Were you shocked or troubled by Dollhouse?

[Bexieh]

I'm currently writing an essay for uni on bits of Joss and feminism and the ethical problems of Dollhouse and the more I read into it the more I realise that quite a lot of people were disturbed by the 'human trafficking and prostitution' shown on the show. I realise of course when I was watching it that it was a disturbing theme, but when I first went through the show I never found myself thinking that the show itself was disturbing, I always thought the show was about the exploitation of the Dolls and in the end, sort of on their side in a way. Like, I was never 'I'm not watching it it's disgusting'. But a lot of people don't see it that way. So yeah, I just wondered when watching it for the first time, how did you feel about the themes?

 

[Taake]

Honestly, at first I thought it was a very compelling theme because the problem was a real one but the scary part to me was the technological aspect of it. And as is said in "Man on the street" by the teacher or whatever he is; "if this technology is real it will be used, abused and as a species we will cease to matter"

So I never looked at it as prostitution etc, I saw the frightening aspects of this being used against human beings to change us from who we are whether we want to or not (i.e. once the technology spread). Prostitution and human trafficking are real problems in a real present day world, yes they scare me, but Dollhouse for me gave a 'fantasy' glimpse into the future where they're taken to a whole new level.

So for me it is more the technology that scared me (as it continues to do because I am frightened by a lot of it and how quickly it's moving forwards in our world) than the real life crimes that could be read into it, to me those became a kind of side-note to the real problem.

 

[white avenger]

Actually, I never saw any of that. I just saw an interesting show with an intriguing premise created by a writer/director I liked and starring an actor whose work I enjoyed, combined with the added attraction of some really good fight scenes featuring a martial art (Muay Thai) that is very seldom, if ever, used in an action/adventure series or movie. The implied prostitution and slavery factors never even occurred to me.

I guess I'm just a shallow, superficial old man.

 

[brinkster130]

I always saw Dollhouse in a very eerie and creepy way, but I still enjoyed it.

The use of the dolls for sexual fantasy and fulfillment was something I noticed right away and I did find it twisted and disturbing. It essentially was a "high class" prostitution ring they were running that was around to serve those with deep pockets.

The use of technology was what I found most scary. Humans can be horrible and the fact that they developed technology to completely control humans was troubling. I always wondered what was going on with other dolls; surely there were incentives to use dolls in combat, business, politics etc. in order to control things an make money.

 

[JCoatsworth]

When I first watched Dollhouse I just thought that it was a really interesting show. It was fun to watch and hat a gripping plot.
I didn't see the programmable people as a problem. It was just a great idea for a awesome story and created many possibilities.

Of course programming people and selling them is unethical, but why not make a great story out of it?
Personally, I think people give way too much thought about certain stuff.
For example Kill Bill. Killing fifty people or so is wrong, but I love the movie. And why shouldn't I? Does the movie say it's the right thing to do? No, it's just the story of the movie.

 

[Bexieh]

Of course programming people and selling them is unethical, but why not make a great story out of it?
Personally, I think people give way too much thought about certain stuff.
For example Kill Bill. Killing fifty people or so is wrong, but I love the movie. And why shouldn't I? Does the movie say it's the right thing to do? No, it's just the story of the movie.

I don't think the problem people seem to be having is that it's wrong to do, but more along the lines of, okay here's a quote from something I read in researching this "In particular, the show depicts people's attitudes towards the Dolls as objects or pets rather than as human beings. Reactions to the show from viewers and critics focus on this aspect, inviting a reading of Whedon, the writers, and the camera as being exploitive, rather than the show being a story of exploitation." I'm not saying I agree with that, just that that's what these people seem to be concerned about more so than the idea of it being the wrong thing to do. The idea of how the subject matter is dealt with rather than what it is.

 

[JCoatsworth]

I don't think the problem people seem to be having is that it's wrong to do, but more along the lines of, okay here's a quote from something I read in researching this "In particular, the show depicts people's attitudes towards the Dolls as objects or pets rather than as human beings. Reactions to the show from viewers and critics focus on this aspect, inviting a reading of Whedon, the writers, and the camera as being exploitive, rather than the show being a story of exploitation." I'm not saying I agree with that, just that that's what these people seem to be concerned about more so than the idea of it being the wrong thing to do. The idea of how the subject matter is dealt with rather than what it is.

Huh, so their problem is basically that the series shows the unmoral attitude of the people from the Dollhouse towards their Dolls, that they see the Dolls as objects or products and not as equal beings?
And they think that the idea itself is unethical? Do I get this right?

 

[white avenger]

I don't think the problem people seem to be having is that it's wrong to do, but more along the lines of, okay here's a quote from something I read in researching this "In particular, the show depicts people's attitudes towards the Dolls as objects or pets rather than as human beings. Reactions to the show from viewers and critics focus on this aspect, inviting a reading of Whedon, the writers, and the camera as being exploitive, rather than the show being a story of exploitation." I'm not saying I agree with that, just that that's what these people seem to be concerned about more so than the idea of it being the wrong thing to do. The idea of how the subject matter is dealt with rather than what it is.

Ironically, the attitude of her handlers toward the dolls is quite similar to the Watchers' attitudes toward the Slayers, and almost certainly the Potentials as well. Both Slayers and Dolls were views as resources of one sort or another. Slavery? We're led to believe that the Potentials are placed in the hands of their Watchers at a quite early age. Kendra actually said that her parents were paid for her. And no slave owner had authority over life and death any more that the Watchers and their Slayers. In fact, the Watchers literally worked their charges to death. Prostitution? That's a subject that never came up on "Buffy," but almost certainly over the centuries, some of the young girls were sexually abused. Probably the attitude of "Why not? She's not going to live long enough to do anything about it anyhow (and don't delude yourself into believing that a Slayer's strength could always overcome the intimidation that she had been feeling for years as a Potential).

Even the characters and conditions on the two shows could be seen as parallels:

(Indulge me here, I AM making a point)

The Dollhouse/Watchers - The the "management," controllers of the Dolls' living conditions, training, and assignments.

Alpha/Angel/Angelus - Dark, sinister lover from Echo's past.

Boyd Langdon/Giles - The authority figure who sees his charge as more than just a resource, who actually cares about and tries to protect her within the limits that his superiors dictate.

Topher/Willow - the resident genius with a less than assertive personality.

And, of course,

Paul Ballard/Spike - with whom Echo, during the course of the series, goes from adversary to intimate friend, if not lover, who dies at the conclusion of the series, leaving Echo regretting that she had never been able to make him aware of her love until it was too late.

Even the ending of the two shows, with both Sunnydale and the doll house destroyed.

(And here's that point)

Joss re-made "Buffy The Vampire Slayer," with a few specifics (particularly science instead of magic being the driving source of the action) changed, and called it "Dollhouse." But in the case of "Dollhouse," with its bigger scale and more obvious elements, the viewers and critics saw what he, whether consciously or not, was doing., and didn't like it.

 

[Xin Rong]

I was neither, I just enjoyed it as a TV show, I was intruiged if anything.

 

[Living Dead Boy]

The entire idea of the "human trafficking" theme is what got me interested in the first place. I think it's an extremely risky and controversial concept to bring to the masses, but it was also important. If the networks had gotten the first season right, and hadn't rushed the penultimate episode of the second season, this series would've been absolutely perfect. It still is a brilliant, if not a bit flawed, look at how technology and power can corrupt. It's also a harrowing glimpse into the future, as much as I don't want it to happen. So I was "deeply concerned", not shocked or troubled. Some episodes were definitely disturbing (Belonging, anyone?), but the show's entire mission statement was to make you feel uncomfortable, and for us to really think about these issues, which I think they pulled off pretty well.

 

[prophecygrrl]

I've only seen a few episodes of Dollhouse, but I didn't really stick with it because at the time, I didn't know who Joss Whedon was and I hadn't watched Buffy yet, so I didn't trust that it would "get better" like others did and I didn't have much interest in Eliza Dushku, lol.

I still haven't watched Dollhouse past the first four or five episodes, partly because of the prostitution and human trafficking aspects. I know Joss meant to walk the line between what unethical/ethical or nonconsensual/consensual, but there are times when he crosses the line (and even he admits it) and IDK, I'm not prepared for that yet? I've been thinking about watching the rest of it in the summer, so I can decide for myself.

There's a pretty cool interview with Joss about women and sex in Dollhouse here:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2009/02/dollhouse-count.html

I just found it when I was googling Dollhouse, and there's some interesting points about objectification and human trafficking in it. Maybe it'll help you in your paper? 🙂

 

[niskaisfact]

My wife was viscerally upset about the series until "Man on the Street", at which point it clicked for her as a feminist. Then it became one of her favorite series, after Dr. Horrible, actually.

For me, it was pretty clear that the series was ABOUT the fantasies and power structures that support prostitution, pornography, and objectification of both sexes. You have to show the evils in order to make the project of undermining them dramatic.

 

[Jodast]

I finished watching season 1 last week and thought it was brilliant. Fox once again dtropped a clanger with a Joss show, but I digress.

It is a creepy premise, you effectively sell your soul for five years to be used as others see fit, for fun and profit. The fact that sex is a large part of the system shouldn't come as a great surprise. Home video took off essetially because it made pornography accesible in the home. VHS won the home video format race because it was the cheaper option for the porn companies to put their product on. Blu-ray won the HD format race because before the movie studios made their decisions, the porn studios opted not to use HD-DVD but Blu-Ray instead. Technology and sex go hand in hand, if you'll pardon the pun 😉

What I find distasteful about it as a concept is that these people have no idea what they have let themselves in for and what is being done to them. There is a difference between volunteering to do things you object to and having objectionable things done to you.

That being said, from what I have seen so far it is an amazing show and I am sad that I only have one season left to watch and know that there won't be any more 🙁

 

[niskaisfact]

If you're writing an essay, you should check out the special issue on Dollhouse in the academic journal, Slayage, put out by the Whedon Studies Association. (It's a peer-reviewed journal, so it's a good source.) It's at slayageonline dot com.

Also, if you were proud of the essay, consider submitting it to the undergraduate scholarly journal, Watcher Junior. We'd love to have a good essay on Dollhouse.

 

[VisionGirl]

Of course the concept is disturbing- it's supposed to be. There are many things in other Whedon's shows that are disturbing too: violence in Buffy, Angel's moral ambiguity in his own show, Mal's constant degradation of Inara, etc. Aren't these things the point? Isn't good art supposed to make you think?

Sure I see the similarities like White Avenger mentioned, but I think Joss explored certain themes in more detail: the ethics of technology, the essence of self/soul/personality, the exploitation by others, personal autonomy, & the triumph of the individual. I'm doing the rewatch (come join us everybody!), & I think that Dollhouse is one of Joss' deeper works.

 

[November]

On the first watch through I wasnt all that disturbed by it, I think I was more caught up in the dolls storylines and being excited that Joss had a new show, but on this rewatch I am! Its a horrifying idea.