Korrasami Bends ‘The Legend of Korra’ In All The Wrong Ways

1. Great article! Thank you! :D

2. I don’t really like taking shots at CaPC. I love CaPC, whether I agree with you guys or not. But I have to say this. I don’t understand why this article is on CaPC . . . Straight guy whines about how the tiniest whiff of a hint of a lesbian relationship in the final seconds of a 19-hour animated series ruined the whole thing for him because reasons. I assume you also hate the Harry Potter books now, after Rowling revealed later that Dumbledore is gay?

   “Korra didn’t contain even the slightest hint that its story-world included “non-traditional” relationships — even as comic relief or as side references.”

   You’re aware, I presume, that people don’t walk around wearing big “I’m GAY!” stickers so that you won’t be confused or annoyed when you find out that they’re in a “non-traditional relationship” . . .? And a lack of cheap jokes at the expense of gay people shouldn’t be a signal that they don’t exist in this universe.

   “Imagine if, at the end of the Star Wars trilogy, the camera pulled back to show the story was all a simulation or just Anakin’s bad dream. Or imagine that Breaking Bad‘s finale took a turn and — hey presto! — there’s suddenly a zombie epidemic! Korra may as well have added King Arthur, dinosaurs, or an alien invasion at the last second.”

   … Dude. Chill out.

   “Instead they chose a last-second absurd “cause juke.” And at first that makes me not want to enjoy Korra again. You can enjoy a great story over and over but a cause-juked story is barely interesting the first time […] like an evangelical film in which any story is used as a means to the real end of promoting a social cause.”

   I mean . . . seriously? I’m not going to join the legions of Korrasami fans that are apparently out there (this is why I stay off message boards) and proclaim this as homophobic, but crafting a complaint this disproportionate on a Christian site is like throwing a smoke grenade. People are going to have good reasons to believe there’s a fire.

   And, really, if your first reaction to this subtle suggestion in the final seconds of a multi-season show that you’ve enjoyed is: “Ew. I kind of hate this whole show now,” it might be worth some introspection to put your finger on exactly where that feeling is coming from. Cuz it seems odd, doesn’t it?

   1. Jared, thanks for your comment. But I’m not sure you’ve carefully read the piece.

      You also seem unfamiliar with the theme and universe of the “Avatar” series, such as in this comment: “And a lack of cheap jokes at the expense of gay people shouldn’t be a signal that they don’t exist in this universe.” However, that’s not what I said about the “Avatar” stories. Instead I said that these *relationships* do not exist in this universe — to be joked about or otherwise — therefore, throwing one in at the last second makes about as much sense as suddenly staging a UFO arrival.

      Sexual identity, or objections to exploring these issues more naturally in a story, had nothing to do with the nonsensical nature of this particular, out-of-the-blue story twist in “Korra.” You may note that instead I object to storytellers attempting to “juke” their own storytelling in pragmatic fashion in service of a Social Cause.

      I find this irritating, and actually a bit Philistine, regardless of what the cause is.

      You may also note that my first point of comparison was evangelical movies (which are usually much more poorly done) — whose hijacking for Moral Virtues are usually in favor of virtues I would agree with, yet are still irksome and Philistine-ish.

      Finally, I think you have missed my own twist ending in which I recommend not whining about the “juke” or deciding it “ruins” anything, but instead determining the whole thing is kind of silly and enjoying the story despite what its creators have chosen to try to do with it. Instead I argue in favor of better, more-human, more-creative and consistent storytelling that is free of any kind of “mind of metal and wheels” approach to service social causes (whether or not they are agreeable).

   2. You didn’t read a word of the article, didn’t you?

3. Ironically, this actually makes me more likely to go back and watch seasons 3-4. I’ve already seen seasons 1-2, and while I didn’t like Korra as much as A:TLA, it was worth watching. Knowing that the “Korrasami” angle isn’t actually played as a romance for the rest of the show means I might actually watch the rest.

4. First of all, thanks for the reply and the attempts to clarify. Let me try to do the same:

   “You also seem unfamiliar with the theme and universe of the “Avatar” series”

   Oh, right, I guess I should provide my “Avatar” credentials. :D

   I’ve seen the original series all the way through about 5 times (starting to lose count at this point, honestly), and I’ve rewatched Korra from the beginning with each new season. And, FWIW, Korra has been weaker than the original series pretty much across the board, but I’ve felt better about each progressive season . . . So. Anyway.

   “Instead I said that these *relationships* do not exist in this universe — to be joked about or otherwise — therefore, throwing one in at the last second makes about as much sense as suddenly staging a UFO arrival.”

   Right . . . I got that. I specifically quoted this line: “Korra didn’t contain even the slightest hint that its story-world included “non-traditional” relationships — even as comic relief or as side references.” . . . But any non-straight person would be baffled by this statement, the assumption that gay people don’t exist unless their existence is specifically established, whether by “side-references,” or the much-more common route of the cheap gay joke or whatever. Your choice of analogy here couldn’t be poorer, suggesting that you find gay people as weird and out of place among “regular humans” as an alien species would be (or dinosaurs, or a sudden zombie apocalypse). And that’s what I’m trying to get at with my criticism . . . This is the tone of your entire piece, even if it isn’t your intent (and I’m 100% sure that it is not), and it comes across as insensitive and off-putting.

   “Sexual identity, or objections to exploring these issues more naturally in a story, had nothing to do with the nonsensical nature of this particular, out-of-the-blue story twist in “Korra.””

   Yes, I get that that’s the direction you’re attempting to come from with your article, but the problem is . . . This is the 3rd article you’ve written about *this particular type of twist* (if that’s actually what this is, but I’ll get to that next), which makes it feel like sexual identity *does* have at least something to do with it. Perhaps it would help if you gave an example of a storyline that handled this well, in your opinion?

   The other problem is, you spend all this time talking about the “story twist” as though it actually were some clear and significant element of the plot . . . When in fact it was merely a brief, subtle image in the final seconds after the story-proper had already concluded. It was so subtle, the creators had to confirm that that was what they were going for. It would be the easiest thing in the world, if one were so inclined, to completely ignore that it even happened, because it makes so very little difference to anything. (Which is why your whole “that makes me not want to enjoy Korra again. You can enjoy a great story over and over but a cause-juked story is barely interesting the first time” nonsense felt ridiculous and melodramatic . . . an incredibly silly overreaction.)

   “You may also note that my first point of comparison was evangelical movies (which are usually much more poorly done) — whose hijacking for Moral Virtues are usually in favor of virtues I would agree with, yet are still irksome and Philistine-ish.”

   Yeah, I didn’t want to take the time (or seem overly malicious) by picking the entire article apart in my first comment, but I did note that, and it struck me as a truly terrible analogy. An evangelical movie will spend almost every second of its entire runtime beating you repeatedly over the head with what it wants to say . . . And not just with subtle images, but with spoken dialogue that seems directed straight at the viewer. To compare that to something like Korra and Asami taking each others’ hands for a brief moment before the fade-out as though it’s the same kind of “preachiness” or “juking” or whatever you want to call it is unfair and even insulting.

   “Finally, I think you have missed my own twist ending in which I recommend not whining about the “juke” or deciding it “ruins” anything, but instead determining the whole thing is kind of silly and enjoying the story despite what its creators have chosen to try to do with it. Instead I argue in favor of better, more-human, more-creative and consistent storytelling that is free of any kind of “mind of metal and wheels” approach to service social causes (whether or not they are agreeable).”

   No, I got that . . . And I think we probably more-or-less agree about the larger point (“the message should serve the story, not the other way around”). But you essentially rant for 16 paragraphs about how ridiculous and badly done this tiny, insignificant thing is, engage in hyperbole and bad analogy, and explain how it kind of ruined the whole thing for you. To do a half-hearted 180 at the very end and say maybe someday you’ll be able to get over it and just tell yourself, hey, it’s super-dumb but oh well . . . That doesn’t really change what this piece is.

   You, like me, are a straight, white, Christian male, and you spent about 1000 words basically explaining that mere *representations* of other groups are “political”—that they “juke” a story for a political “cause”—while implying that any experiences you relate to are just normal life with no political subtext at all. That’s the comfort of subconscious privilege . . . and a poor foundation to build a CaPC article on.

   1. Jared,

      As internet comment-flame-war threads go, this one is so far pathetic. One or both of us will soon need to step things up with blasphemies, vulgarities, accusations of racism, gratuitious Hitler/Nazies references, or insults of the other’s ancestors. :-)

      To resume, let me first summarize my thought process approaching this issue.

      First, one could simply ignore it. After all, this is frivolous popular culture, right? Or more positively, the “Korra” story and “Avatar” universe as a whole are so intricately made with joyous explorations of awesome characters, good versus evil battles, etc., that this whole strange “ship” is not even relevant. But I chose not to go this route out of my attempt to respect the creators’ intentions. They clearly wanted to make those last seconds of “Korra” count for a social-cause statement. So I think it is good and right that we hear them out and compare it with the rest of the story.

      Second, one could rehash the common biblical points against any sort of social cause of this nature, and make the whole article more socio-political about LGBTetc. rights, “gay marriage,” and that sort of thing. As you can tell, I have my views on this topic, but I think it’s best to leave those types of articles to other writers. The topic is already well covered. What isn’t covered as well is the strange occurences that result when advocates of this particular social cause try to hammer it into their stories — and end up distracting from what the stories were actually about.

      So in a sense, I will end up saying about the social issue itself, “Let’s not talk about that.” I recognize this will be frustrating in case some folks *did* want to discuss it.

      I’m a bit rusty about comment point-by-point responses, so I’ll try to get back into it.

      Actually, I will start with your final accusation of “subconscious privilege.” Like I said above about the social issue, I choose to leave the “privilege” discussion to others, and I’m afraid I will be very stubborn here about refusing to play the “privilege” game. This quickly gets into discussing supposed motives and prejudices, which is both absurd over the internet (where we do not know one another) and also, I suggest, is not a biblical way to approach relating to others even in disagreement: by plying in a “how under- or over-privileged is your assigned Group” trade.

      I do want to recognize the best aspects of the “privilege” advocates are after — encouraging others to be humble and show compassion for others. Yet I do not read Jesus Christ encouraging people to “check their privilege” *in this way*.

      Rather, He demands that people check their lives in light of His nature. Any guilt that we feel is good, but it should lead us to humble themselves before God in an initial state of repentance for sin before Christ the Savior (justification), a process that repeats throughout life as Christians battle sin (sanctification). But in its worst version, the “privilege” notion twists the Christian concept of personal guilt before God to impersonal guilt (“I have benefited too much”) before man. I do not believe this notion is a biblical approach. I also do not believe it will lead to genuine lasting action to help the poor, the marginalized, or victims achieve human flourishing.

      That being said, let’s move on.

      Glad we’re both “Korra” fans, then. I feel that some of my fandom may have been lost in the article, which was naturally predisposed toward discussing the element that could detract from the story. Like you, though, I still prefer “A:TLA.”

      “But any non-straight person would be baffled by this statement, the assumption that gay people don’t exist unless their existence is specifically established, whether by ‘side-references,’ or the much-more common route of the cheap gay joke or whatever.”

      Ah, I think I understand your point better. And your point is noted. At the same time, my point was about the emotional core of the story being built on the types of friendly and familial relationships I listed. The stories of both “Avatar” and “Korra” were also perfectly fine with drawing real-world parallels, and the latter series could have at least set up the fact that same-sex relationships could exist in the story-world. From my perspective, anyway, it seems to me that advocates of this cause would find it repressive not to reveal their identities or relationships in public, leaving traditional couples to hog the spotlight. That is, after all, what is leading to real-world activism that goes beyond pressure to acknowledge these relationships.

      “Your choice of analogy here couldn’t be poorer, suggesting that you find gay people as weird and out of place among ‘regular humans’ as an alien species would be (or dinosaurs, or a sudden zombie apocalypse).”

      You again read your own negative interpretation onto both my intentions and my wording — but the “suggesting” (and “implying” as you elsewhere say) denotes moral judgments of supposedly secret heart motivations that are not yours to make.

      (Tangent here: This seems another job hazard of some, not all, folks who play the “privilege” game. Some of them, though not all, seem to want to barter in a kind of cultural-fundamentalist-style guilt-economy in which he with the most confessed “privilege” wins valuable moral points. Trust me, the Holy Spirit gives me enough guilt so that I need to keep going back to Jesus, Who died to clear my sin’s eternal consequences. I don’t acknowledge additional “guilt,” rightly or wrongly discerned, from strangers. And I encourage you to decline to let strangers do the same to you. In real-life environments, anyway, this is how conservative cultural-fundamentalists take control of churches and groups, and pressure others to go along with it.)

      Back to “Korra” and the article: In a fictitious world in which no same-sex couples or activism or issues are ever seen, *and* in which it is only “traditional” familial and friendly relationships that receive exclusive attention, it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude that a (supposed) last-second change of “rules” is an invasion of the story — a contradiction to the “laws” of the story-world on par with my comparisons.

      “It comes across as insensitive and off-putting.”

      I think this charge is overwrought. If I call the plot development (as interpreted authoritatively by the story-makers, however invisible it is in the actual story) absurd, it makes sense to draw comparisons to equally absurd story scenarios.

      “Yes, I get that that’s the direction you’re attempting to come from with your article, but the problem is . . . This is the 3rd article you’ve written about *this particular type of twist* (if that’s actually what this is, but I’ll get to that next), which makes it feel like sexual identity *does* have at least something to do with it.”

      Hmm, I had to count! And if you count both the “How to Train Your Dragon 2” satire and the “Doctor Who” article, then that would indeed make three articles. However, I write at least one article per week — and almost exclusively they are about biblical perspectives on fantastical stories and other pop culture — so I am not sure this illustrates any vendetta. If you’re open to persuasion that I don’t have this sort of nefarious goal, then I suggest that if I did have this vendetta I would be spending a *lot* more time writing stuff that critiques this particular social cause. However, my interest is mainly when social causes (agreeable and otherwise) “juke” stories and end up making them bad ones — or end up at least sparking a conversation about whether the story itself really went there. (I will resume this topic in a moment.)

      “Perhaps it would help if you gave an example of a storyline that handled this well, in your opinion?”

      So far I have not seen one. This is not to say this does not exist; after all, I prefer stories that are not Dark and Gritty and “Realistic,” partly because I know my own thought life and what motivates me to enjoy God more and care for others more, and partly because I do not find most of what’s called “gritty” and “realistic” actually realistic. Thus I stick with happy-ending stuff. But in my view, the popular fantastical stories I’ve seen (and other than nonfiction, I am usually limited to these genres), the attempts to bring in gender-identity stuff, when they occur, are at best awkward.

      And at most they are also potentially offensive. Even in this case, some critics (who say they support the LGBTQetc. causes) say they found the “Korra” creators’ interference heavy-handed, the supposed “twist” without support, and the whole notion even stereotypical about women in same-sex relationships (e.g. Korra the powerful muscular one and Asami the sweet feminine counterpart). Again, I am not studied on all these issues and can’t speak beyond what I’ve read from online fans.

      “The other problem is, you spend all this time talking about the ‘story twist’ as though it actually were some clear and significant element of the plot . . . When in fact it was merely a brief, subtle image in the final seconds after the story-proper had already concluded. It was so subtle, the creators had to confirm that that was what they were going for. It would be the easiest thing in the world, if one were so inclined, to completely ignore that it even happened, because it makes so very little difference to anything.”

      True. And it sounds like we agree the “twist” was 99 percent from outside the “canon” of the actual story, leaving it possibly negligible. Yet I think I dealt with the “why not just ignore it?” objection both in the article and in the above ‘graph about how I approached the issue. The creators want this to be discussed, and I did not see any Christians discussing it (beyond one ministry’s updated review of the “Korra” series that merely issued the obligatory Caution About Your Children). Taking pop culture seriously means engaging with these topics with as much biblical thought as we can muster. Furthermore, it has been three months since the series concluded. Only recently did one of the show’s creators auction drawings of the happy couple (in his interpretation), showing they wanted to keep the topic alive.

      “Which is why your whole ‘that makes me not want to enjoy Korra again. You can enjoy a great story over and over but a cause-juked story is barely interesting the first time’ nonsense felt ridiculous and melodramatic . . . an incredibly silly overreaction.”

      Quite possibly. But let me try another comparison: imagine the end of “Parks and Recreation” (or some other recently concluded show with a huge fanbase that I don’t watch myself because I spend more time watching cartoons). Imagine if a favorite character suddenly, out of the blue, is shown clutching a Bible and walking with a weepy face into a very Baptist-looking church — as if that were the sum total of what the show and characters and story were all about. Now as this Bible-clutching Baptist-ish chap I may be pretty happy about that, right? But if I were a fan of the show, I would feel irritated and unsure about continuing as a fan. “You mean … that’s IT?” And this would go double if the creators came out and said, “Yeah, we’re evangelical Christians now, and that’s what we meant by the scene.” I would think: Oh, so you got religion and it sounds like you only wanted the show to make me go away thinking about nothing else besides going to gget revival’d. I’m a fan of great storytelling, and although I’m even more a fan of getting saved, this “twist” would be just bad. And it would make my reaction as a jilted fan perfectly justifiable.

      “An evangelical movie will spend almost every second of its entire runtime beating you repeatedly over the head with what it wants to say . . . And not just with subtle images, but with spoken dialogue that seems directed straight at the viewer.”

      Ugh, you’re making me wince just thinking about it.

      At the same time, when I do see those movies (so far, only twice, the second time for Research), I know what I’m getting into. When I read a pundit’s article or internet comment, I’m not offended by the person stating a strongly held opinion or trying to persuade someone else. But when I go to enjoy a story — well, a story that was not made for evangelicals and rated at worst a soft PG — I expect something else. And because “Korra” was mostly good all the way through, the finale “twist” as interpreted from outside by the creators felt even more awkward and absurd.

      “To compare that to something like Korra and Asami taking each others’ hands for a brief moment before the fade-out as though it’s the same kind of ‘preachiness’ or ‘juking’ or whatever you want to call it is unfair and even insulting.”

      I didn’t say this in the piece, but I thought that moment itself was lovely. Korra won the battle, especially against her own war wounds and depression, and got to take a break with her bestie. Asami could use a break too. I was overall fine with that scene. But it’s exclusively the fans’ demands and then the creators’ validation that came across as a total juke for a social cause. And now, as the article quoted from one fan, that’s all we’re apparently meant to talk about. In one sense that’s fair: it’s respecting their intentions. But pretty soon I shall be all talked out, and once this has all blown over I intend to enjoy “Korra” again absolutely social-cause-juke-free.

      So as we wrap up, I’ll simply repeat or emphasize my response to this:

      “explain how it kind of ruined the whole thing for you. To do a half-hearted 180 at the very end and say maybe someday you’ll be able to get over it and just tell yourself, hey, it’s super-dumb but oh well . . . That doesn’t really change what this piece is.”

      1) Didn’t ruin it, only resulted in temporary annoyance at the attempted bait-and-switch. 2) Wasn’t half-hearted, LOL. 3) I did not say “maybe someday,” etc., but stated definitively that I won’t let ’em juke it. If that sentiment needs reinforcement in this comment, then here ya go: #TeamAvatar #LegendofKorra #MaKorra4Evah

      Who knows? Perhaps in the next comments we can just move on like fanboys. That Colossus battle was pretty sweet, and I loved Korra’s compassion toward Kuvira, and the subtle ways the storytellers handled Verrick’s already/not yet move toward repenting from his misogyny and treating Zhu Li right, and they didn’t break my heart by killing off Tenzin or his family, and yet … and yet … Y U NO have Former Fire Lord Zuko finally head through the spirit portal to have tea with Uncle Iroh?!

5. Wow! Well, whatever else there may be to say (and there can’t be much, surely), you’ve certainly been more than fair in responding!

   “not a biblical way to approach relating to others even in disagreement: by plying in a “how under- or over-privileged is your assigned Group” trade.” (etc.)

   I almost instantly regretted dropping that word into this conversation because it arrives loaded with baggage that wasn’t going to be of any use to us . . . and often a certain veneer of self-righteousness that I was (probably unsuccessfully) trying to avoid. Le sigh.

   What I was trying to communicate, and basically my one remaining salient point, was that it would be worth considering how this article will inevitably read to an audience that has reason to believe Christians have it in for them, and that there are several points where you come across as someone who finds depictions of non-straight lifestyles or relationships as bizarre and abnormal and off-putting . . . which brings me to this:

   “You again read your own negative interpretation onto both my intentions and my wording — but the “suggesting” (and “implying” as you elsewhere say) denotes moral judgments of supposedly secret heart motivations that are not yours to make.”

   They certainly aren’t . . . and if I seemed to be judging that, then that was my biggest failure to communicate. I probably didn’t say this enough, but in one spot in particular, I explained “This is the tone of your entire piece, even if it isn’t your intent (and I’m 100% sure that it is not)” . . . If I thought that you *intended* to come across the way I felt that you *were* coming across, I probably wouldn’t have bothered to comment at all.

   But I have to stand by my feeling that when you compare Korra and Asami joining hands to the sudden arrival of a UFO (or your other analogies from the article, re Star Wars, Breaking Bad, etc. . . . That *was* hyperbole, right?), that choice of analogy makes it *sound* like you find same-sex relationships weird and alien. It just does. And since, as you say, this is the internet and we don’t all know each other, it becomes a very easy assumption to make. I tried to communicate that I *wasn’t* making that assumption, but that some of your choices could easily be taken that way . . . but I clearly didn’t manage to communicate the first part of that.

   As for the rest of your reply, I think we could go back and forth about a few small things, circling slowly in towards some kind of consensus or agreement to disagree cordially, but as I say, you’ve been more than generous already in responding, so we’ll just assume we’re basically there.

   “Y U NO have Former Fire Lord Zuko finally head through the spirit portal to have tea with Uncle Iroh?!”

   If there are any “Avatar” fans who don’t think the more Iroh the better, I don’t want to know them. =P

   1. Jared, the verdict is in: we are both pathetic at the whole flame-war thing. Well, you are, anyway! You have personally tarnished the reputation of the internet.

      My thanks for your spirit of personal correction. And ultimately I do not mind you bringing up the “privilege” issue because 1) It’s clear you did not mean the overwrought “speech police/hang your head in shame, white man!” version of it; 2) Because of my ethnicity/gender, I knew I would be tagged with this eventually, and this was perhaps the best possible way for me to have a First Time; 3) You provoked me thinking more seriously about the topic, and how to approach it or not approach it. In fact, I might go after ya on FB and tag you in that recent discussion.

      ‘Tis noted that the “alien invasion” example could have come across as hyperbolic in the wrong way. My intent was certainly to show that the outside interpretation was absurd (contrasted with the actual story we saw), yet I understand it could have connoted that the “invaders” were from the actual religion/cause itself. (Whether this does constitute an “invasion” and how Christians respond is another issue.)

      So I agree that we’re overall in agreement, and that is awesome.

      Furthermore, one point I left unsaid is that “Korra” left so much unresolved pretty much all over the place — not just with Iroh in the Spirit World, but with the villains, heroes, and subplots everywhere. Of course, I might have felt that about the original “Avatar” series had I been tracking with the new stories as they were made, rather than watching the whole complete series. But with “Korra” it felt like the story development was much more piecemeal. For my part, I would have preferred keeping Amon as a series-long villain similar to Fire Lord Ozai. He was scary enough.

6. I’ve dealt with it by resolving to not buy the fourth season DVD. I’ll end it at Book 3, thank you. That was a perfect ending.

7. Maybe in Avatar’s world a relationship is just a relationship and anybody else but them two cares if they are or not the same sex. Maybe this is the reason why any same-sex relationship wasn’t shown explicitly before, because no one in that world cares so it wasn’t necessary to attach importance to it in the story when it isn’t relevant there.

   May be we just should open our minds to the change as Avatar Aang told Korra at the end of book 1, when you still enjoyed the story.

Comments are now closed for this article.