loyalists seem male to you? 

    I wonder if they are intentionally drawn with gender abstract forms or outfits, or if that was to just make them more toy-like.

    (some random thoughts on names)

    Luz means "light"

    Morpheus calls her "Thessalian", not "Thessaly"

    "Murphy" - does that mean this little realm is governed by "Murphy's Law", and everything must go wrong?




  • I'm not so sure that the Endless own human experience as much as they seem to be human experience. All the things that life, especially higher life forms, experience are expressed as one of the Endless. Death, Delight/Delerium, Destiny, Dream, Desire & Despair. All aspects of human life. Perhaps they were created at the same time as life became aware of itself. As Death says at one point in an earlier story, she'll be there until the last life is gone and then she too will be gone.
  • One thing, though, Thessaly says that the moon won't accept Wanda. We never see the moon reject her. So is it the universe, or is it Thessaly's own prejudice?

    Also, @Daniel:
    "Murphy" is just a corruption of Morpheus, probably the way Barbie mispronounced it as a child, which stuck as the characters in her dream were created by her.
    And "Thessalian" is probably just the name Thessaly was using back then, and she's just updated her name here and there to better match the times. Hob Gadling changes his name every so often for the same reason.
  • Male characters died, as did the some of the females. A lot of sacrifice to save Princess Barbie as well as "real" Barbie. The gender-abstract characters were toys, as someone pointed out, reminiscent of "Labyrinth" (love that movie for a whole bunch of reasons.) It's part of the whole Princess Barbie persona. They become the mythic companions in the journey to reach the kingdom to which the child is entitled.

    I have a fuzzy idea of where I'm going with this, just not clear how to get there. I'll probably get it around 3 or 4 AM.
  • Thessaly may be from that ancient area of Greece, which would explain why she's referred to by Morpheus as "Thessalian."

    I like what Daniel did with a gag around "Murphy." Yes, it probably is a mispronunciation of Morpheus but it's a good question because it is Murphy's (Morpheus') domain so any law there is will be "Murphy's law."
  • autographedcat I love that line, too - A very nice "we've been together forever, we'll be together forever moment" 

    It's also a nice break in the flow, between all the elves and demons and other high fantasy, it's nice to have a bit of "Hey, these are real people that we are dealing with."
  • I saw this group on Twitter and after reading the forum, found myself driven to comment. I hope that's okay!

    The Moon also calls her Thessalian. The Moon and Morpheus both suggest that she is far older than she seems, and Morpheus calls her one of a group. I was always under the impression that she was the last of a group of "witches" of some sort from Thessaly, but I never really thought about how well that ties into the themes of identity present in the volume. In fact, since Hazel and Foxglove are both plants, I always thought they were not their birth names - while that might be a stretch, it would mean that none of that group in the real world go by their "real" name - Thessaly, Wanda, Foxglove, Hazel, even George would all be assumed names, or names they gave themselves.

  • edited March 2014
    More about the ancient Thessalian witches and the drawing down of the moon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drawing_down_the_Moon_(ritual) (no SANDMAN content at link) Our Thessalian appears to be the last of her order, at which point I guess it made sense to her to start going by just "Thessaly."

    @Totz, actually, George corroborates Thessaly's story. That said, it's not the Universe rejecting Wanda, just the Moon, or more specifically whatever aspect of the Moon Thessaly is invoking. (As we saw with Ra in Urania's story, gods and heavenly bodies can get complicated.) The ritual links the Moon to menstruation, both of which operate on a monthly cycle, which is why a trans* woman can't take that path. And we feel for Wanda.

    It's cruel of that powerful entity to exclude Wanda, to deny her such a significant part of her identity based only on a comparatively small and arbitrary aspect of biology oh hey maybe there's a lesson there.

    @Reo, I think your interpretation leaves something to be desired. For one thing, only Wilkinson (and maybe Martin Tenbones) can really be said to sacrifice themselves for Barbie. Prinado's more of a casualty than a sacrifice, and Luz dies in the service of the Cuckoo. Nor do I think is your interpretation of gender roles supported by the text.

    Speaking of gender roles, during the (small) video chat today we came around briefly to discussing what the Cuckoo thinks are the differences between boys and girls:
    Boys and girls are different, you know that? Little boys have fantasies in which they're faster, or smarter, or able to fly. Where they hide their faces in secret identities, and listen to the people who despise them admiring their remarkable deeds.
    Now, little girls, on the other hand, have different fantasies. Much less convoluted. Their parents are not their parents. Their lives are not their lives. They are princesses. Lost princesses from distant lands. And one day the king and queen, their real parents, will take them back to their land, and then they'll be happy for ever and ever. Little cuckoos.
    Now, I hope we can agree that this is obviously a bullshit dichotomy. It is, after all, part of the spell the Cuckoo is weaving over Barbie, not intended for the reader to take as fact. What struck me as particularly galling earlier was that, as an example of a "boy" fantasy, she invoked Superman (or Hyperman, as the case may be). Superman, the last son of a dead and distant planet, whose parents are not his parents.

    And now, having typed out the quote, it occurs to me that the Cuckoo's own motivations betray the lie. She's not waiting for her parents to come back for her; that's not what cuckoos do. She just wants to fly.
  • Nice catch, Adam. I knew about Foxglove (digitalis) but entirely forgot about Hazel. Not enough Nutella I suppose. Only one is a medicinal (digitalis for cardiac purposes) but both figure into British/Celtic mythology. Foxglove is said to be a favorite gathering place for The Folk (faeries) in various parts of the British Isles, including the Celtic/Gaelic parts, and hazel twigs were used for "divining" (witchcraft.)

    Even more reason why Thessaly, some kind of elder witch, would use Hazel and Foxglove. Not only are they the only biological women, an apparent necessary distinction that I've seen in other Urban Fantasy and (regular) fantasy tales, but they are also botanicals that are associated with mythology and witchcraft.
  • Welcome aboard @Adam_R, and thanks for joining in.

    Feel free to post on all the other discussions as well, everything here is still active and ongoing. 

    In a story about Identity, everyone has rejected their given name and chose one on their own. - What seeds might grow from that?  I'm picturing a freshly planted field, covered in crows consuming the seed. 

    Foxglove, witchhazel, a wand and a thistle?  (Yes, I'm taking some liberties here, but sometimes it's about conveying an idea, opposed to a definition)
  • Svithrir,
    The false dichotomy the Cuckoo sites is exactly to what I was alluding when I said that we get a dose of Freudian theory in this volume and, in fact, it's one of the clearest and briefest explanation of this particular piece of fantasy that Freud delineates that I've seen.

    The "boy" fantasy that the Cuckoo states isn't really a dichotomy but a secondary stage of the initial belief. The initial belief by the child, of either gender, is that, after viewing how other parents behave towards their children, that the child must be adopted or a step-child of some sort and just needs to be reunited with his or her "real" parents, who are always better, perhaps nobler, than the parents the child has now. Royalty is one of the possibilities, hence Princess Barbie.

    The second phase of the fantasy is sexualized (according to Freud) in which the child, more often the boy in Freud's description) becomes competition for the parent of the same gender for the parent of the opposite gender. In a boy's option that would be about becoming more powerful than Dad, which could lead to the superhero idea expressed by the Cuckoo. Freud doesn't speak of superheros.

    The Cuckoo is telling a story and just wants Princess Barbie to do what it wants to get to the porpentine & be able to fly away so it can foul other nests with its offspring. It's a separation of two pieces of psychology to try to appeal to Princess Barbie.

    Back to Thessaly for a moment: according to Wikipedia, which we all know is infallible, the ancient Thessalian witches were known for Moon magic, especially the ritual of "Drawing Down the Moon."
  • Computer battery about to die, but hello from Bozeman in the middle of the night!  It's cold here but the sky is very very big.  And people here have an expanded sense of personal space.

    I have been thinking about this book SO MUCH and I think it might be the most difficult volume for me to wrestle with as an artist.  I have so much to share but it's still being shaped in my mind!

    You are all amazing and thank you for being here.  I look forward to working on this more with you and a very lengthy post is coming the minute I have time.  Now I finally have a moment, but my battery's about to die and that will be that.

    The names are amazing and illuminating -- I never thought about it, but thank you for pointing it out.

    So much to say about Wanda, Barbie, Thessaly, Hazel, and Foxglove. So much to say!  This bizarre quintet of women fascinates me.

    It must be very very interesting inside Gaiman's head.

    Uh oh shutting down.  love to all - Marian
  • In light of what I said back there about Family Romances (Freud, S., 1908) I would like to make clear that the Cuckoo didn't entirely make up the difference between boys' and girls' dreams. Freud does say:

    " But here the influence of sex is already in evidence, for a boy is far more inclined to feel hostile impulses towards his father than towards his mother and has a far more intense desire to get free from him than from her. In this respect the imagination of girls is apt to show itself much weaker. These consciously remembered mental impulses of childhood embody the factor which enables us to understand the nature of myths."

    This book, Volume 5, seems to be about coming of age. Very much like Labyrinth, Barbie is confronting her dreamworld which, we're told in chapter 6, Into The Night, in The Doll's House, are "...more valid and true than anything she feels when waking," as Rose is able to see into everyone's dreams.

    As Barbie's Dreamworld crumbles she has to deal with loss. She wipes off the veil that she's drawn on her face for Wanda's funeral and let's someone (other than her house mates, who, except for Wanda, are some form of extension of her life in The Doll's House) see her actual face. She slowly loses them all, dream companions and "real world" helpers and has to build a new life in this world without the romantic dream of childhood as her constant escape. Perhaps she begins to have new, "adult" dreams and an adult life where she's not a "doll."

    Barbie's life in the "real" world is saved by a virtual stranger, Maisie (Maisie=maize=corn? Another botanical name?) towards whom Barbie has shown a kindness that Barbie considered so trivial she didn't notice to whom she was kind. A selfless act that was repaid. A human kindness, not a Princess bestowing a gift on a subject repaid by a human bestowing "the ultimate gift" to another human. Maisie dies protecting Barbie in this world the same as Martin Tenbones dies in this world protecting Barbie except that Maisie is protecting her from a danger in this world, not (apparently) from the Cuckoo.

    Not having read farther in the series than this I can only wonder (and please, let me be surprised) what lies in store for Barbie, Hazel, Foxglove and Thessaly. How do they cope after these events with being in the "real" world and still subject to "Murphy's law."
  • edited March 2014
    @twodogs9: Huh! Well that's fitting, considering Freud's ideas are cuckoo! :P (Freud was very influential in changing how we think about psychology, but most of his actual conclusions have since proven false.)

    @Adam_R: In panel 2 of the "Moon's Road" page, she calls herself Hazel while Foxglove calls herself Donna, so I'm inclined to think "Hazel" is her birth name. But you're right, names and identities are an important theme. In fact, considering she still went by "Donna" as recently as when she was with Judy, I wonder whether Foxglove chose that name at least in part to go with Hazel's. (Also, welcome!)

    Just to start dipping a toe gingerly into the subjects of Wanda and Maisie and death: It occurs to me that Maisie's grandson Billy, as a "preoperative transsexual", may very well have been a victim of The Connoisseur. I think it's indicative of how Gaiman doesn't treat death lightly in these books, a reminder that when he introduces death and murder to the story, he also creates mourners. It may also be a bit of editorializing about how you're more likely to know a trans* person, or someone connected to someone trans*, than you might think. (As Foxglove says when she learns Barbie knew Rose: "Hmm. Small world.")
  • edited March 2014
    Ok, FINALLY able to comment. This whole having-a-job thing is still throwing my rhythms out of whack. Here are some of my notes and comments:

    Interesting female archetypes. Barbie, the princess, the “little
    lady.”  Hazel, the innocent. Thessaly, the witch. Wanda, the trans woman. And there’s
    the triple goddess again: Fox (maiden), Hazel (mother), and Thessaly
    (crone.)

    For most of us, we don’t begin telling stories verbally or
    in writing. We begin telling stories with our toys, with play.

    This volume is weird, and disturbing, and I never know what
    to think of it, and it’s still my favorite. I have never known why, but it is.

    Not overly fond of most of the art in this section, but Thessaly’s conversation with the moon is gorgeously
    minimalistic. Lovely.

    The danger of giving things life is risking having them die.
    Barbie’s childhood toys die; most of us don’t have to face that with our toys,
    but if you tell a really good story, with characters that come to life, those
    characters may also have to die. If authors have responsibilities to their characters, what
    of the characters and stories we create as children? Do we owe those
    characters, so often incarnated in our toys, anything? Most of us seem to hang
    on to a few of our most cherished toys long into adulthood. Do we feel
    responsible for them? For what we’ve done to them?

    Is the scene where all the inhabitants of the land walk back
    and disappear into Morpheus’ cloak an intentional reference to C.S. Lewis' The Last Battle?

    In regards to identity: is it that “whole world” inside all of us that
    Barbara talks about? Does erasing someone’s identity erase that whole world? The moon refuses to admit Wanda as a woman, but the gods in Sandman are hardly all-knowing or particularly concerned with what is right. Even the Endless aren't that way; why should we take the moon's word for it? Also, it should be remembered, it turns out to be incredibly destructive to walk that path; the things Thessaly wants are not good things, and she truly does not care who or what she destroys in order to get what she wants. 

    @Svithrir: LOVE the Oz-in-reverse reading. That's really interesting.

  • Svithrir, sorry not getting back to your comments sooner. Real world and all that.
    In "The Sandman Companion" this book is noted as being the least popular. It is Mr Gaiman's favorite.
    Not mine. I did not put a lot of energy into the analysis.
    So I went back and looked for references to the sexes of the supporters of Barbie & the Cuckoo:

    Tantoblin - Luz refers to Tantoblin twice with masculine pronouns on page 1 of #32. (Book 1)

    Martin Tenbones - masculine name (Martin rather than Martina) and Luz refers to him with masculine pronouns at the end of #32.

    George - clearly male. 

    Wilkinson - the mouse in the hat & trench coat. Looks like a male outfit to me. He later refers to all of his brother and sisters all named "Wilkinson" which was especially hard on the girls (rather than it being "hard on us girls"). So I thought of him as male.

    Prinando - in the middle of #33 when Barbie reaches her troop, Wilkinson introduces Prinando (the monkey in the hat) as the gentleman in the hat.

    Luz - and Wilkinson introduces this character as a her. Wow! I missed one. OK. But this character does not lay down it's life to defend Barbie. It's a traitor. The character is killed (or sacrificed like a piece in chess) by the Cuckoo when Thess, Fox, & Hazel appear. But it's not Luz's gender that turned her against Barbie. I imagined Luz succumbed to the same fate as when the Cuckoo laid it on heavy to Barbie - even Barbie wanted the Cuckoo to live and be happy. And Luz must have folded even faster.

    For me too many male characters die either for females or at the hands of females. And Thess wants more blood. Which I suppose all makes a good story but this is my least favorite of the 10 books.

    One thing I totally missed that was mentioned in "The Sandman Companion" for this book was that Allanora was a former lover of Morpheus (mentioned in earlier books. Really? OK, if Mr Gaiman says so.)

    The other thing mentioned in "The Sandman Companion" is that this story is very similar to Jonathan Carroll's 1988 book "Bones of the Moon". And it turns out they were both fans of each other's work and talked about it. Have to add that book to my reading list.

    And yes, C.S. Lewis is in the stack of books in Barbie's bedroom in Florida (also from "TSC"). So any resemblance to "The Last Battle" may be quite intentional.
  • @Joi, you're not alone in somewhat disliking the art. Shawn McManus did most of the art for this volume, and I find it to be hit or miss. His wider shots can be very good, but his faces can get very… melty. Chapter 3, meanwhile, was drawn by Colleen Doran, and is much more solid.

    I can't corroborate the C.S. Lewis refernce, not having read NARNIA myself, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me. Personally, the treacherous mountain pass and the talk of angry trees and giant spiders in the woods immediately reminded me of LORD OF THE RINGS. As reo points out, Lewis appears on the shelf in Barbie's bedroom. So do LOTR and THE WIZARD OF OZ.
  • As for responsibility, Joi, I don't think authors do have a responsibility to their characters, because characters aren't real. (That's part of what made "24 Hours" so chilling. When Dee treats real people as an author might fictional characters, the normal and accepted becomes horrific.) Authors' responsibilities are to themselves, to their audience, and to their subjects. They must be responsible for and with their characters, but not to.

    With that in mind, I'd like to start looking more closely at Wanda and Maisie. As Marian alluded to in the Questions thread for this volume, these two characters are both representative of oppressed minorities (one a trans* woman, the other a homeless black woman). They also suffer a more grim fate than any of the other human characters, save perhaps George, who in many ways is their polar opposite in terms of privilege (a straight cis white man).

    These two women experience some of the most distress in the story as well, partly because they're more ready than other characters to notice and react strongly to the fantasy and horror. Wanda takes sick over the business with George. And Maisie, poor thing, is so terrified of Martin Tenbones that she wets herself.

    (Marian, I know you're touring right now (hope you're having a good time!), but I very much look forward to having you share your thoughts and what more specific questions you're wrestling with.)

    Samuel Delany, in his preface, says that Wanda struggles with her identity. She seems confident enough in her womanhood to me. However, to the extent that he's right, Delany glosses past the nature of her conflict and its source in her inability to undergo sex reassignment surgery. Trans* people who forego SRS have myriad reasons for doing so; in Wanda's case, if her nightmare is to be believed, it's due to her fear of surgery. Even if she has personally come to terms with the decision that makes her most comfortable, that fact could enable challenges to her femininity to inflame self-doubt.

    Here another parallel to THE WIZARD OF OZ comes to mind. As in Dorothy's companions, we see the concern that some natural "shortcoming" (Wanda's word) reflects a flaw in her character. Wanda has a body part to lose, not to gain—not that that's how SRS actually works, but that's how it's presented in the book. Wanda already knows the moral, that it's what's inside that counts. We know she isn't making empty proclamations throughout the book when her womanhood is challenged, because we see her self-image in person in the end, decoupled from her body in death. Unlike for the Scarecrow, Tin Man, or Lion, however, there can be no diploma or totem for Wanda to display to solidify her self-worth in the face of an unfair and doubting world.

    Meanwhile, you'll notice that the women who take the Moon's Road end up doing nothing to actually help Barbie. In fact, they only make things worse; Barbie needs to spend her boon to get them safely home. Wanda, who isn't permitted to go over the rainbow, is the one who protects Barbie; directly, by guarding her as she sleeps; and indirectly, by helping Maisie out of the storm.

    I've gone on long enough for now, but a couple other questions to muse on: Wanda and Maisie's first encounter is confrontational; what can we read into Wanda's attitude toward surviving the city? Why do their deaths coincide with the unmaking of The Land?
  • Svithrir, I will go you one step further with the women taking the Moon's Road doing harm...
    If they had not pulled the moon down, there would have been no hurricane, the building would not have fallen down, and Wanda & Maisie would not have had to die in such a way. Mr Gaiman may have crafted their deaths in another way. But the chain of events triggered by Thess's code to take any affront with murderous retribution gained nothing for Barbie.

    The chess game played by the good Queen (Barbie) and an evil Queen (the Cuckoo) was totally lopsided in evil's favor. I paint the Cuckoo as evil because her motivations were based on selfishness. Barbie was good in that she was acting altruistically for her childhood imaginary friends. The surprise for both "Queens" was to find they were merely pawns in a deal between Morpheus and one of his former girlfriends. And that for Barbie & The Cuckoo, eventually they both grew and changed for the better. Wanda & Maisie (also both Queens) both died but we were shown in Barbie's dream that Wanda grew and changed and became a real woman. I pray that Maisie got to be reunited with her grandson or similarly grew and changed into what she wanted in the afterlife. After the dream land was unmade, the characters progressed and evolved. Which I see as one of the positive functions of dreams - they help us to see that difficult changes can eventually lead to good things.

    I believe the author's responsibility to their characters is moot.
    The larger concern for the author is: how do I hook my audience to care about my characters?
    Failure to do so results in the author having to get another job.
  • I don't see the Cuckoo, or Barbie, being "pawns" for Morpheus. He was surprised the skerry was still there, and even more surprised that someone was using it. The continued existence of the skerry seems to have been a gift to an old love, not a game.
  • Thanks for pointing out the harm done by the drawing down of the moon, reo. I had forgotten to mention that.

    I agree with Joi, though, regarding Morpheus's involvement (or lack thereof, rather). He explicitly takes a "wait and see" approach to the skerry. In fact, I think the entire chess metaphor is ill-fitting. Neither Barbie nor the Cuckoo is trying to win by attrition or maneuver the other into checkmate. It's a simple case of the hunter and the hunted. Barbie doesn't even know what to do to "defeat" the Cuckoo at this point, she just wants to get to the hierogram safely. As for the Cuckoo being evil, she certainly seems that way up to the destruction of the hierogram, but then Morpheus specifically brings that into question.

    I strongly disagree that Wanda "grew and changed and became a real woman." The point is that Wanda was a real woman all along, despite other characters' protests.
  • edited March 2014
    So, it's taken me awhile to figure out what I want to say about this volume. And part of it is that I am solidly in the listening stage of learning to be a good ally when it comes to trans issues (including the timing of this article My Trans Story is Not Your Growth Experience ). And part of it is that this desire to learn has been strongly driven by my physical world experience over the past year or so. There's someone I met about a year/two years ago who, as far as I'm concerned, has always presented as the gender I know - even though I've known just as long that there is a biological mis-match. Someone else I know is 'transitioning,' by which I mean, the rest of us are transitioning to using the right pronouns, because this is who they've been all along.  So I'm spending a lot of time learning how not to misstep.

    By the by, I live in a small town. Cities aren't magic. Good families are - and that's what both these individuals have.

    I am glad that the narrative supports Wanda's statements as to who she is. When she dies she isn't transformed - we've seen other spirits, and they aren't idealized or transformed versions of themselves, they are simply themselves.  Wanda's presentation in the everyday world is such that Hazel, who lives in the same building and has running jokes about borrowing sugar and sundries, has never realized that her biological sex is not female. I don't think we were meant to read varying degrees of femininity into the artwork, other than in the nightmare sequence - I think we were simply supposed to see Wanda as drawn by artists with varying degrees of skill at rendering a woman's face.

    Thessaly declares "Wanda is a man," but I don't think Thessaly's judgment should be accepted on this matter. And it is Thessaly who decides who will go with her into the dream, not the moon. The moon neither accepts nor rejects Wanda - and looking at their relationship, I don't think Thessaly is the best person to know what opinions the moon would have on who 'counts' as a woman.
  • Svithrir, I like that you see Wanda as female. Stick to your guns on that. 
    I take the Moon's point of view. It's the chromosomes you are born with that make a person technically & physically male or female. Society has a lot of baggage about what are "male" and "female" characteristics and traits and roles are (which I say are a total load of hooey) but that is stuff for every person to work through - to be some working combination of that traditional "male" & "female" trait/role mix.
    If Wanda is already physically female, there is no point to her appearing in Barbie's dream at the end as more female.
    But I like the idea that we can both be right.
    What do you say?

    Joi, I'm not so sure it was a gift. Morpheus tells Allanora their "compact" has reached an end. I took that as it was a formal agreement or deal they had made. Yes, long forgotten, but it was no game.

    ***

    As for the chess game, now this is all my opinion so here goes. The Cuckoo is indeed winning by attrition and she does maneuver Barbie into a checkmate when she takes over her mind and gets her to smash the necklace on the hierogram. The Cuckoo is very happy that she has finally won. And then she seems very surprised when Morpheus appears and says: this is my realm. Morpheus does ask for silence but they all appear rather awed when the whole realm then proceeds to go marching into his sleeve. Barbie and The Cuckoo were not pawns or queens in some game of his. He did not even know they were there. But Barbie and The Cuckoo and all their supporters acted that way.

    I took all this to be a huge allegory for what we all think we are striving and questing for is not what is really going on in reality at all - that there is a larger and broader event happening that we are not even aware of. That we cannot hope to even comprehend it. That it would not even make sense to us if we heard the words. One of the functions of dreams is that the subconscious is trying to gently introduce some overwhelming/shattering truth to the conscious. That the "Game of You" is about this huge illusion - that reality never was about any single one of us. We are all minor background characters in some much bigger play going on with characters and themes that we know nothing about but yet we think that we do.  
    That if we play our background parts well, we will be rewarded - just as Wanda/Alvin finally gets his/her wish. 
    The clues are right in front of us, fully displayed in plain sight, and still no one gets it. 
    This may be why Mr Gaiman likes this "least liked Sandman volume" the best of all 10. 

    Just my opinion. And it's still not my favorite volume.
  • Like Ginger, I'm still (and probably always will be) learning how to be a good ally on trans* issues. So if I misstep here, I'm counting on people out there in the know to call me out on it.

    But I will try to respond to reo's comment. I do not like the idea that we can both be right, not least because someone else's sex is not up to you or I. People are entitled to their identities. If we ignore what they tell us about who they are, then that's on us.

    Wanda is a woman; that's how she identifies, and that's how the story (if not all its characters) treats her from beginning to end. In the end, Barbie's reaction isn't that Wanda looks "more female." It's simply that she looks gorgeous.

    @Ginger, you're right (as Totz was further up the thread) that the Moon doesn't address Wanda directly, but I need to point out again that we don't just hear the Moon's rejection from Thessaly. We also hear it from George.
  • Looks like I am in the minority of being politically incorrect these days on this topic.
    I have no problem with someone's preferred self gender identity. That is some person's choice.

    But the hard science is hard science.
    You can say all you like that the moon is made of cheese. 
    All the people in the land can say the emperor's new suit is grand - when in fact, the emperor is naked.
    The hard science DNA says either: XX or XY or maybe even XXY or XYY (for this medical condition or whatever the politically correct phrase for that is these days).
    It has nothing to do with religion or morality.
    I go with the hard science and logic on this one. And that is my hangup.

    Know that this topic (about this particular story) it has been debated before. We are not the first ones here. 
    I am not looking to change anyone's mind. But I am not going to play dumb so as to not offend (or that once again my Karma has run over someone's Dogma). What I am searching for is a way to show that all opinions expressed here are good and valid. And as Marian requested, we can all be excellent to one another.
    Because of the conversational exchange of listening and honesty, we all grow richer.

    I am going to try a bit of distraction because this may be a very raw nerve for some.
    The interesting thing is it looks like a "Morpheus" movie in Hollywood is finally in the works.
    And it's very interesting that Marian started this book club at just this time.
  • Reo: I'll accept the amendation of "gift" to "agreement." Seems in line with the text. 

    One thing I should note about the art, that just came to me. While the art in most of Game of You isn't my favorite, I LOVE how differently all the women are drawn. Barbie's the only one who is thin with long hair and big boobs, the comic/graphic novel "standard." Hazel's young and kind of chunky, Fox is rail-thin with tiny boobs, Wanda is thin with not much hip, Maisie is old and round, Tessaly is short and dainty. I love that so, so much. I wish that I could take it for granted that women would be portrayed with different shapes. 
  • I like questions, and I like the process of asking questions. I find by asking questions I often find out more about myself than by giving answers. 
     I'm going to try a mix of the two this time:

    The idea of the moon as feminine is not always the case, the most famous example being  Shinto, where the Sun is female, and the Moon is male. I've seen some statements that a masculine moon is in the majority, but I think this has a lot with how you count things.

    But we do have this cultural idea that the moon is feminine because the Greeks and Romans did. However, in the Sandman universe, we have several statements that all the gods exist, in face, back in book thee, Death says "He's the Sun, Well, sort of one of them".

    One of the many suns, just as there are many moons. Everything Thessaly does is on her terms, her beliefs , her magics, her rules. The moon she calls on is the moon she believes in, with the rules and conditions that come along with that.

    Who am I?

    A collection of proteins? A soul in a construct? A series of energy waves? Someone's experiment on blog post bot coding?

    If I were to judge gender on chromosomes, then what gender is Death? Morpheus? Thor? Loki? Bast?

    What is Urania Blackwell? She has no chromosomes?

    So why is Wanda in the story? I do notice that all of the characters have something that puts them on the edge of society, so maybe this is another edge to be shown. One way to define a geometric object is by the number of edges - We don't really know what our world is like until we see all of the edges. 

    Edges and shapes.....
     
  • edited March 2014
    Hey, how about I post this in the right group this time?
    -----------------------------------


    I've talked before about how reading these books had been different for me this time around. Another instance appears in this story:

    "I'm down on the Lower East Side and I'm callin' to say that I don't know what the hey's going on down here but we got waves like you wouldn't believe."
    "I think maybe it's that hurricane they was talkin' about on the news. I think maybe it's headin' back this way."

    "Hurricane Lisa ....is indeed heading back this way."

    This is exactly what happened with Hurricane Sandy, including the mixed reports on if it was going to hit, where it was going, etc.

    I grew up in the country, and I have seen the destructive power of water, but to look out and see the building surrounded water, to see the roads turned to rivers....and at this point we had already lost power. It really felt like absolutely anything could happen at that point.

    In the end, we were without power for 4 days, without heat for the month of November, I lost my car, and my wife's office building was wrecked. She's been in a temporary building since then, and might be moving back finally in a week or two. And with all that, I feel lucky, compared to what some others went through.

    I mention this, because of the deaths at the end. The idea of a single group of buildings being wiped out is very real and practical to me. I don't see Maisie and Wanda as being targeted, just an example of how real the non-dreaming world can be. 
  • @Joi_the_Artist Speaking of the comic book style - What did you think of the portrayal of the comic book shop at the end?

    There's certainly been stores that I've gone to that I've never wanted to go into again. Was that scene in there as a toss-off joke, poking fun at the place where you bought the very thing you're holding in your hands? (Like a talkshow host making jokes about his network) 

    If that story were being written today - would Barbie just be buying the comic off the internet, and not have been treated that way? I know that there's a big concern about the local store going away as a concept, and I think there's cause for concern there, but I do think there's some good in it, if it can help push competition to create a more easygoing environment for all.   (At NYCC last year, Marvel talked about how digital comics have lead to a huge increase in female readers/purchasers, and those numbers are helping them change the structure of their company and the books they published. They also said that they don't think all of these are new fans, they just buy more often now because of alternative methods.)
  • Joi_the_Artist - YES! It's lovely seeing so much variety in body type, especially among women (though the guys only have it slightly better in standard superhero comics - most fit neatly into either broad-shouldered and muscular or wiry but muscular).

    Svithrir - totally missed George saying that, both in the reading and earlier comment, so thanks!

    reo_1963 - When I was a girl of around five or six, a grandmotherly woman on a North Carolina beach asked me my name. I told her "Ginger," and she snappishly replied, "No, I mean your Christian name." I ran off to my parents in confusion. I have been mad at this nameless stranger for years, ever since I was old enough to understand the content of her reaction (rather than just the weirdly angry tone), because Ginger is my name. It's not actually short for anything - but even if it were, how could this stranger presume to tell me my preferred name wasn't real enough/good enough/Christian enough?

    Calling Wanda "him" or saying she is not a "real woman" until she is dead and without physical body strikes me as similar to insisting I reveal a proper Christian name. I told her who I was; it was not tiny-me's fault she wouldn't accept it. Wanda told people who she was; from that point on, it was a matter of respect to call her by the preferred name and terms. Barbie, Fox, and Hazel - her chosen family - get it right. It's sad that her family by birth, even in death won't even consider it.

    But to bring it away from politeness and to science, the social sciences all distinguish between sex and gender - both are real, but only one is determined only by chromosomes.  My academic background is in anthropology, so that's always going to be my go-to. Anthropologist Jason Antrosio put it (fairly) succinctly in his Living Anthropology blog, "When anthropology talks about human sex, gender, and sexuality, we insist that we must take account of what humans say, think, and believe about their activities. To do otherwise is arrogant, presumptuous, and a root cause for why people become suspicious of the people who call themselves scientists. To say this is not to deny evolution, to deny science, to deny that humans are animals, or to claim some sort of ethereal special place for the non-material. It is simply to ask that a role for human activity and imagination be included as part of our understandings. And of all the products of the human imagination, the idea that organisms are ruled or determined by genes is surely one of the most bizarre–but apparently also one of the most far-reaching and pernicious."

    Was Wanda born sexually male? Yes. Genetically, would she be sexed as male? Most likely (though even there, as you pointed out, not everyone fits neatly into XY or XX). Speaking strictly of biological sex and not gender, male is the correct term. However, her gender is feminine. And as woman is a gendered social term, calling her a woman does not violate science or logic, just the social conventions of the time period of this comic.

    I will be sure to follow that link later - I thought Levitt did a fine job directing Don Jon... but that's a very different sort film from what I'd expect to develop out of The Sandman. (Also, I would hope the rumor was directing only, not starring and directing! I enjoy his work but can NOT picture him as any of the main characters to date.... and now I'm trying. Stop, brain.)

    Daniel - Hurricane Sandy was scary from a distance - I can't imagine watching it bear down on you. I'm glad you and your immediate family got through relatively intact. Somehow, natural disasters are more surreal when they strike urban centers. I half-expect the flooding in my small town - but when things happen in Chicago, it's more shocking despite the rivers and Lake being right there.

    Having played with chat bots in the distant (for the internet) past, if you ARE an "experiment on blog post bot coding," I am seriously impressed with how far you've come! Kudos to your creator!
    I, meanwhile, will be investigating ways to become both a wave and a particle in my dreams tonight.
  • Daniel - I regularly frequent my local comic shop which now has a number of women who shop there and who work there. It's a cool place, and they frequently set aside the one-shots and tie-ins that I otherwise might have missed.

    However, back when these books were first coming out? No women worked the counter, and I felt like the only girl who shopped there. (A feeling not lessened when the owner welcomed me back by name when I got back into comics recently... about a decade after weening myself off them.) When I went to conventions in the nineties, I always got asked who I'd come there with - as though no teen girl would be there without a boyfriend/brother/father dragging her along. (The number of sales flubbed in Artist Alley by leading with that question!) So I think Gaiman was making a comment on the way too many stores actually ran - not unlike his commentary on conventions in the earlier volume. Not particularly mean or even that pointed, just "yep, this is what it's like in comic shops sometimes." So the comedian-network analogy seems to fit pretty well.

    I think Barbie would still be walking into a shop to buy her comic today. Just in terms of story telling, it makes better visuals and allows for character interaction in a way that using a website... doesn't. Hopefully though, the joke would be more how different the shop is from the expectations built up by pop culture (looking at you, Big Bang Theory).  Also, today's shoppers who also happen to be ladies can turn to the internet for reviews on the safety/friendliness of particular physical comic shops. Hooray for Tumblrs like haterfreewednesdays!
  • I haven't put together my thoughts on this volume until now, mostly because I felt like there was too much there and I wanted to go through and read it again, and try to put my (many jumbled thoughts) in order. Think I'm finally there, so here goes. 

    There was so much examining of gender and societal roles in this volume. I think that's part of why I appreciated it so much - these are things I have questioned my entire life, and the source of many family arguments and feelings of isolation, the idea that I was a "weirdo" myself, and finally the acceptance that it didn't matter, I am who I am, even if my ideas about the world don't fit into a nice neat little box. (For the record, I'm not trans myself, but I still chafe at gender boxes, and think I might be somewhere in the middle of the spectrum if the world allowed for more than two options). I actually really appreciate how Neil Gaiman went about addressing some of these issues - he was simultaneously much kinder, and more realistic about them, than many other authors (especially if we consider when it was written). 

    The ideas of gender and sex are never as clear cut as one might think, and I like how that is looked at here. Yes, gender is more of a social construct, but even physical sex is more complicated than it at first appears. If you base it on genitalia, then how do you define someone born with ambiguous genitals (usually called intersex)? If you base it on chromosomes, what do you call the outliers (XXY, XYY)? Even people that appear physically to be one sex sometimes are tested and have chromosomes that point them in the other direction...in that case, what do you call the person? (This has happened with many athletes, actually, which is the only reason we know...most people never get their chromosomes tested, so it remains a mystery) If you base it on hormones and secondary sex characteristics, where do you put the people will medical disorders that cause confused signals? In the end, our system of binary gender is just plain faulty, it doesn't allow for enough variation..and we're right back to the transgender discussion. And there's a pretty good amount of science to back up the idea that someone that identifies as transgender often has more characteristics (based purely on brain scans) that cross over between genders than someone that identifies as a cis male or female. There's so much grey in the universe, when you get right down to it.....

    OK, so back to specific characters. I have a couple of things that jumped out at me and I want to mention. First of all, with all that Thessaly seems to know, it struck me as odd that she didn't recognize the cuckoo for what it was at first..she followed the lie that Luz was actually the cuckoo, without hesitation. Considering that up until that point, she didn't appear to be surprised by much, that struck me as bit odd. Still not sure what to make of it. 

    Also, I agree with whoever commented about different female characters being drawn differently and portrayed as really separate from each other. I loved that about this volume, and I loved how it showed so many different personalities, all on the feminine side of the spectrum, but also on the edge of society - Barbie, because she's weird and figuring herself out, Wanda because she's trans, Hazel and Foxglove because they're gay, Thessaly because she is (apparently) a very old witch that survived to modern times. All outcasts in a way, all living on the edges of society, all trying to make it work anyway. They're a beautiful band of misfits and I love them. (Yet another reason that I like this volume so much, speaking of the gender binary, is that this particular group of people seem to push at those boundaries - you have some biological females that are butch, and vice versa, and all these people are just being who they are, regardless of what anyone else thinks, and that is glorious).And I would ask anyone that may not care for this volume as much based on the lack of male characters, to take a moment and consider our general media. This is what it feels like on the other side - when you are part of a group that isn't well represented, and most modern media pushes you to the sidelines of most stories. Think about how many of your favorite books, films, tv shows, and yes comic books, feature mostly male characters, with just females as support cast. They are MY favorites as well, and I am sometimes bothered by that. No, you don't have to be ok with this book by any means, but use it as a jumping off point, for a new perspective. :)

    I like how the maiden, mother and crone imagery continued so obviously in this volume. When the women are walking the moon's road, they even walk in ORDER: Thessaly first (the crone leading the way), followed by Hazel (mother) and Foxglove (maiden). They also tend to stand clumped together while in The Land, as if they are just another incarnation of the three fates. And I can't help but think that the REAL reason they didn't or couldn't bring Wanda along is that three is the magic number. Did anyone else think it odd that Thessaly was so open and willing to bring newcomers along, that know nothing about real magic? I wonder if she NEEDED them...like maybe she wouldn't have been able to walk the moon's road at all if she didn't have help from two other women that could help her complete the triad. And that they needed maiden, mother and crone representation to make it work. And if we want to argue that the moon represents a goddess that Thessaly once worshipped, then its rules may be different. The moon that most witches of past times believed in represented not just femininity, but specific phases of it. The FULL moon, which was there that night, represents the pregnant women, or motherhood. One could argue that that PARTICULAR moon deity may have discriminated against Wanda because she didn't have the capacity to get pregnant (and to be fair, in that case, it wouldn't have allowed anyone sterile to go either). Wanda would be beautifully accepted by the gods of some native tribes, that believed in two spirit people, but not by the old European gods, where masculinity and femininity were drawn in severe lines, and symbolism surrounding reproductive organs was everything. 







  • On a personal note, was anyone else frustrated that there were no repercussions at all for cuckoo? Like, not even a mild punishment? As Dream said, she was acting according to her nature, but she certainly SEEMED malevolent, and I was more than slightly perturbed that she just, basically, got away in the end. But I feel like that's a pretty good life lesson - sometimes things or people that you think of as evil aren't really, and justice isn't always served in a satisfactory manner. It's not really up to us to make sure that karma is balanced, but we do have to learn to deal with it. 

    I also found it interesting that all of the minor characters that lived in The Land (based on Barbie's toys) were so ambiguous when it comes to gender. Yes, some were referred to as "he" or "she" but on most, even when we learned the gender, it seemed irrelevant...they just WERE that creature, based on a child's toy, and their assigned gender seemed to have very little to do with their personality. I wonder if that was an obvious echo to other gendered themes throughout the book, or perhaps commentary on the fact that children are less hung up on gender differences than adults are. 

    The whole story with Barbie is both sad and also relatable, in a way. She starts off living the perfect life, doing what she's supposed to....but as soon as she deviates from the script, and leaves Ken and tries to live on her own, she seems so...adrift. Like, once she has lost her connection with The Land, she doesn't have any clear sense of direction or purpose anymore, just going along until she can figure something out. I feel like her face painting is a way to recapture her identity and explore herself. I really think that her friendship with Wanda was the big anchor in her life. Sometimes it takes having a friend that has been through crazier crap than you, who is so strong in their own identity (in her case because she has to be) and will look out for you no matter what, to help you figure yourself out. 

    The whole scene at the end, with Wanda's funeral, hit a nerve with me. I have heard of this happening, I can see its possibility of reality in my own life, and the lives of others. It's so painful when one's biological family can't accept someone for who they are. I felt a twinge when they said they had put Wanda in a suit and cut "his" hair, and Barbie's comment was how "Wanda was always so proud of her hair". Even the name on the gravestone. It just..hurts, to have one's identity (that one may have worked VERY hard to establish) so thoroughly erased. I worship Barbie for her response at the end, writing Wanda's real name on the headstone. Now, of course, there are at least SOME ways to protect oneself, legally, from SOME of this happening....but the truth of the matter is that one's next of kin has a lot of power, and can get away with a lot once someone is gone. I guess my big question is, why is it so hard to respect someone else's lived experience? Why must we question so much about another person's identity, whether what we are confused by is their preferred gender pronoun or their manner of dress or the job they pursue or their choice of lovers/life partners? Why does it matter SO MUCH to society that we all fit in these neat little molds? (I don't have good answers for these, just things that pop up in my mind while reading)

    Also wow, that was kind of a long post, and over a week late, and I am sorry everybody, but I just wanted to get that out there. This volume means a lot to me, and brought up a lot of personal stuff in ADDITION to just being a fun Oz-like read. (figured you all addressed that aspect already) But it's late, and although I feel like I might be forgetting something, I think I need to be done. And now, back to your regularly scheduled commentary...
  • AK_Becky, Ginger and Daniel are all asking the right questions and bringing up excellent points. It's all the plot twists and character progressions in "The Sandman" that make the make the story so accessible to latch into our real lives. And it's the stories of our real lives (not our arguments) that make this forum rich.

    I never used to give much weight to the stories in Number V but from these discussions, I have changed my mind. This is my 2nd favorite volume. My most favorite is the next, Number VI.

    No one has yet to question me about how can I dare to objectively question reality (via science and engineering) given my past background in psychological past of "accused Acute Schizophrenia" and religion and being aware of spirits and having self studied Tarot (even though I gave that up decades ago). And maybe that is due to Marian's request we be excellent to each other. 

    I wonder about that question myself from time to time. Today when people act all psychologically upset, insurance companies do not cover them going into the hospital for months at a time as they did in the 1980's. In my case I saw shit there (psychiatric hospital) that really scared me to the point of I would behave so I never would go back. Between that and later on in college and trying to pass "weeder" classes of chemistry and physics that required students to perform experiments that collected data and had allowed tolerances for error, I saw what society expects: it wants responsible members to carry on traditions for jobs that require high standards for quality. And before you scoff, think about your expectations when you go to grocery store to buy milk & bread, eggs or bacon, or even a box of cereal. Do you buy items that are out of date? Would you buy an item you know is spoiled, moldy, or toxic? Well defined roles and clear expectations keep society running smoothly.

    My earlier point about gender (which I can see is evolving) is there seems to be 2 distinct issues at stake:
       1) the chromosomes a person is born with (not changeable, yet)
       2) how an individual adopts the gender roles and characteristics that society defines
    and how even if I am clear about this upfront, these are very emotionally charged topics. Why?

    Did anyone ever see the 1970's movie "Little Big Man" with Dustin Hoffman?
    It's this huge saga story about a white man adopted by the Indians. One of the Cheyenne in the story is a "Contrary" for a time.
    Even the Plains Indians allowed for their role rules to be broken. And it strengthened their society.

    I think by each of us examining the differences between our chromosomes and those societal gender expectations, we will have interesting contributions.

    I have personally found that society acts very unkind to women who give up their children. (My mom did that for a time and society was brutal to her when she talked of it. She did better when she never mentioned it.) There are huge societal expectation of a "mother". (And any man who sticks around to fulfill any portion of his role as be a "father" is regarded as a hero.)
    If a woman earns more than her husband, it must be because the man is incompetent. I supported my wife to climb the management ladder because she said that type of success would make her happy. I warned her what she would find. I had turned away from that path earlier in life. She did not understand my words. Now she does.
    The Finance Dept at the Advertising company she works at is fairly greedy in how they project a person's annual billable rate and do not take into account a person's vacation or sick time. So a woman's time for being out of the office for maternity leaves ruins my wife's budget. Her department is 95% women. Which means that those who to pick up the slack are those who are not pregnant. And problems get escalated. Which means there are times my wife has to work late. So I cover the kids at home those nights.
    As opposed to the times when I just go home, eat dinner, wash dishes, help kids with homework, and soon act as a volunteer coach for my one son's farm league baseball teams. (In previous years I was an Assistant Scout Master when my older son was into Boy Scouts. I am kind of glad I am out of there because they had some really stiff ideas of gender. If it wasn't for their possibly losing their tax exemption status, they might still be that way today.)

    As far as I am concerned, society has some really messed ideas about what it considers to be "successful" for men and women. And what society defines to be "male" or "female" is stupid. And you may have to make your own stand to pick and chose what you want and need when you find the mold does not fit. I have.
  • This particular volume tells a story that cuts to the heart of the question of "What does it mean by sexual identity?" And it gives no cut & dry answers. It tells a fictional story reflective of our times. 2 people die in a building collapse. Both are tragic. The story of Maisy's dying and funeral bothers me more than Wanda's dying and funeral. Alvin's family effectively erases his life with his tombstone. Barbie marks it up with lipstick (which is temporary). But what of Maisie other kids and grand kids? What of them? What do they go on to do? Or is their story just fairly "normal", making it unworthy of more ink. And that bugs me.

    In "The Sandman Companion" Mr Gaiman relates how people have told him how they have been to funerals just like Wanda's. And how women have related similar stories of being harassed in comic book stores just as he described. So that these 2 points are brought up here is a good thing.

    I live in northwest NJ. When Sandy blew in we lost electrical power for a week. Our home is far enough in land that flooding was not a problem. Being up on a mountain helps. Some of our neighbors had minor property damage. Trees taking out parts of roofs. Gratefully no one directly around me died. 
    Daniel, I am glad to hear it was only structural damages that took place around you too. 
    Being an NJ transplant for the past 23 did make it so I like one of stories in Vol VI quite a bit. (Always fun when art accidentally lands in your backyard.)

    Ginger, you could have told the woman on that NC beach that "Ginger" is your Christian name because only idiots have not heard of "St Ginger" before. But in your own way, you were kind to her. That was very big and sweet of you to do.
  • AK_Becky - Boxes are a pain, and there are never quite enough to fit all the variation in human existence. *internet hugs* I hope defining and refining your own terms helps communication with your family - and that you've got a good support system beyond blood relations.

    Yes, I definitely felt the echoes of the Maiden-Mother-Crone figures throughout the story line. I hadn't consciously noticed that Thessaly, Foxglove, and Hazel were so frequently drawn bunched up together, but now that you've pointed it out, it definitely highlights the connection. I am pretty positive that Thessaly did need representatives of the other stages of womanhood to walk the moon's road - she's pretty self-motivated, so I doubt she'd have dragged along newcomers if they weren't of immediate use to her. (As an aside, I don't like Thessaly much, but I love her character design: straddling the line between girl-next-door cute and slightly plain, her long hair and giant glasses, but a cut-throat ancient terror underneath. She's the female version of the serial killers: charm on top, danger below.)

    I wonder if Thessaly was distracted by the name "The Cuckoo" as well as by the cuckoos that invaded the waking world, and was therefore inclined to assume the cuckoo must be in the form of a bird itself? So Luz fit her preconceived idea of what her enemy looked like.

    To me, Barbie seemed more adrift for lack of dreaming than for the loss of her perfect life (I might be projecting based on what I'd miss more). I'd loved the first time we saw her dreams, seeing this entire adventure realm living inside her, while beside her Ken dreamed of prosaic worldly success (money, sex, repeat).  Not being able to access that imaginary (or I guess not so imaginary) world must have been such a blow - the loss of a kind of creative meaning that may not have had an outlet elsewhere in her life.  The moment when we see in the mirror that she's doing this bold, bizarre checkerboard on her face, instead of normal make-up struck me with this kind of gleeful shock. Like, ok, yes, there's really nothing that says a person can't just paint pictures on their face because they feel like it today. (Tricky to pull off at most work places, but wouldn't you love to hear that conversation?) Today, Barbie is putting on a gameboard. Tomorrow, I imagined, it will be something different, until she figures out who she wants people to see when they look at her.

    Wanda's funeral was heartbreaking. On one hand, I know funerals are really for those left behind - but by burying 'Alvin' in a suit and fresh haircut, they're mourning a person who never really existed. Wanda was a person; Alvin an idea they couldn't let go.

    Oddly, I was satisfied by the end of The Cuckoo's storyline. Despite her attacks on Barbie and the neighbors, she didn't succeed in directly harming many. (And maybe I'm wrong in not taking the dreaming world deaths quite so much to heart, but Abel is... okayish, for getting murdered all the time.) Most of the deaths - certain the most tramatic, Tenbones, Maisy, and Wanda - seem to result from others' reactions to The Cuckoo, rather than The Cuckoo itself. Maybe she should have been held to account - but what would she have learned from it? What wouldn't she do again to fly free?  Also, she really reminded me of a young kid she looks like; the empathy - and sense of consequence - is not fully formed yet.

    reo_1963 - The lack of information on Maisy and her family is sad. Some stories don't get told. Some get told, but ignored. Some get told, but only to limited audience. Maisy's story is sketched in a few quick lines: a lost child, a fear of dogs. It reminds me of the hints dropped in the second volume of a second version of Nada's story (But then, that is a women's tale, and it is never told to men.) In Maisy's case, we aren't given any assurance that the full story ever gets out. Does her family miss her, do they find out what happened - even in the least metaphysical sense? The lack of answers stands out especially because she is poor, homeless, and black - characteristics that are often relegated to the background characters in comics and fantasy books and rarely given to central characters. But then, these stories keep cycling around and picking up storylines for characters that I'd assumed had been dropped, so maybe there are some answers further along.

    Ha, I've had SO MUCH ESPRIT DE L'ESCALIER about this one encounter, it's seriously ridiculous. "What tiny-me should have said is __" Your response could have worked if I'd had any idea that saints (and their name days) were a thing. I'm not entirely sure that I even knew that Ginger is usually short for Virginia at that time. (I was actually named out of the OED. Yes, my entire family are nerds/geeks of some kind.)  So thanks for the positive spin, but I really wasn't being kind - I was freaked out by the nice old lady who had reminded me of Grandma suddenly being scary!
  • Ginger - thank you so much! As a child, the gender boxes caused a lot of strife with my mother especially (it seemed everything I did was "unladylike"), both with my just being a tomboy and also with the societal expectations as I grew up. But hilariously, as an adult, my issues with some family members have much more to do with me not going to church anymore and coming out to my parents as bi. (In theory, they could be upset about a whole lot more in my life, but I don't keep them informed since they didn't take the first news so well). I don't have it nearly so bad as some - I mean, my family does still speak to me, and there are a few supportive people (my sister, my weird aunt that is strikingly like Wanda's aunt) - but I'm also incredibly lucky to have a great support network of friends that I built up starting in college, and stay in contact with to this day. I've got a great community to be a part of where I live as well. Some of these storylines actually upset me the most because I have some close friends that HAVE gone through similar circumstances, and had it way worse than I did, and I have seen firsthand the aftermath of trying to overcome a family that rejects you. 

    Also, your commentary about Thessaly had me laughing, because I was thinking the same thing. I kind of love her character - the way she is drawn, the hidden knowledge and power behind such an unassuming face - but I can't STAND her as a person. As a pagan myself, it kind of pains me to think of someone being so arrogant as to stampede around and muck up the natural order of things so badly, all for some petty revenge. But having her in the story adds so much to it, I don't think it would have been NEARLY so interesting without her. ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.