DOLLHOUSE REVIEW, SPOILERS

[fannishliss]

So we wanted to watch Dollhouse. We are not intense Whedon fans, but will certainly make an effort to watch his shows. I was a big fan of Firefly, a moderate fan of Buffy (more at the beginning) and Angel (more in the middle).  We also liked his XMen and I liked Dr. Horrible fairly well!  Anyway, just to get that out of the way, Whedon is not my God, but I have given all his work my attention.

He talked about his project re Dollhouse on Fresh Air if you want to go listen to him talk for an hour.
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13&prgDate=02-12-2009 i think.

He did run it past friends of his at Equality Now because he knew the idea was going to raise a lot of eyebrows....  not that he went out for a feminist vetting but they were feminists and they said, yeah, try for it.

So, here is my humble opinion and take on the show's first episode.

I like that Joss wanted to give Eliza Dushku a vehicle and I thought she did a great job in the first episode.

I think we are ABSOLUTELY meant to feel queasy about the Dollhouse and the business they do. Why else show us the Doll in pain, getting wiped?  and also, the Handler is a very sympathetic character, in that he wants to impose his sense of Justice and Mission on what the boss woman calls the Engagements.

Now, Ok, I have this copy of "Brothel: Mustang Ranch and its Women" by Alexa Albert, on my shelf, so I am certainly seeing the Prostitution aspect of the show.  I actually think the Prostitution aspect is one of the most interesting aspects of the show -- the way both real life Viewers and fictional Clients seem to expect the Dolls to be, to use the usual phrase, "high class Call Girls."  I find it extremely interesting that because Eliza fits the "beauty myth" when she walks in as the negotiator the Client immediately discounts her abilities.  He also thinks that she is "pretending"  -- he doesn't realize that she is REALLY a negotiator. I also read somewhere a review that asked, why send a Doll to negotiate a hostage situation? -- the answer to which seemed PERFECTLY CLEAR TO ME UPON VIEWING THE SHOW.  Echo is NOT a prostitute -- or not SIMPLY  -- but is encoded with whatever traits and skills the client needs in a certain situation.  

The question becomes, how blank IS Echo?  She still has language, she can do yoga and walk around.....  she is not simply a blank slate.  And her ability to remember the things she saw as Echo when she was on a job is a fascinating thing.  How much of her old personality is still there, bleeding through.  The new character is nearsighted, has asthma.  Yes, but personality also has genetic aspects --   for example, handedness, tied to whether the left or right is dominant....  is that something the tech can alter?  I'm hoping we'll learn more.

I'm a lifelong SF reader and have always been fascinated with AIs and personality constructs.  The whole show concept is VERY highly theoretical -- that is, related to postmodern ideas of what a person IS. It's a very Philip K. Dick concept all round, right?  I loved how the Negotiator was pieced together from aspects of different folks -- it begs the question, how did they GET those "engrams"  (that's the SF I've always heard used to describe units of personality or memory). 

I know people have problems with issues of consent -- and to me, those issues are not at all sidestepped by the show.  To me, they highlighted very clearly that Echo became a Doll under duress, didn't want to, and now has no control over what engagements she is put into. So clearly there is no Consent on the part of her original personality -- but the personality she exhibits during the engagement should be considered a real person, right?  and is clearly making her own decisions, based on her "engrams"  -- like we all do.  Don't try to escape the predetermined nature of every choice we make by differentiating how OUR brains have been programmed by our experiences, and how Echo's brain has been programmed artificially.  From where she is, she can't tell the difference -- no more so than we can determine how free our will has ACTUALLY BEEN.  right?  :)

To me, Whedon's project has always been to understand the Hero, in her aspect as the Girl -- be it Buffy, River, Inara, Zoe, Kitty Pryde, etc. Echo is the idea of the Registered Companion (Inara) removed from her overtly sexualized role (Inara is a Courtesan of the highest accomplishment)....  Echo is only sexualized to the extent that the client has a limited imagination -- like the Client who assumed that Edward James Olmos would have made a better Negotiator.  NO -- because Echo is a superhero.   She is/can be the BEST, a construct of whatever would be ideal in the situation.  Like Rogue, she soaks up powers --, and like Rogue, not always by choice. 

So, I do think it is a feminist project -- if only because Whedon is trying to give Dushku the opportunity to play many different characters, not just the tough girl or the ingenue she is usually handed (to paraphrase an interview I heard with her).

I'm also interested in the side character of the Boss.  She reminds me very strongly of the woman in Princess Mononoke who wants to build the factory to employ the former prostitutes and leper women--- she doesn't mind destroying the Forest  if her women have employment.... in this case the Boss doesn't really care about the prostitution, but is focused on the win, win, win -- money for her, satisfaction for the client, and a new life for the Doll in trouble at the end of the five year contract (assuming she intends to honor that agreement and not just ice the dolls at some point....).    I love the idea of the Handler and his ideals of Justice and MIssion ....  I really thought the Boss was missing something when she didn't see that completing the MIssion after the Client had been shot, was the best way to make the money!   I think the Handler will be the first to recognize what in Echo remains constant between engagements -- and I'm betting there WILL be something there.

I'm eager to watch again.