Sunday, March 30, 2008

Not in Conventional Way

It’s been awhile since the issue of marriage between Lawrence and Nick has come up. In fact, the only recollection I have of the potential marriage between Lawrence Poirier and Nicholas Browne was in this letter:

Mike's Letter, December 2005

Like Gordon, Lawrence has achieved a lot in the years since we graduated. Taking over Lakeshore Landscaping was a huge risk, but with his partner's help, he has turned it into a thriving business. He and Nick have been together for several years now, and although they're married in practically every sense of the word, they have not decided to legalize their union with a wedding ceremony! His mom (Connie) told him she would support them if they decided to marry but she would not "give away the bride"! They will work up until January and then take a month off to travel.

Connie being unwilling to “give away the bride” is played up to be humourous in the letter; but I never was certain if Connie’s lack of support in a ceremony was the reason why Lawrence and Nick didn’t get married. We have this idea show up today for what may be the first time in the strip (although there may be some collection where this ground was covered prior to 2001. I am not sure when Nicholas Browne made his first appearance.)

Nevertheless Connie Poirier’s apparent prejudice rears its ugly head as she seems to disapprove of Lawrence participating in a wedding where there isn’t a white dress or tossing of the bouquet. It also doesn’t make a lot of sense. Even if Lawrence Poirier were a heterosexual, as the mother of the groom traditionally Connie’s participation in white dresses and bouquet-tossing would be minimal. I find it interesting however, that when Elly was the mother of the groom, buying the white dress for Deanna, was the one primary area in which she did participate in the wedding expenses. With as much fuss as the strip has made over Elizabeth’s dress over the last week, I suspect that Lynn Johnston has a little obsession in that area also.

I know that when this subject has come up before in forums discussing the strip, the idea of the same sex marriage has been a prickly one. On the one hand, one of Lynn Johnston’s great achievements in all her years of doing this strip was “Lawrence’s coming out” sequence and the Reuben award she got for it. Even in her more recent interviews, that moment and the killing off of Farley are marked as the story highlights of the strip. So, I find it interesting that this strip, which proclaimed Lawrence as gay, seems to be balking at the idea that Lawrence and Nick would get married. The common speculation has been that Lynn Johnston did not want to alienate her more conservative readers, and yet, how can you make that case, when she had Lawrence come out in the first place?

According to the For Better or For Worse website, Lawrence’s coming out is based on Rod Johnston’s brother Ralph, who later moved in with Chuck, the birth father of Stephanie Haskins, on whom Shannon Lake is modeled. The Meet Stephanie, part of the For Better or For Worse website, specifically says that Ralph moved in with Chuck, but no marriage is mentioned.

So, possibly Lynn Johnston could have Lawrence not married, because Ralph and Chuck aren’t married, and she is making art imitate life. And yet…if that were the case then why are a white dress and a bouquet even being mentioned?

19 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great to see Connie is still treating her son like a second-class son just because he's gay. This is not really a surprise though. To a Milboroughite, a child is worthless if s/he will not produce a big, white, straight wedding and "natural" children. Note that she is upset he won't marry in a "conventional" way. Because in Milborough, you are either conventional, or you're worth a little less as a person than the almighty Pattersons.

Not to mention, this is another example of Connie not living up to her "I'm a feminist" B.S. None of the real, serious feminists I know place value on the old-fashioned trappings of a wedding ceremony that have their roots in the inequality of women. A wedding isn't beautiful or special unless there's a girl in a big poofy dress with some flowers. Yeah, that's real feminist.

And what is this "as long as we still own the horses!" crap? Sounds a lot like Elly favors parents using money to control their children and the children's friends. Like how John invested in Gordo's business, and uses that as an excuse to meddle. Elly is a control freak.

11:12 PM  
Blogger DreadedCandiru2 said...

qnjones:

Because in Milborough, you are either conventional, or you're worth a little less as a person than the almighty Pattersons.

As always, Connie has the stupid belief that she somehow failed because her son turned out gay and she "can't" have grandkids to spoil. Heck, she even envied Elly when she was pregnant with April. That line of thinking indicates the she is a poser feminist just as clearly as the white organdy-and-crinoline fetish.

Sounds a lot like Elly favors parents using money to control their children and the children's friends.

Lynn loves the notion of having Elly's children being dependent on her because her own doesn't listen to her much. In her mind, the act of giving birth is something for which Aaron and Katie can never stop repaying her.

3:41 AM  
Blogger April Patterson said...

Plus, what about Molly and Gayle, Connie's stepdaughters, who are both married? Apparently, their weddings did not count, since Connie was only stepmother to the brides.

3:52 AM  
Blogger DreadedCandiru2 said...

april_patterson:

Not only that, their children are only step-grandkids. Connie has no place in their life at all according to Lynn.

4:12 AM  
Blogger howard said...

qnjones,

Not to mention, this is another example of Connie not living up to her "I'm a feminist" B.S.

I haven’t seen the “Connie as feminist” stuff in the strip in a long, long time. In fact, Connie’s main role used to be to call Elly on her nonsense, when she started going off on how she wasn’t happy, because she didn’t know what Elizabeth was doing with her life. She doesn’t even do much of that anymore. Of course, since Liz is in Milborough and finally engaged to the right guy, there may be no need.

Sounds a lot like Elly favors parents using money to control their children and the children's friends. Like how John invested in Gordo's business, and uses that as an excuse to meddle.

It does sound exactly like this and we have seen Gordon Mayes with his continual obeisance to the Pattersons as a result. I honestly can’t get my head around this one. I see Connie agreed with Elly on this one; so I wonder if she invests in Lawrence's business in order to keep control of Lawrence.

6:55 AM  
Blogger howard said...

DreadedCandiru2,

As always, Connie has the stupid belief that she somehow failed because her son turned out gay and she "can't" have grandkids to spoil. Heck, she even envied Elly when she was pregnant with April.

Well, at least in today’s strip, Connie is consistent with her prior opinions relative to Lawrence, as sorry as they are.

6:56 AM  
Blogger howard said...

aprilp_katje,

Plus, what about Molly and Gayle, Connie's stepdaughters, who are both married? Apparently, their weddings did not count, since Connie was only stepmother to the brides.

If the Who’s Who biography of Connie is canon, when Molly and Gayle left Connie and Greg, they pretty much cut Connie out of their lives, but are starting to learn to tolerate her as a grandmother. My guess is that their wedding probably didn’t count as far as those “mother of the bride” instincts go. When my wife got married, her mother and step-mother had only one daughter between them, and having to deal with those “mother of the bride” instincts was a significant task to make sure both women were satisfied.

6:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Howard,

I agree, Connie has not been up on her feminist high horse in a long time, but the expanded biography on the FOOB Central website still makes a big deal out of the "fact" that Connie is/was such a strong feminist. That wasn't really even true back in the day. Even though Connie liked to spout off the jargon, she was always on a desperate manhunt, looking to get married to any man who would have her. Hence the disastrous Pete Landry marriage and all her angst over why Phil and/or Ted wouldn't marry her, even though neither of those men would have been a good partner for her. It didn't matter if it was a good match--she just had to get married. Then the bio makes it clear that she settled for Greg, who did not really meet her standards. This is not so bad in my book, exactly, since Connie is/was pretty dysfunctional in her view of men (like most of the women in the strip). But she settled for a man who had primary custody of two kids. Two FEMALE kids she had no interest in AT ALL. A real feminist should have been all about understanding those teenage girls and trying to nurture them as young women, but no. They were just a nuisance in Connie's way. She was desperate to marry, and forced the issue, even though it was obvious Greg's kids needed time to adjust to the idea. After the wedding, they left his kids behind but took Lawrence with them to Milborough to celebrate--a clear message to the girls that they were not a part of Connie's vision of her family. She dragged them to Milborough to live, then refused to even try to understand why they were unhappy. She griped about them until they packed up and left to go back to their mother. And Connie was happy to be rid of them. Yet Lynn still heaps the blame on the girls for the failed relationship. Then, when it turned out Lawrence wasn't going to marry some girl and pop out babies with her as little trophies for Grandma, suddenly Molly and Gayle were supposed to be thrilled to have their selfish stepmother horning in and demanding a place of honor with their kids. Nevermind that those kids have a "real" Grandma. No, they are supposed to accept Connie as Grandma, because while Connie isn't as good as a Patterson, she is a Patterson associate, which makes her better than any other relative, regardless of her selfishness and incompetence.

The long bios that Lynn has written generally infuriate me. Both Anne Nichols and Connie have bios that make you realize they are truly awful people who focused on their own dysfunctional needs and never gave a thought to what was good or right for their own children. Like, marrying a man with kids if you don't want to be a stepmother is a shitty thing to do. Likewise, continuing to have children to fill your need for love because you trapped yourself in a loveless marriage with a philanderer.

I find it a little strange that Lynn doesn't see that she is not creating sympathetic characters. Nearly every last one of them has been retconned from "a pleasantly real person with flaws" into "a deeply flawed hypocrite who uses other people." Notice that the reason for a person's dysfunction is almost always an abusive or deprived childhood. I think Lynn is using those bios to work out issues she should be resolving on a therapist's couch.

7:35 AM  
Blogger howard said...

qnjones,

Just to let you know, according to the Beth Cruikshank website, she’s the one who does the expanded Bios:

Beth's current project is researching and writing the stories for the expanded "Who's Who" section of the FBorFW website. She is enjoying the chance to delve deeper into the rich and varied lives of the many characters outside the Patterson family who have added depth, humour and insight to the FBOFW strip over the years.

After the wedding, they left his kids behind but took Lawrence with them to Milborough to celebrate--a clear message to the girls that they were not a part of Connie's vision of her family.

I was struck by this too. There is an actual strip shown, so Beth was making the story match the strip and not making stuff up.

She dragged them to Milborough to live, then refused to even try to understand why they were unhappy. She griped about them until they packed up and left to go back to their mother.

The Bio actually says that Greg moved them from Thunder Bay to Milborough because he disapproved of Molly’s boyfriend and friends in general. There is no strip reference to this one, so I am not sure if that was a retcon to take the blame off Connie or not.

She griped about them until they packed up and left to go back to their mother. And Connie was happy to be rid of them. Yet Lynn still heaps the blame on the girls for the failed relationship.

True enough. We are not given a reason why Greg had primary custody of his daughters, but back in the day, it was rare when Mom didn’t get the kids. The way the bio is written is that the situation with Connie was so bad that as soon as the girls lost their support system of each other, by one graduating and going to university, the younger one considered her mother to be the lesser of two evils in comparison to life with Connie. I have next-to-no recollection of these characters.

10:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...but the expanded biography on the FOOB Central website still makes a big deal out of the "fact" that Connie is/was such a strong feminist. That wasn't really even true back in the day. Even though Connie liked to spout off the jargon, she was always on a desperate manhunt, looking to get married to any man who would have her. Hence the disastrous Pete Landry marriage and all her angst over why Phil and/or Ted wouldn't marry her, even though neither of those men would have been a good partner for her. It didn't matter if it was a good match--she just had to get married. Then the bio makes it clear that she settled for Greg, who did not really meet her standards. This is not so bad in my book, exactly, since Connie is/was pretty dysfunctional in her view of men (like most of the women in the strip). But she settled for a man who had primary custody of two kids."

Oh, wow. Take out "feminist" and put in "adventurous and independent" and substitute "Elizabeth" for "Connie".

Same old, same, old.

11:23 AM  
Blogger DreadedCandiru2 said...

qnjones:

I find it a little strange that Lynn doesn't see that she is not creating sympathetic characters. Nearly every last one of them has been retconned from "a pleasantly real person with flaws" into "a deeply flawed hypocrite who uses other people." Notice that the reason for a person's dysfunction is almost always an abusive or deprived childhood.

In other words, they've all become copies of Lynn. Since they're victims, they're allowed to do whatever they want to whoever they want to, no questions asked. This is, after all, the same woman who is angrily confused by those who qyestion Mike's parenting or Flapandhonk's treatment of April. Since they have suffered, the moral beauty of their souls is beyond reproach. Mira, on the other hand, is a damned drama queen.

2:11 PM  
Blogger howard said...

debjyn,

Oh, wow. Take out "feminist" and put in "adventurous and independent" and substitute "Elizabeth" for "Connie".

The difference here is that although Connie only gave lip service to her feminism, and practiced manhunter-ism; Elizabeth did have a clearly documented 2 years of “adventurous and independent" before she returned to Milborough and changed her personality.

2:43 PM  
Blogger howard said...

DreadedCandiru2,

In other words, they've all become copies of Lynn.

With Connie, it is particularly interesting, because the nature of the character is that she is supposed to be more accepting of new ways of doing things, like treating men and women the same. And yet, Connie was placed into the role of the person who couldn’t accept her son was gay, and now is unable to accept his marriage if there is no wedding dress or bouquet.

2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today's strip was wierd. It was like she was trying to piss off everyone outside of Coffee Talk. We have:

1. The assumption that Lawrence's homosexuality makes him effeminate. Although she's kind of been doing this to him ever since he came out.

2. The bald statement that one needs to marry and have a family to make their lives complete.

3. A reminder that parents need to dominate every aspect of their childrens' lives. This is especially bad because it implies that Liz and Michael will not even have the same level of self-sufficiency that people in the eighteenth century could expect. At least then one could make their own decisions once married off. The Patterkids have to be forever bound in Elly's orbit.

Incidentally, do you think that Liz will be allowed to keep her job once she and Anthony marry? I had originally thought not, but then considered that Deanna still works (supposedly, off camera), and that many think of teaching as "women's work." Is that enough to earn Liz a pass, or does she have to give Anthony a hoooooome?

3:14 PM  
Blogger howard said...

paladin,

Incidentally, do you think that Liz will be allowed to keep her job once she and Anthony marry?

I think she will. Before Elly took over Lilliput’s, almost 50% of the strips were devoted to Elly’s struggle to find a job. With this background, I don’t see Liz giving up work.

Is that enough to earn Liz a pass, or does she have to give Anthony a hoooooome?

She has to give Anthony a hoooooome. However, what this means is that in addition to working as a teacher, Elizabeth will also be responsible for keeping up the house and taking care of the children – the two characteristics that Thérèse lacked when she did not give Anthony a hoooooome

4:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, if the strip is to end with a wedding, and the question was whose could it be besides Liz and Anthony, then perhaps it will be Lawrence's... Anon in Rochester

5:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's unlikely that you will find any pre-2001 references to the possibility of Lawrence getting married. Same-sex marriage became legal in Ontario only in 2003.

10:05 PM  
Blogger howard said...

Anon in Rochester,

Well, if the strip is to end with a wedding, and the question was whose could it be besides Liz and Anthony, then perhaps it will be Lawrence's...

Now if only Deanna could find an old wedding dressing in her crawlspace that would fit Lawrence perfectly.

11:13 PM  
Blogger howard said...

Anonymous,

It's unlikely that you will find any pre-2001 references to the possibility of Lawrence getting married. Same-sex marriage became legal in Ontario only in 2003.

That explains why the possibility was first referenced in 2005.

11:13 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home