Tag Archives: Bones

Short Film Sunday: Validation

In case anyone was wondering, “What does TJ Thyne do when he isn’t being adorable/paranoid on Bones?” (like I was), well this short film is the answer.

Bordering on a little too sugary sweet, I think just in time the film recognizes its own campiness and decides to soak it in instead of attempting to be serious.

I don’t know if that sentence makes any sense, but the point is, I love this short film. And I think you will too!

Leave a comment

Filed under Film

byronic heroines

I really love Byronic heroes. I like reading them, I like identifying modern ones, and they are just a really fun archetype. Except in the case of Edward Cullen. Though Stephanie Meyer did make him a Byronic hero, she made him a 19th century Byronic hero, so he comes off as domineering and misogynistic towards Bella who should ostensibly be a modern woman, though she is really a wet rag of personality. Still there are well-developed modern Byronic heroes, they just require a subversion of some sort that Meyer does not supply for her hero.

Buffy the Byronic Heroine

Here’s me coming clean about my inspiration for this post: I’ve been watching a lot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Now Angel, he’s clearly Byronic Hero. He’s a vampire. I think it is hard to be a vampire and not be a Byronic hero. His modern day subversion is that his “dark past” isn’t always behind him, and Buffy falls in love with him after he becomes good (initially). Also another part of his

subversion is that Angel is not always the dominant figure in the driving relationship of the first three seasons. Now what could be more subversive to the machismo archetype than if it was a little blonde girl who could just as easily be on the cheerleading squad?

Let’s go over the basic characteristics of the Byronic Hero and see where Buffy Summers fits in:
  1. She has a ward. This is my all time favorite indicator of a Byronic Hero. Rochester has Adele. Michael Corleone has the family. Hawkeye Pierce has the sanctity of the medical profession in a desecrated scenario.  Angel has Buffy. And Buffy has the fate of the world.
  2. A troubled past. Buffy has a past that troubles her, though not necessarily troubled. Definitely her current situation is more troubling, but when confronted with the possibility that her Slayer duties/powers might not last forever, Buffy beats herself up over the fact that she has nothing else to offer the world based on who she was before her calling was known.
  3. Struggles with personal conception of morality and society’s concept. Buffy often does things that she sees as moral and keeps her actions from others. Harboring and caring for Angel, dating vampires, and keeping information from her friends and mother.
  4. Exile from society. Buffy, who once was very popular before her Slayer days, is definitely on the fringe. In school and in her town.
  5. Most importantly, Buffy is independent. There is no doubting that Angel is a Byronic hero, more closely and literally than Buffy in the classical mode. Byronic heroes can’t really be in relationships with a modern woman so this provides proof that Buffy is a modern woman. Even Jane Eyre, who is heralded as somewhat independent, making a moral opposed to romantic decision to leave Rochester at least until it is moral to be with him, lives to care of the blinded Rochester. Angel and Buffy don’t end up together. And she moves on with her life.

I’m having a lot of trouble identifying other Byronic heroines. Based on a theory I had earlier that all TV doctors are Byronic heroes (Hawkeye Pierce, Doug Ross, John Dorian, Gregory House) I thought maybe Temperance  Brennan from Bones might be a Byronic hero (are you getting that I really like David Boreanaz?) But that show is based around the fact that Brennan and Booth combine to make the hero, so they characteristics are of Byronic hero are almost split between the two protagonists.

*These are just the ravings of someone who has been rapidly intaking way too much Buffy the Vampire Slayer. They may or may not be valid at all.


Filed under Literature, Television

new book purchases

I love summer. I always feel like I buy a lot of books during the summer. Especially paper back books that feel like they have a powder on the cover that never rubs off, opposed to the shiny ones. It is hard to explain, but those are the books I like to read in the summer. So today I got two books: Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal of the Conflict between Faith and Reason by Russell Shorto and Brunelleschi’s Dome: How a Renaissance Genius Reinvented Architecture by Ross King. Possessive nouns and titular colonicity FTW?

My mom picked by the Descartes book, and I was interested in it primarily because of my obsessive relationship with the Fox shows Bones, which is super smart and features a Deschanel sister and the gorgeous David Boreanaz, what’s not to love? But it is on summer hiatus, so my need of anthropological studies of bones is not being fulfilled. I read the preface of the book today and it seems to be going in the direction of the art and literature books I wrote about liked, where authors look at one painting, one book, or in this case one skeletal system, track its history and figure out something about the outreaching influence of that one object.

The second book is about something is much more clearly influential. Brunelleschi INVENTED linear perspective. But that isn’t even the coolest thing he ever did. He made the largest brick dome in history…without concrete. I mean that is just cool. Plus I love the Florentines! If the Medicis love you, I love you. And Brunelleschi had the cutest Florentine nose.

The Duomo of Florence, and Brunelleschi's Dome

1 Comment

Filed under Other Readings