The Freedom of a Joke

I find it mind boggling that you can feasibly be arrested these days for simply having a different opinion of something than the guy standing next to you. This concerns the recent spate of arrests of people posting things on social media sites such as Twitter or Facebook, and in the process offending someone. Let me give you a few examples…

A guy called Matthew Wood, aged 20, from Lancashire, made a joke about missing girl April Jones in October of last year. This action led to his arrest, apparently because the communication was ‘grossly offensive’. The BBC reported on this, but failed to include the joke which apparently caused so much offense.

Next up is Olympic swimmer Tom Daley who, after coming fourth in the platform event, received various abusive tweets from an unnamed 17 year old who was then promptly arrested. He mentioned Daley’s dad, who had died the previous year from cancer, and generally said he’d let everyone down. The BBC once again failed to include the tweets, but reported anyway.

The final one I’m going to include is courtesy of the Guardian –  a twitter joke from China, a country famous for allowing its citizens freedom of speech. A blogger posted a joke on twitter about the Communist leadership congress and immediately got arrested. Chinese citizens have rallied round him, but I doubt it’s going to do much good.

Okay, so from these three examples we basically have two jokes and someone being mean to someone else. Oh the horror. The last one I’m going to discount because it’s China and what did the blogger really expect. Concerning the other two, I’m just going to give you my thoughts. There may even be some jokes in there – if you believe these may offend you, I couldn’t really care less.

So, this joke about the missing kid. Yes it was insensitive, yes it was in bad taste, but in no way was it illegal. Even the insinuation that making a joke could be illegal is mind-boggling – have our police forces got nothing better to do then track down social media jokes just in case they offend someone? I remember the slew of jokes that appeared when the Madeline McCann story hit the headlines, and I have to say some of them I laughed at. Yes, I’m an inherently bad person for laughing and all that jazz, but you can’t arrest me for my sense of humour. It brings into question the whole concept of ‘free speech’ – you can have as much free speech as you want as long as you don’t infringe on anyone else’s right to not be offended. Any joke you make could offend someone.

“What’s brown and sticky? A stick.” This joke offends me greatly, it’s not clever or a bit dodgy or even toilet humour. It’s just a bit of a naff joke. But then again not quite naff enough to be hilarious. Are you going to go and arrest anyone who retells this joke because it offends me? Of course not. There is a fantastic sketch by comedian Steve Hughes, where he talks about people being offended by things, and he sums up my feelings pretty damn well. Check it out.

Okay, so it’s the subject matter that is questionable in this case. This poor 5 year old was missing (presumed dead by the time the joke was posted I believe) and someone decided to use this very sad event for a bit of light relief. There was a comedian (who I unfortunately can’t recall the name of at present) who said that his favourite type of joke is one that makes the audience laugh but then a few seconds later either wince or groan. You feel bad for laughing, but you know it’s still funny. This is true of a lot of comedians: Frankie Boyle, Jimmy Carr and Daniel Tosh to name just a few. Now I’m not arguing that the joke was in bad taste, just like some of the jokes performed by the example comedians, but I will wholeheartedly argue that the guy who posted it should not have been arrested, nor should the story really have made the news.

Moving on to the second example. Poor little Tom Daley got bullied over Twitter after coming fourth in the diving. Let me point out early on that the comments made to Daley weren’t racist, sexist, homophobic or anything else that could be construed as hate language. The tweeter was just a bit mean to him, and yet there was a pubic outcry and the lad ended up getting arrested.

Going back to the Steve Hughes video above: “When did ‘stick and stones may break my bones’ stop being relevant?” People are mean to each other every single day, I encounter at least three people every morning being dicks on my commute to work. I somehow manage to get over it. How pathetic exactly have we become as a society when we believe that we are that entitled that no one should be mean to us? Even if you’re against being cruel to another person, you can’t possibly agree with this lad being arrested for it. The mind boggles.

So… this post doesn’t really have a point. Just, the next time you’re about to complain about something offending you or someone is being mean, take a minute to ask if it’s worth it.

“Few people can see genius in someone who has offended them.”

~ Robertson Davies

Story of O

With the popularity of the ever-so-hated Fifty Shades trilogy has come a barrage of recommendations for novels that better represent sadomasochism, or at least present it without a lot of euphemisms and eyebrow raising. One such recommendation was the erotic novel Story of O, written by Anne Desclos under the pen name Pauline Reage, first published in 1954 and suffering from a publicity ban for many years after. 

We meet O (we never find out her real/full name) just as she is being taken into a place called Roissy, where she will receive her training as a female submissive to her lover Rene. During this section she is whipped, flogged, sexually abused in every way you can think of, and must dress and act a certain way at all times or risk being punished. She is also the property of Rene and therefore the property of any other male at Roissy. When they leave Roissy and return to their normal working lives, O maintains her role as a slave when around Rene and at his command begins to share herself with his good friend Sir Stephen. She also becomes involved with one of her models, Jacqueline, who does not understand the scars and obedience displayed by O, but agrees to move in with her and becomes her lover. Sir Stephen then takes O to Samois, a mansion specifically for training and body modification relating to submission, and agrees to be branded with Sir Stephen’s initials and have her labia pierced with heavy rings linked to a disk engraved with Sir Stephen’s name. At the close of the novel, O is taken to a party wearing nothing but an owl mask and is treated completely as an object, with Jacqueline having freaked out and left her, O is accompanied by Jacqueline’s younger sister who leads her round by a chain.

As you can tell, pretty intense, and nothing like the quaint little love story shown in Fifty Shades. The main difference is that the relationship between O and Rene isn’t really explored, in fact it’s barely touched upon at all, apart from when they occasionally declare their love for each other. The focus here is on O, her role as a slave and her mindset as a submissive. I feel the need to point out here that she isn’t a masochist – she feels the pain and hates it – but is rather a submissive, so she will accept the pain as part of serving her master(s).

As a work of literature it isn’t particularly amazing, the prose are sometimes clunky and some of the phrases she uses to describe sexual acts are so confusing you have no idea what is going on. I do worry that it is classed as ‘erotic literature’ because it’s about as erotic as having lemon juice squeezed into your eyeball, but different strokes for different folks I suppose. Don’t get me wrong, I actually enjoyed the book, but not for the slave/master elements, but for the way it explored O’s own feelings and emotions when faced with this world. A lot of the reviews I have read are outraged at how terrible it all is, how could they treat this poor woman like this, she doesn’t consent that means it’s all rape, blah blah blah. These people clearly know little about how this particular relationship is working. It is clearly stated that O is at any  time free and able to leave Rene or Sir Stephen at any time, but if she consents to being with them then she cannot refuse to do anything they want her to do. There is a fine line I will admit, but the consent is still there and she still holds the power over the situation. Yes it isn’t the basis of a healthy relationship, but it can be the basis of a happy one.

There are points where O does not want to do something, or fears doing something, but once she thinks about it she realises that that is what she actually wants. She becomes proud of her slave status, proud of the initials branded into her skin, proud of the scars from the whip. You can argue that she is brainwashed, but she demonstrates enough self awareness in other sections that I believe she is truly happy in this role, and the feelings that develop between her and Sir Stephen are real. The plot gets even more interesting when you learn about O’s promiscuous history before she met Rene, revealing even more about this woman who seems to have no real sense of self.

Her relationship with Jacqueline is an odd one, but the introduction of Jacqueline’s little sister is even weirder. Natalie is just fifteen when she comes to stay with O and she immediately becomes enthralled, wanting to be a slave just like O is. When Jacqueline leaves (scared off by the promise of Roissy), Natalie stays and is taken in her sister’s place, with the insinuation being that she will be introduced to a slave lifestyle whilst there. The story ends at this point so we do not learn Natalie’s fate, but O is happy and content to simply be treated like an object.

Some have also tried to argue that Story of O is what people should be reading if that want a book about BDSM. Hell no. This book gives out a worse view of BDSM simply because the consent issue is dealt with so quickly (literally a few sentences) that it is very easy to miss and this gives the whole book a nasty after taste. It’s also a lot more hardcore than anything explored in Fifty Shades, and I’m talking body modification, scarification, branding, everything else you can think of. If you aren’t familiar with this type of lifestyle, this novel will not settle well. 

If you’re interested I would definitely recommend checking it out, because it is completely different from anything I have read before. But if anything mentioned in this blog post has you even slightly horrified, avoid this book because you won’t enjoy it and you’ll just get annoyed at how seemingly pathetic O is in regards to her treatment.

Fifty Shades Darker

So I have finally managed to battle my way through the second novel in the Fifty Shades trilogy, Fifty Shades Darker just so that you, dear reader, don’t have to. And when I say battled through, I mean it. This was amongst the most painful reading experiences I have ever had the misfortune of conducting, even surpassing its own brother Fifty Shades of Grey for tedious stupidity in literary form. The thing that makes it even worse than the first is that the comedy value is gone, E.L. James is trying to make it a more serious romance novel but only succeeds in creating a stodgy pile of mushy teenage angst that is truly painful to get through.

We begin where the last novel finished, Ana has run out on Christian after he, at her request, beat her with a belt and she freaked out. It’s been five or so days and Ana is a complete mess, she hasn’t eaten in days, she doesn’t really sleep, she just sort of mopes around and cries a lot. This seems like a pretty ridiculous reaction for someone who at this point had been going out with Christian for less than a week, especially when she is meant to be scared shitless by him and his ‘fucked-up’ lifestyle. Circumstance leads to Christian getting in touch and they go to some event or other, of course expressing their deep love for one another and immediately falling into bed again. They then go through the novel falling out and immediately making up again (of course accompanied by tons of make up sex), whilst everyone else is either hugely jealous of Ana, wanting to rape Ana or simply trying to kill them both. Christian has decided at this point that actually he doesn’t need to be in a dominant/submissive relationship, and having a ‘normal’ vanilla relationship will do just fine thank you very much, persuading Ana to move in with him. They end the novel announcing their engagement and buying a house, whilst Ana’s jilted ex-boss plots to kill them both.

I’ll get the most annoying thing about this whole shibang out of the way now. Ana has known Christian a grand total of about three weeks at this point, and for five of those days she had run away, and she decides that moving in with him and getting married is definitely the best decision she can make. This man who scares her, has dominated her when she didn’t particularly want it, stalks her to a ridiculous level, has crazy ex-partners who try to kill her, keeps loads from her and is ‘fucked up on so many levels’ is probably not the best choice for a future husband. Whatever happened to knowing someone longer than three weeks before deciding to get hitched? She says she has ‘nothing left to break’ and that nothing can fill the ‘void’ in her soul, after having known Grey for about two weeks. Grow a backbone, stop being so pathetic and eat something before you die from malnourishment. At one point she even describes it as ‘being in purgatory’ – does James even know what purgatory means? Here’s the wiki definition: Purgatoryis the condition of purification or temporary punishment by which those who die in a state of grace are believed to be made ready for Heaven. Ana, you’re not in purgatory, you’re just being melodramatic.

To accompany the terrible plot line, the writing is just as poor as previous, with James wheeling out her favourite old sayings and euphemisms which manage to be excruciatingly annoying whilst also conveying absolutely no helpful information whatsoever. This isn’t helped by the awful email format that is used constantly throughout the book, it’s jarring and tedious. The lexical statistics proved my point so well in my last review that I’ve decided to rely on them once again:

Crap/Holy Crap/Double Crap – 34 times

Holy Shit/Holy Fuck/Holy Cow/Holy Hell/Holy Motherfuck – 121 times (once every three pages)

Shit – 137 times (once every three pages)

Oh my – 47 times

Ana’s schizophrenia is still rampant, with her inner goddess back-flipping all over the shop and reclining on a chaise longue, while her subconscious throws bottles of gin around and continuously glares or snarls at everyone. It is really bizarre because it is like Ana is three different people – one who constantly wants sex (goddess), one who thinks Ana is a moron (subconscious) and one who has no idea what she’s doing because she’s too busy watching her inner goddess ice skate around the room (Ana herself). The majority of the time I find myself, unsurprisingly, agreeing with the subconscious and wanting to beat the inner goddess around the face with her own smugness. The voices in Ana’s head get mentioned a grand total of 119 times, that’s once every three pages. Seriously, not enough happens in the novel to warrant an argument between your three different psyches every three damn pages. Ana has also picked up the nasty habit of bombarding us with rhetorical questions that we can’t possibly know the answers to.

It appears that she also hasn’t learnt to not gnaw on her own face yet, with her biting her lip and Christian getting all ‘stormy eyed’. I get that it’s meant to be her little ‘quirk’ that turns him on, but considering he’s turned on if she breathes a bit too loudly, we don’t need to hear about it. Apparently neither of them have had their asthma checked out either – once every seven pages we have someone gasping for breath usually accompanied by lots of ‘oh my-ing’ and commenting on Grey’s Herculean body. The descriptions of his body are also hilarious, this guy doesn’t have time to run a million companies considering he must work out constantly as well getting tanned, waxed, bleached and everything else just to make sure he is drop dead gorgeous. 

My last comment on the actual writing itself will seem like an odd one, but just go with it. You can see from above how many times James uses ‘Holy Fuck’ and variations of it, if you then add to that all the usual swearing, comments on how people are sporting a ‘just-fucked’ look (whatever that is supposed to mean), then you have a novel chock-full of swearing. Considering how much I swear in my usual life, it’s not the swearing that annoys me, it’s the fact that it’s crowbarred into every single line in the middle of situations that warrant no swearing whatsoever. A fantastic example of this is when Ana is making an omelette in Grey’s kitchen and nearly wets herself with excitement when she finds some peas in the freezer. Peas!

In this novel we’re introduced to someone new, Ana’s boss Mr Jack Hyde. Oh I wonder if he’s a baddy? Even though he seems really nice when we meet him, is it possible he has a darker side that Ana manages to bring out? There’s this great literary technique called foreshadowing, and when pulled off subtly it can add so much to a novel. James takes the concept of foreshadowing and beats you around the head with it repeatedly. He quickly gets onto the task of getting into Ana’s knickers but this just results in Grey firing him (oh yeh, I forgot to mention that Grey buys the publishing company than Ana works for. Because that’s not, you know, as stalkerish as fuck). Ana goes in the following day to find that she, an intern who has been there about four days, now has Jack’s job and has to do all this mega important stuff. Jack then tries to kill Grey and is unfortunately unsuccessful, leading to lots of hugely nauseating scenes between the two when they’re reunited.

Shit characters and writing aside, let’s meander into the realm of the sex. And oh boy is there a lot of sex. Bad, poorly written, excruciating sex. We still have lots of ‘down there’ and ‘my sex’ going on with Ana and Grey both orgasming at the drop of a hat every two pages. The descriptions are so frequent and repetitive that become really boring; he takes off her clothes, she gasps, he puts his fingers… blahblah… biting lip… blahblah… comes apart at the seams… blah. Seriously. We also discover that Ana is up for giving the sadism another go, making Grey take her to his playroom, but given how she reacted to it the last time it seems ridiculous that she would even contemplate going back in there.

We also meet the elusive Mrs Robinson – the woman who introduced Christian to the world of BDSM at the age of fifteen. She is the most pointless character in the entire novel even though she’s meant to have this humongous bearing on the entire narrative, but she just wanders around in the background before getting hugely jealous of Ana and having a drink thrown over her. James tries to demonise her, with Ana’s ‘paedo sense’ tingling and numerous references to how fucked up the whole thing is, but you find yourself just not caring. If Christian cared more than perhaps the reader would take more interest, but as he doesn’t appear to give a crap, why should we.

The main plot point of the novel is supposed to be when an ex-sub of Christian’s called Leila tracks Ana down, leading Christian to get far too protective and douchey. We then discover Leila has a gun, a key to the balcony of Christian’s room and an unhealthy obsession with Ana, who she watches sleep. After Ana goes back to her apartment to find Leila waiting for her, Christian dismisses Ana and takes care of Leila, wondering why Ana gets all weird and a bit jealous. Ignoring the fact that she is a mentally unhinged submissive who is quite clearly besotted with Christian, Mr Grey still decides that the best course of action is for him to give Leila a bath and send her packing to a hospital. Show me any woman who doesn’t mind her boyfriend bathing another woman, especially an ex who has just threatened you with a gun. Every character is a complete moron and it’s amazing any of them manage to function during the course of an average day.

There is once again an explicit link made between being ‘fucked up’ and wanting to participate in BDSM. In the prologue the line “You are one fucked-up bitch” is repeated six times, a prologue which runs for less than one page. We are of course getting a glimpse into Christian’s childhood with his crack whore mother getting beaten up by her pimp, which of course explains everything about why Grey is so messed up and why Ana has to try especially hard to change him. It’s complete bollocks – it’s meant to reflect Grey’s tortured soul and get us to feel sorry for him, but the only emotion it evoked from me was annoyance.

Again, the links between BDSM and generally being a heartless monster are rampant. Ana contemplates getting back with Grey right at the beginning of the novel, but decides that “I cannot be with someone who takes pleasure in inflicting pain on me, someone who can’t love me.” How do those two things correlate even slightly? He enjoys inflicting pain not because it hurts her but because that’s just a fetish that he has, and it certainly doesn’t mean that he doesn’t love her. James really needs to learn about the psychology behind a happy, healthy and consensual BDSM relationship before writing the sort of nonsense that touts the same rubbish that has hounded the BDSM communities for many years. Not everyone who practices is mental, deranged or crazy, many are completely normal people in fantastic relationships that fulfil want they want.

There’s too much in this novel that infuriates me, and the fact that the comedy is seriously lacking just makes it a whole lot worse. It’s stupid, moronic, embarrassing and an absolute slog to get through. I still can’t decide whether or not I’m going to bother reading the third now that the entertainment value has gone, my life is too short for this shit. I just don’t care, about the characters, the story, any of it. I am really failing to understand all of the excitement surrounding it, I even watched the documentary on 4od about it and most of the people on it also didn’t get it. What is the world coming to?!

Fifty Shades of Grey

Or Fifty Shades of What The Fuck Did I Just Read?

I won’t hate on a book until I’ve read, and people who do this annoy me intensely, so I procured a copy of E.L. James’ Fifty Shades of Grey and settled in for what I knew would be a hilariously torturous ride. Before reading it myself I had already read numerous reviews, both positive and negative, read the comments from the BDSM communities condemning it, heard the simpering teenage girls and middle-aged women getting excited over this unknown world.

I will warn you now, before I delve further into my review, there will be a lot of swearing, discussion of graphic sex scenes, explanations about BDSM, spoilers and a whole heap of me on my literary high horse. If any of this, especially the last point, will get you riled please navigate away.

Now… where to start…

At the beginning I suppose, so here’s a quick overview of the plot for those of you thankfully unaware of this book:

Fifty Shades of Grey follows Anastasia Steele, a 22 year old college senior who lives with her best friend Katherine. Due to illness Katherine persuades Ana to take her place for an interview with Christian Grey, an incredibly successful and wealthy young entrepreneur. Grey arranges for a photo shoot to accompany the interview, to take place at a hotel the following day, taking Ana out afterwards. This leads to various events, culminating in Ana waking up in Grey’s hotel room after a night of drinking.

Ana later goes on a date with Grey where he takes her to his apartment and insists that she sign a non-disclosure agreement forbidding her to discuss anything that they do together, which Ana agrees to sign. He also mentions other paperwork, but first takes her to a room full of BDSM toys and gear. There Grey informs her that the second contract will be one of Dominance and submission and that there will be no romantic relationship, only a sexual one.

They slowly begin to explore this relationship, even though Ana has not yet signed the contract. The BDSM aspects come to a head between Ana and Grey after Ana asks him to punish her in order to show her how extreme a BDSM relationship with him could be. Grey fulfils Ana’s request, beating her with a belt, only for Ana to realize that the two of them are incompatible as they currently stand. Devastated, Ana leaves Grey and returns to the apartment she shares with Katherine.

So there we are – from the plot it doesn’t actually look that bad. Not everyone’s cup of tea, certainly not mine, but still passable in a Mills & Boon type way. Then I learnt that this story began its life as Twilight fanfiction, released under the name Master of the Universe and the author has basically just changed Edward/Bella for Christian/Ana. Here’s a comparison someone has put up on the ‘net for those interested in exactly how little has changed in this story. Now fanfiction is absolutely fine, as long as you don’t pretend that it is an original piece of work and start making money off it – lazy E.L. James! It doesn’t help that it still reads like a fanfic – the amount of mistakes in this book are ridiculous, does this woman have an editor and did they bother to proof read before printing? There’s misspellings, changes in tense, at one point she describes Travis as “José’s friend and gopher”… I’ve put a picture of a gopher up on the left – look at that cute little furry face! I think you mean ‘go-fer’, as in someone who you send on errands. Good lord.

It doesn’t help that James’ vocabulary appears to be limited to six or so phrases/actions, so you have characters that do exactly the same thing all the freaking time. Seriously, if I have to read the phrase ‘oh my!” “Holy shit!” or be told what her ‘inner goddess’ is doing one more time I’m going to start breaking things.

Oh my – 77 times (once every three pages)

Holy shit/Holy fuck/Holy crap/Holy Mosses/Holy Hell/Holy Cow – 160 times (Every one and a bit pages)

Whisper – 198 times (More or less every page)

Crap – 95 times (Once every other page)

Inner goddess – 59 times

Biting things – 43 times. Once every 5 pages. Usually her own face.

This book only has 236 pages anyway, and Ana spends most of it either whispering, swearing or biting herself. And while we’re on the subject – what in all that’s holy is an ‘inner goddess’? Especially an inner goddess that appears to be as active as Ana’s, which at various points:

• sways in a gentle victorious samba
• sits in the lotus position looking serene
• does the merengue with some salsa moves
• is jumping up and down, clapping her hands like a five year old

it appears to be linked with her wanting sex, but when linked to a five year old jumping up and down whilst clapping, I’m not so sure.

This isn’t aided by the fact that I believe Anastasia may be slightly schizophrenic, she keeps up a constant commentary on what her ‘inner goddess’ and ‘subconscious’ are doing like they are two different people, they also talk to her, argue between themselves and tell her to do things. James also apparently doesn’t understand the concept of a subconscious, it is meant to consist of ‘contents which have at one time been conscious but have disappeared from consciousness through having been forgotten or repressed’, unlike Ana’s which pipes up at random times to call her a hoe and hide behind sofas.

The apparent stupidity of the girl isn’t helped by her complete and utter naivety when it comes to absolutely everything. She’s 21/22 and has lived away from her parents for four years whilst doing her degree. In this time she has never got drunk or been kissed/had sex or even masturbated. I might just be able to believe this, perhaps her parents are quite strict religious people (or not as the case may be, they seem very relaxed when we get to meet them). But the idea of a student not owning a laptop, having an email address or reading contracts before signing them is absolutely ridiculous – they are all absolutely necessary for a student to survive, and if she can afford to run a car she can afford a bloody laptop. The Mary-Sue nature of this girl beggars belief, she’s a naïve virgin, everyone is in love with her, she astoundingly beautiful yet can’t see it herself, is clumsy when it’s needed to further the plot, reads British Classic Literature (a characteristic which is rammed down your throat at every possible opportunity) and can suddenly become this witty/sarcastic sex goddess at the drop of a hat. I think my inner goddess just threw up a little. Speaking of British Classical Literature – there are constant references to Tess of the d’Urbervilles, suggesting that James has absolutely no idea what this story is about, it’s not exactly a love story that you would want to liken your own life to, not to mention the fact that Tess gets executed at the end.

So let us now move onto the Adonis wonder that is Mr Grey. I have to say that this guy actually isn’t that bad overall – apart from the mood swings. A lot of reviewers think he is a grade A douchenozzle, but I can forgive the way he treats women, how ‘fucked-up’ he is, how every single fucking thing about him is perfect, because this is fanfiction and you simply must have a main male character who is perfect but tragically flawed. Yes he has stalkerish tendencies, yes he throws money around like there’s no tomorrow, yes he likes to beat his women, but if the female he is focusing all this towards doesn’t want it, she should walk away. He isn’t scary, he isn’t controlling, he isn’t fucked up. He likes his relationships to be conducted in a certain way (master/sub) and if the female isn’t into it then the relationship changes – either by it ending completely or the BDSM aspects being toned down. The only time to hate on the Grey is when he says lines such as “Ready for some contraception?” or “I declare this Ana open!” Wow, those are the least sexy lines you could possibly say to a woman – she’s not a shopping mall opening day. Or even better “Quite frankly it makes me MAD, and you really wouldn’t like me when I’m angry”, a line more typically heard from Bruce Banner right before he turns into a big green guy with anger issues.

Here are some more choice exchanges between our two love birds:

Ana – “How would you like your eggs?”

Grey – “Thoroughly whisked and beaten”

I’ve got to be honest, this reminds me of a celibacy talk that some of my generation received at school. How do you like your eggs in the morning? UNFERTILISED! Something that Grey is very concerned about as he forces Ana onto contraception.

Ana – “You hang up”

Grey – “No, you hang up.”

Ana – “I don’t want to.”

Grey – “Neither do I.”

Oh by the Hammer of Thor, will this never end? Also, be quiet with all the ‘fifty shades of fucked up’ and ‘seven shades of scarlet’. You’re not a dulex colour chart and these sorts of stupid descriptions add nothing whatsoever to the book.

I’m also coming to the conclusion that at least one if not both of them are asthmatic, considering they seem to do a lot of ‘audible gasping’ at each other. Back to the stats for a moment – 48 instances of gasping, 17 of deep inhaling. He touches her and she audibly gasps and convulses… that isn’t being turned on, that’s a stroke. I know this is meant to be ‘erotica’ and thus a lot of gasping will be involved, but pick up a thesaurus James, please.

This brings me quite succinctly onto my next point… the sex. And oh what a lot of sex there is. Graphic, gaspy, excruciating and sometimes just down right nasty, sex. The first time they get at it is because Christian finds out Ana is a virgin and he must ‘handle that situation’ before they go any further. Since when is your virginnity a ‘situation’ that needs handling? That matter aside, the first few sex scenes would be bearable if they weren’t full of Ana’s euphemisms for what Christian is doing. ‘He touches me… there‘ There? What your fucking belly button? Dear lord girl if you can say ‘clitoris’ every two lines you can name the rest of yourself as well. And ‘cupped me intimately’ is the most excruciating phrase to describe sex, ever. The sex scenes don’t get much better after you’ve gotten over Ana’s bizarre commentary. In between Grey telling her “you expand too!” (guys: don’t talk about the vagina like it’s a balloon, women don’t like that) and Ana’s descriptions of her orgasms, “I splinter in a million pieces”, “my body convulsing and shattering into a thousand pieces”, “coming apart at the seams like the spin cycle on a washing machine” (note: if your washing machine is coming apart at the seams, get it repaired) there really isn’t any room for any sort of erotica or sexiness. Add to this the unlikeness of it all, and you’ve got a completely unbelievable series of events. Example: she is completely naïve yet gives an amazing deep throating blow job the first time, she feels ‘deliciously sore’ after having her virginnity jackhammered out of her and doesn’t seem in the slightest bit embarrassed the first time she has sex. Oh, and she orgasms all the fucking time. Throughout the book she orgasms 18 times – this is a virgin with no previous. A lot of women find it difficult to orgasm after twenty years of having sex, but not Ana. Grey is just as bad, on average needing about a minute of down time before he’s ready to roll again, producing condoms out of his pockets like a vending machine. The physical descriptions aren’t much better – James constantly refers to Ana’s nipples as ‘elongating’…. Nipples don’t elongate, they harden! There are other bits and pieces, some hilarious, some horrendous (the tampon scene, you know what I’m talking about!) but I want to more on to my next pressing subject.

…The BDSM

Now BDSM in books doesn’t bother me in the slightest and if you know me personally you’ll know why, so it’s not the inclusion that annoyed me, it was the execution. The contract itself is pretty standard if somewhat poorly laid out and worded, though one point in particular stood out for me. Grey strictly says no needle, knife or electro play because it could cause permanent scars or blood etc. and yet wants to do a bit of anal fisting – on what scale is this man working? Take needle, knife and electro play over anal fisting any time, it’ll cause you far less internal and external damage (unless they stab you with the knife of course). It just seemed like a bizarre line to draw.

Then there’s the fact that she doesn’t actually sign the contract, the one that is meant to protect them both from harm. Add onto that her complete unwillingness to use her safewords when she really should and you’ve got a recipe for an extremely unhealthy and really quite dangerous BDSM relationship. Even Grey doesn’t seem to know what he’s doing safety-wise – one of the first times he ties her up he then buggers off into the kitchen for a bit and has a conversation with housemate Kate. Rule one of bondage, never ever leave a tied up person on their own, especially if it is one of the first times you do it and considering how fragile Ana’s emotional state appears to be, it just isn’t a good idea.

Ultimately, it is how James presents BDSM that really annoys me, and what outraged the BDSM communities so much. The fact that Grey is constantly viewed, by himself and those around him, as ‘damaged’ and ‘fucked-up’ really doesn’t help the case – his fetishes are explicitly linked to what happened to him as a child, his crack whore mother etc etc. implying that all those who participate in BDSM are fundamentally (and dangerously) fucked up in some way. Ana has the line “Any sane person wouldn’t want to be involved in this sort of thing surely?” and she wonders if what Christian does is legal, throughout the book the BDSM scene is portrayed in a none too positive light, filled with fucked up people who want to do illegal things to each other. There is also a big deal about Christian’s first relationship, a D/S relationship with an older woman when he was fifteen, an age that Ana finds completely abhorrent. Is fifteen really that young – here in the UK you can have sex at sixteen, hell in the Vatican City the age of consent is twelve. What I don’t get the most however, is the fact that Ana isn’t submissive in any way, nor is she a masochist, the two things that Grey wants from his women. If you don’t want that sort of lifestyle then there’s no way throwing yourself into it to the extent that Ana did is going to help – no wonder she runs off at the end of the novel.

In the end, I believe James’ own inexperience when it comes to the world of BDSM shines through on every page. It’s like she loaded up Wikipedia, read the first few lines on BDSM and just thought “yeh, that’d be fun to include!” without actually reading up on any of it. I honestly don’t understand all the women that are getting so wet over Christian Grey and his lifestyle – it’s not safe and it doesn’t sound hugely pleasant, regardless of the BDSM aspect.

Overall?

It’s badly written, and I think that is my main problem. The plot line could be passable if it wasn’t for the absolutely shocking way in which it’s presented. I would actually recommend going out and reading this book (or getting a PDF version for free) because it is so damn hilarious – I haven’t laughed so hard in ages, the characters are absolutely terrible, the sex is excruciating and the BDSM is hilarious.

I have got the second, and will begin it once I’ve finished laughing at the first one.

Movie Challenge Days 5 – 8

Day 5 – A Film That Reminds You of Someone

One of the few films that reminds me of someone is the Evil Dead series, starring B-movie legend Bruce Campbell as protagonist Ash who must fight deadites, travel through time and defeat the skeletal army on the other side. I first watched these films a few years ago and is one of my first memories of hanging out with the person who is now my other half. Our love of B-movies has grown over the years, as has our love for Bruce Campbell (that chin! *swoon*), and I now have a reasonable collection of Campbell films and novels. Whenever we watch one of his films, or quote one of his characters, or try to coerce a sceptical friend into watching them with us, I remember that first night watching them (and being confused as to why the recap at the beginning of the second film has little to do with the first film…).

It’s funny, gory and cheesy, with some fantastic lines, hilariously bad costumes and one or two scenes that are truly bizarre. If you enjoy the films I highly suggest doing some research on the production (Campbell’s autobiography If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B-movie Actor goes into quite a lot of detail concerning their struggles for funding etc), discovering how difficult it was for both actors and directors makes them even more interesting to watch. I think Evil Dead will remain one of my favourite films for many many years, and will always remind me of the first time I watched them.

Day 6 – A Film That Reminds You of Somewhere

Difficult one… The movie  Secretary will always remind me of the house and housemates that I’ve just left, mainly because that is where I first watched it. I’ve reviewed it on this blog before, and it concerns a woman (Maggie Gyllenhaal) who has just been released from a mental hospital for problems that manifest in self harm. She goes to work for a lawyer as his secretary and they develop a non-sexual BDSM relationship, which eventually after many twists and turns becomes a properly defined one. It’s an interesting enough film though not for the faint of heart, there’s self harm, various BDSM acts, a few bits of sex/nudity, an alcoholic father, the list goes on. The most interesting thing for me was that it was the first depiction of BDSM that showed how much control the sub has within the relationship, with the dominant actually holding very little. The ending irked me, it was a little too neat, and the idea that she would be in a fit state for anything after sitting in a chair continuously for three days is ridiculous. My housemate’s worry/bemusement at what exactly I was watching kept me entertained for days, though could be also be said for quite a few of the films I own.

Overall, films don’t tend to remind me of places, more of people, so there’s not much more I can offer for this one!

Day 7 – A Film That Reminds You of Your Past

Easy one! Kidulthood, because I grew up in the ghetto and am well whack, yo.

But seriously, there really isn’t one. I remember watching some Disney movies as a child (Aladdin was my first cinema experience), and I recall watching Hollow Man starring Kevin Bacon at quite a young age and not being able to sleep afterwards.

Day 8 – The Film You Can Quote Best

“Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries! Go and boil your bottoms you sons of silly persons!”

It’s got to be Monty Python and the Holy Grail, one of my favourites films and quotable unlike any other. There was a time when I could do it more or less line for line, but unfortunately that highly important skill was replaced by other knowledge. Monty Python are amongst my favourites comics, and their films have brought me joy for many years as well as the solo careers enjoyed by the individual Pythons. I even had the singalong version, meaning there was no escape for my poor parents who most of the time had no idea what I was going on about.

There are so many fantastic parts that I won’t attempt to start quoting it all at you now but if you haven’t seen this film go and pick it up at your next opportunity! Yes, you won’t understand bits. Yes, they take the piss out of religion a tiny bit. Yes, the ending is fantastically abrupt. But it is an absolutely brilliant film, no matter who you are or what you age (unless you completely lack a sense of humour, in which case leave my blog).

Book Challenge – Day 10

Day 10 – Book that changed your life

Books may be able to change lives, but far more often they end up changing feelings and opinions about particular things, especially those groups on the edges on society who don’t necessary get the attention (positive rather than negative) that they deserve. I’m going to discuss a controversial book, that has been on my blog before, and if you have any problems with the original material, you may want to navigate away.

A book that changed how I approached a particular topic would be Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, an extremely controversial book that has gone through various bans and there is a very (in my opinion) narrow-minded approach to any who admit they have read it, believing that they must have an unsavoury interest in children in order to want to read it.

Nabokov manages to navigate the reader around the pressing issue of the actual underage relationship, and instead focuses heavily on Humbert Humbert himself and allows you to delve into the mind and reasonings behind a paedophillic mind. You do need to approach the book with an open mind, or else you will constantly find yourself pulled back to thinking about the wrongness of it rather than focusing on what you’re actually being presented with.

Thankfully I did come to this book with an open mind, mainly because I had already seen the 1997 film adaptation with Jeremy Irons. This also allowed me to accept the relationship easily, because Lolita in the film (Dominique Swan)looks around 16 rather than the actual age of 13. She also acts a lot older than a typical 13 year old in the book, so sometimes when reading I managed to forget how young she was and then some detail or action would suddenly remind me.

Even though this book was met with outcry when it was originally published, I hope that most have overcome the subject material and the novel is allowed to be celebrated for its level of writing (which is fantastic) and the characters we are introduced to. Don’t get me wrong, it isn’t the paedophilia that should be celebrated, forgotten or allowed, but this is entirely fictional and those aspects should be put to rest in respect of this book. It offers far greater insight than it would if banned and no one read it.

Humbert Humbert is an interesting character because of how he rationalises his actions to himself and the reader, whilst also condemning them outright. Also the presence of Clare Quilty – another paedophile – adds an interesting second perspective on the characters, he is Humbert’s doppelgänger throughout the novel. He uses and abuses children, whereas Humbert actually love Lolita and wants the best for her, even if the best is letting her go to live her life with her new husband. Lolita herself is an interesting character, though there is a lot of discussion about whether she is actually like this or we are simply presented with Humbert’s impression of her – it seems that she is the one who entices Humbert, she makes the initial moves and (at the age of 13) he isn’t even her first lover. Whether or not Lolita is actually like this is sort of a mute point, because that is the character we are presented with and we have to read it how we’re given. I don’t care if that’s just how Humbert sees it and he’s trying to excuse his actions, that is how she is presented to us and that is what we base our reading on.

The most interesting thing for me was the sympathy I felt for Humbert. You approach the concept thinking that there is no way you could feel sympathy for a man who has violated a young girl, but in the end you actually do. The way he writes, he sounds confused, paranoid, alone and ultimately he is. He’s lost everything, including his health, and it is all his own fault, even if Lolita is to blame for some of it. Whilst you don’t re-evaluate the actual paedophilia, you end up rethinking those who have those kinds of urges because Humbert is only human and fights desperately to stop himself, even partaking in a normal healthy relationship for a time.

So, if you want a book that may challenge some preconceptions then pick up a copy of Lolita or, if you’re not feeling quite brave enough for the book, check out the film adaptations and, most importantly, go to it with an open mind.

Book Challenge – Day 9

Day 9 – A book that makes you sick

This is a really difficult one, namely because I don’t know what it’s actually asking for. One that disgusts me? One that makes me ill? One that has themes so controversial it makes me sick? Not that I’ve read any books that have done that to me anyway, and I have read some pretty controversial/nasty stuff.

Having a quick browse on the internet, we come up with the usual suspect of A Child called It, American Psycho, and The Wasp Factory. The goriness of American Psycho, the rationality displayed in The Wasp Factory, most of these books seem to have something in common and that is the detail and attitude given towards death/murder etc. I have said this in a post before, books like that just don’t affect me the way they do most other people. Whether it’s Patrick Bateman hacking bodies up or Humbert Humbert having sex with a thirteen year old, it’s not going to provoke a sickening feeling within me, merely interest in how the author is dealing with such topics.

But I digress. The most recent passage I read which gave me pause for thought due to its gruesome nature was a scene from Consider Phlebas by Iain Banks. Dubiously dubbed a ‘space opera’, we follow Changer Horza as he tries to win the war against the Culture, but he gets waylaid many times and meets a few interesting groups of people. One of these groups is a starving tribe who have a very fat, greedy, cannibalistic prophet and Horza is captured by them, first watching a fellow captive get mutilated and eaten before the prophet turns on him.

It’s details such as the prophet having different sets of teeth for certain body parts, the cheese-wiring of his fingers was particularly painful to read, and the less gruesome more disgusting aspects like the sheer obesity of the prophet and how he is described. It seems that Banks is trying to toe the line between the grotesque and the comedic (in Literature we’d probably call it a carnivalesque space, allowing the horrific to become comedic) but for me he failed miserably, just making me want to give up on the book even more.

This seems to be the general consensus with the majority of people who have read this, and many other of Banks’ books. His stories are on the whole interesting, especially when concerning the Culture (unforuntately Considering Phlebas is neither interesting nor about the Culture) but the scenes of torture and animal cruelty are unnecessary and really add nothing to the plot. Take the cannibal scene from above as an example, it contributes absolutely nothing to the plot line whatsoever, it doesn’t further the character, it doesn’t impact on anyone or anything at all once Horza escapes. It just seemed like Banks had an idea about a cannibal prophet, couldn’t quite fit it nicely into the plot so just decided to stick a random chapter in anyway.

I think this book rates higher than a novel such as American Psycho for this challenge because of the sheer pointlessness of it. Bateman mutilated and killed people because he was mentally damaged in such a way that he had to do it, and the book provides an interesting foray into the mind of a psychopath. Considering Phlebas doesn’t, it is just a senseless interlude included simply in an attempt to horrify the readers by exposing them to the extremes of human behaviour. Well Mr Banks, with me you failed, I simply just don’t want to read any more of your works because they’re pointless. If the plot, the writing and the character development had been better, the random cannibalism wouldn’t have bothered me as much, but it just ended up being the mouldy cherry topping a very unpleasant cake.

One thing I will say is that I love the title. Considering Phlebas is taken from T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land poem, and is a nice bit of intertexuality for anyone who spots it.

Book Challenge – Day 7

Day 7 – Book that you can quote/recite

This is an interesting one, because I’m not sure being able to quote/recite a book is actually a positive thing. Thankfully there is a book that falls neatly into this category, but I’m quite glad that only one came to mine rather than a long list, simply because it allows me to reread a book I really enjoy without already knowing exactly what is going to happen.

For me, it has to be The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde, first published in 1890 and is Wilde’s only known novel to date. You can tell right from the opening line that Dorian Gray was written by an author who is predominantly a poet, simply from the choice of words and imagery used. The sounds of the words crescendo up and down, rolling off the tongue in a fantastic whirl of lexis, metaphor, allusion and allegory, and this is probably why I find passages from it so easy to remember, because they so closely resemble poetry.

The subject matter is kind of secondary with this day’s challenge, because it isn’t the plot line that makes me remember and actively strive to quote Dorian Gray but instead the beauty and complicated nature of the words. Here’s some fantastic quotes from the book, try saying them outloud (and if you’re American try out a posh English accent, it’s quite fun)…

• “The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it. Resist it, and your soul grows sick with longing for the things it has forbidden to itself, with desire for what its monstrous laws have made monstrous and unlawful.”
• “The quivering, ardent sunlight showed him the lines of cruelty round the mouth as clearly as if he had been looking into a mirror after he had done some dreadful thing.”
• “There was purification in punishment. Not ‘Forgive us our sins,’ but ‘Smite us for our iniquities’ should be the prayer of a man to a most just God.”

There is a lot of pontificating about beauty, wisdom, death and all the other major philosophical arenas within this novel, some of the lines are specifically designed to ignite annoyance, some I agree with wholeheartedly (eg. the third example quoted above) and you have to just let the words roll over you if you truly want to enjoy the book.

Yes the plot line is also interesting, but if it was just told without the fantastic word structure then I fear it would fall somewhat flat. It would also be an extremely short novel because all of the talking would be cut out, and that is really a large chunk of the book.

Recently there was a film adaptation of the book, and it was shocking (I know, I’ve said that about the last three challenges, but bear with me). Of course the joy of reading the poetic language was lost right from the off, but they also completely skewed the storyline – at no point in the novel do Dorian and Basil have a sexual relationship, nor does Dorian have relations with any men throughout. It added nothing apart from “oh look, we’re modern so of course he’s going to have a gay encounter”. Don’t be silly, it added nothing and actually undermined their artist/subject relationship. Lord Henry was however played well by Colin Firth, so it had one redeeming aspect.

The satirist Will Self recently did a modern rewrite of this novel, titled simply Dorian, and it is very interesting but lacks the word play that the original had. If you like Wilde’s novel then I would try and get hold of a copy of Self’s, simply for comparison and a newer look at the story.

So if you love poetry as well as English Literature, you should definitely check this book out. It is very short, but take the time to really saturate yourself with the phrases being used, especially the lines spoken by Lord Henry. Fantastic stuff!

The Woodsman

The Woodsman is a 2004 film, directed by Nicole Kassell and based on the play by Steven Fetcher, and continues my look at the slightly more controversial films to hit the big screen in the last few years. Kevin Bacon is renowned for tackling the characters of the edges of society and The Woodsman is no different, but this time our understanding is pushed even further.

Walter (Bacon) is a convicted child molester, returning to his hometown of Philadelphia after serving twelve years for sexual assault on various minors. He gets a job at a local lumber mill where he meets Vicki (Kyra Sedgwick) and they begin a relationship, Walter revealing his past after they sleep together and then orders her out of his apartment. Walter also receives frequent visits from police officer Lucas (Mos Def) who is verbally abusive, suspicious and believes that Walter cannot change but is merely waiting for opportunity. Walter sees from his apartment window (which is opposite an elementary school) a man who he calls ‘Candy’ (Kevin Rice) luring young boys into his car with sweets but he does not report it to the police, instead suffering silently under Lucas’ suspicion. There are various sequences that show Walter following young girls, but instead of acting upon his feelings talks to his therapist. Nosy co-workers unveil Walter’s past and it is only Vicki’s intervention that allows him to escape unscathed, but some of the workers resign claiming inability to work with him. Walter, ostracised and frustrated, returns to a park to which he once followed a bird watching young girl (Robin) where he happens to meet her again, continuing their previous conversation. Robin reveals that her father is abusing her and, sensing a similarity between the two men, offers to sit on Walter’s lap. He refuses and leaves the park, encountering Candy on his way home, releasing a young boy from his car. Walter beats the man bloody in a fit of rage before going to Vicki’s and asking for her forgiveness. Sergeant Lucas returns to Walter’s apartment to find him packing his belongings to move in with Vicki, and insinuates that he knows that Walter assaulted the man outside his apartment but decides not to press charges as Candy is wanted in another state for raping a young boy. Walter is finally seen meeting up with his sister, who he has not seen in years and, in a voice over discussion with his therapist, Walter expresses hope for the future.

As you can see, it’s quite an odd film and reminded me of Lolita in many respects. The interesting aspect comes from how you feel and react towards Walter, because at no time do you feel hatred or disgust for him, regardless of his past. The film is almost a non entity – I don’t really know what to feel about it, what conclusions it was meant to be drawing or how I am meant to feel towards any of the characters. I’ll attempt to go through the characters/scenarios as best I can and let you draw your own conclusions.

Walter himself is a recluse, frightened and unsure after spending twelve years inside. He obviously desires children and takes no action to hide these feelings from the viewer, following some girls and watching them repeatedly from his window. He doesn’t however act on these feelings and instead talks to his (exceedingly annoying) therapist, and the appearance of ‘Candy’ seems to take the emphasis from the children and onto this man. At one point he claims that he never hurt the children and, upon seeing Robin’s reaction to her father’s actions, he finally realises what he has done and it appears he turns over a new leaf. Apart from this he doesn’t actually have much redemption, he doesn’t save any of the children hurt by ‘Candy’, but does inadvertently stop him offending. Kevin Bacon does a fantastic job with the relatively little he is given, though character development isn’t amazing.

Vicki is a bizarre character, seemingly not bothered by Walter’s past, even though she reveals suffering sexual abuse at the hands of her three older brothers. Their relationship moves extremely quickly, the movie only takes place over the course of about two weeks and they’re already moving in together.

Sergeant Lucas is in general a really annoying character, but perhaps most accurately represents how most people would feel and react to a convicted paedophile. The problem with this is the fact that he is meant to be a police officer, and act accordingly even when dealing with unsavoury persons. Dropping the charges against Walter however goes against everything this character has said throughout the film – yes Walter beat up a wanting paedophile but it is still a crime and Lucas was looking for any excuse to lock Walter up again. It seems an inconsistent and generally pointless change of opinion.

The only other character who really makes an appearance is Walter’s brother-in-law Carlos, who has some very odd conversations about women in general, which Walter’s then specifies to his niece. It’s all a bit weird, a tad confusing, and leaves you wondering if there is anyone in the film who is not a paedophile.

There is of course Robin, the young girl who Walter meets in the park. She might be the most interesting character, but again there is a confusion of feelings. Walter is kind to her whilst also desiring her (at one point asking her to sit on his lap), but her father obviously abuses and upsets her – the question is asked which would be better for her? It is, of course, a completely hypothetical question, but in the end her situation is not resolved and she goes home to her father as Walter goes home to Vicki. This in particular reminds me of the Humbert vs. Quilty scenarios in Nabokov’s Lolita, both paedophiles but one believing himself to not actually be hurting the children whilst the other cares little for their well being.

So what conclusions can we draw? Firstly that the police service are morons -who the hell would put a convicted paedophile in an apartment with windows overlooking the playground of an elementary school? Secondly that everyone is either an abuser or a victim of abuse, it certainly seems that way in this film. Thirdly, that people can maybe change when given the right set of circumstances, or at least enough to distract them from their urges.

I have to say, very little seems to happen in this film. When it ended I was still expecting more storyline, mainly because there are no notable moments of redemption – perhaps if he had helped the young girl without taking advantage of her in the process the film may have finished in a more rounded way, but there is a degree of completion I suppose. Walter’s voice over at the end explains the need for time, and hope for a future relationship with his sister and niece. Redemption is probably the main thing tried to be conveyed, but for me it fell a tad flat.

It’s taken just over $1,500,000 and was well received by most of its critics, with Bacon’s performance of particular note. The subject matter does make for uncomfortable watching, but Kassell makes an interesting adaptation and makes you challenge some assumptions. All in all, check it out, but don’t hope for a masterpiece.

Trust

Based on a screenplay by Andy Bellin and Robert Festinger, this is a 2010 film is David Schwimmer‘s second attempt at directing and brings together big names Clive Owen and Catherine Keener with young up-and-coming actress Liana Liberato to tackle a range of controversial subjects.

We meet Annie (Liberato), a fourteen year old volleyball player who does all the usual things like hanging out with friends, going to school and playing on her laptop. She also begins talking to sixteen year old Charlie (Chris Henry Coffey) on an online chat room, their relationship slowly escalating over a period of two months through IM, text and calls. Charlie finally reveals that he is not 16, bumping his age up to first 20 then 25 but Annie, liking Charlie’s compliments and interest, claims not to care and they agree to meet in a public place – the local mall. When they meet Annie discovers Charlie to be closer to 35 if not older, and starts to cry, but is soon seduced by Charlie’s compliments and lingerie presents, and they go to a hotel where he forces himself upon her whilst also secretly filming. Annie tells her best friend Brittany what happened, who promptly passes it on to her school counsellor and the FBI become involved. The focus of the film then becomes Annie’s dad Will (Owen) who doesn’t know how to deal with the assault, and especially with his daughter claiming that it was consensual and that they love each other. Will’s life, relationship with his wife and daughter, and his work life all begins to deteriorate as he discovers how many sex offenders live in his area and reads through transcripts of his daughter’s risqué conversations with Charlie. A turning point comes when the FBI reveal that Charlie has done this with three other girls, one aged just 12, and Annie finally admits to herself that she was raped. She attempts to regain her life by taking part in a volleyball tournament but Will, supporting from the stands, sees a man who closely resembles one of the sex offenders and attacks him, embarrassing his whole family. The next day at school Brittany apologises for the ‘internet thing’, leading Annie to discover a website calling her a slut and giving out her number/address. She rushes home and locks herself in the bathroom, overdosing on pills but thankfully getting saved by her father in time. When she wakes up the next morning she finds him outside by the pool, they talk about various things and ultimately forgive each other, signifying a moving on for both father and daughter.

As you can see, not exactly happy viewing material (there seems to be a trend forming in my recent posts…) but is definitely interesting and tackles some issues that probably want to be avoided by many. You are probably wondering, after reading the plot line, what actually happened to Charlie because he’s not mentioned again. Well, actually nothing happens to him. The FBI have DNA from the various incidents but nothing more to find out who Charlie actually is, and he refuses all contact Annie attempts to make. As the credits roll, a home video shows that Charlie is actually a high school physics teacher named Graham Weston, a married father of a young son and you are left with the assumption that he has got away with it. You would think that you would be annoyed that he as got away with it and will presumably go on to assault other young girls, but the emotional journey that Annie and Will go on overrides any emotions you feel towards Charlie, even anger at a lack of justice. I actually think Schwimmer was clever in his decision to show that Charlie had got away with it, it moves the focus from justice (and therefore the offender) to repairing the family unit (and the victim).

Liana Liberato does fantastically as Annie, more or less her first big role, and she really captures the journey that Annie goes on, from normal teenager to hurt and confused, and finally through desperation and to redemption with her father. Clive Owen is also brilliant as father Will, confused at his daughter’s apparent consent and helplessness at the fact that he can do absolutely nothing to find this man, protect his daughter or understand why any of it has happened. The most interesting aspect comes when Will tells his boss (Al) what is happening, and Al is relieved when it is explained that it wasn’t a violent sexual assault, but more “sex between friends”. You can understand where Al is coming from because that is how Annie presents it, but Will becomes more and more angry and confused, not sure what his daughter is doing, why she lied to him or what he as a father is meant to do next.

Whilst the focus of the film may not be on Charlie, the scenes with him in are still highly uncomfortable to watch. Liberato was 15 when she played this role and the rape scene is pretty intense, with Schwimmer not shying away from showing it as it is. Liberato, dressed in the red lingerie that Charlie bought her early, is coerced onto the bed and overpowered, with a few weak ‘just wait’ before she spaces out. We view the majority of the scene through Charlie’s hidden camera but Will is haunted by flashbacks throughout the film (some showing Annie enjoying herself), and some reviewers have questioned the need to actually see the rape at all. It may actually be the ‘shades of grey’ that are explored concerning consent and other issues that are more compelling than the actuality of the scene itself. The scenes with the school counsellor Gail are also fantastic, with Annie finally breaking down and admitting to herself that she was raped, but also the scene between Will and the counsellor, with Gail explaining that “People get hurt. There’s only so much we can do to protect ourselves, our children. The only thing we can do is be there for each other when we do fall down to pick each other up.” This line really embodies the aim of the film, and the journey is a interesting one to undertake.

Trust grossed just over $120,000 coming far under its budget, but overall was praised by critics for being powerfully emotional and perceptive, with Schwimmer’s directing style and choice of actors making this film truly unmissable.