Comments on: stupidity: some thoughts on the characters in HBO’s “True Blood”

By: brian

brian — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:56:05 +0000

Yeah, that’s pretty much exactly what I’ve read. Heavy handed, and trying to make parallels that don’t really apply (in a positive way).
I only said “thinly veiled” because it’s hard to believe Alan Ball is so oblivious that he’s doing more harm than good with his metaphors that I couldn’t believe he’s doing it on purpose.

By: onefinemess

onefinemess — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:11:58 +0000

It’s not veiled in the least. It was the intention of the book’s writer and, I’m sure, the intention of Alan Ball (the creator of the TV version, who is gay – same guy who did 6 Feet Under).

However, as I mentioned to Jen in a conversation the other night, I think the metaphor is piss-poor because:

Gay people, by nature, DO NOT FUCKING KILL PEOPLE.

I’m still scratching my head trying to find the parallels between:

a group of people that may or may not be born different, but are, as a group, ultimately harmless

and

a group of post-people that, my or may not be “reborn” evil, but are, as a group, killers and eaters of humans.

Sure, religious people hate em both – but they hate a shit-ton of other things too.

Anyway. The whole killer thing ruins the metaphor for me and makes me wonder why a gay dude would think it was such a good idea.

IF the books mythology was set up differently, such that a majority of vampires were actually swell beings, and fed off animals or some junk, and it was only the rogues that went around killing people then, well, then you might have a much better thing going.

By: brian

brian — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:45:13 +0000

I’ve heard that this show is a thinly-veiled and overly stereotypical metaphor for the struggles minorities (specifically gays) face in society. Did you get that impression?
I can’t bring myself to watch anything with FAKE ROGUE in it anyway.