The Bene Gesserit Seamstresses of the 'Verse

[trinityvixen]

A link kindly provided to me by linaerys about the class conflict in Firefly/Serenity has been eating my brain for the past twenty minutes because, being bored as nuts around work, I am doing nothing but thinking on a plot bunny I plucked from my brain last week and how to work it out. It's not what the article itself talks about that I've been considering, however, but something brought up in the comments to it:

Fictional guilds are well established in literature, and I've been comparing the guilds and workers in Joss Whedon's 'verse to a pair of my favorite series with similar constructs: Frank Herbert's Dune stories and Terry Pratchett's Discworld.

Now, all three of these fictional realms are very different from one another, with one being openly comedic, another focusing primarily on pathos and tragedy, and the one at the heart of my deliberations being stretched between the two. However, the two series I know so well actually shed different lights--both very useful--onto the matter of the Guild of Companions in Firefly.

So, let's start with what we know. In the 'verse, women and (contrary to what some might think based on the series alone) men are trained from a young age to be Companions. Just to make sure I'm understood, keep in mind that just we don't see the men does not mean they weren't there--in fact, when Serenity reaches the point where Mal goes to meet Inara, there is at least one man clearly visible in the training house. He may be a teacher, true, or perhaps akin to the kind of model you'd find in an art studio. If the latter explanation holds, he would still be pretty well trained in all the arts Companions would impart to students. If the former, well, the only teachers we know of are former Companions themselves, ergo, he would be a Companion. Moving on...

Companions are schooled in art, music, dance, language, beauty (evidenced by Inara's abilities with both makeup and cloth), hygeine (her trip for an annual physical, which includes, we can reasonably presume, a screening for STDs), psychology (inferred from her ability to solve problems mostly by listening and asking incisive questions at the right moment), and, of course, sexuality (do I even have to say why I think they learn that last one?). In the deleted scenes from Serenity, Inara reveals that such training began early in her life, at the cusp of puberty for girls, when she was 12. Additionally, we are exposed to one training lesson wherein Inara is playing the part of a client while one of her students lowers her to a bed (thus strengthening my argument for the male at the house to be both teacher and Companion--he would have lots to impart here). In her argument with Sheydra, Inara says the girls cannot be Companions because of sexual coaching alone, and that shaping their outlook requires years of teaching control prior to higher order acts.

Beyond this, we know little of the Guild aside from a few laws. One is the physical, as imparted to us by Inara in "Ariel." In "The Train Job," "Jaynestown," and "War Stories," we are also told that Companions have the right to choose clients, thus ensuring they are always able to refuse an offer or a request for their services. Unlike, we are to imply, whores, who are to be assumed and shown to be too dependent on earning whatever they can to refuse many (Rance Burgess in "Heart of Gold" is the only man Nandi singles out as specifically unwelcome; she never once tells any of the posse willing to follow him that they aren't allowed in her house). Against clients chosen who prove to be unworthy, a la Atherton Wing, the Guild provides protection in the form of blacklisting.

The Guild is a union that way. Seen as such, it takes no stretch of the imagination to end the debate of what kind of class of girls are sent to them for training in the first place. Run like a union, the Guild could charge fees to its members to support the central House. In return, the Guild would arrange to contact them with new clients, filter client registry to suit talents or appetites, pay for or help fund medical care, use social and intra-house leverage to punish any who attempted unfairly to besmirch a Companion. It would not make decisions for its members, per se, but it would streamline the processes that are not worth every single Companion handling individually.

As such, it seems extremely unlikely that the sorts of girls and boys sent to Companion Houses are wealthy to begin with. In a world where the wealthy want for nothing because they can abuse a servile class almost without censure (there is much talk of indentured labor in "Jaynestown," a mention of slavery in "Bushwhacked," and even Badger is seen examining a prospective worker like a head of cattle), there is no need for the wealthy to have to rely on blue-collar labor to pull through. Artists, musicians, and dancers would be better served attending academies devoted solely to those pursuits, if endowed offspring of rich scions were so inclined, rather than working to bed those talents to serve others (artists are notoriously bad people-persons, so I doubt the central idealogy of pleasing others with their work would fly with them). It is possible that Companion Houses recruit among the rich, possibly as polishing/finishing academies for children before they enter more career-oriented paths (Simon's use of the word 'MedAcad' interested me because the word academia applies more to tertiary schooling, but academy immediately calls to mind private secondary schools; perhaps it's just me, but it does appear that the schooling system focuses more on trade universities after high school).

Poor people, on the other hand, have everything to gain by sending away extra mouths to be educated at the Guild's expense. The Guild would be able to afford the education by its dues, and, one presumes, any endowments by former members, and would, in return for the scholarship, have its choice of students to suit its program. Not that I think the affluent don't put their children through similar hoops--perhaps there is an entrance exam as with ancient Chinese civil service, or modern-day Japanese high school admissions?--but the poor would be less picky for one, and the immense gratitude of being accepted into a career path where one might make a lot of money would make for a more pliable mind than if one enrolled a child already accustomed to luxury and leisure. Upward mobility, or the promise of it, is not to be discounted as a motivating factor in engaging in work, no matter how degrading it might seem on casual glance. As the Guild ensures protection against abuse, or retribution where it fails to do so, the risks are considerably lessened. Since a lack of money can often lead both men and women to sex work in particular--the one form of labor that is truly mobile and requires next to nothing in the way of 'skill' (yes, there is some, but no, for the most part, none is required)--most of those without funds would probably see great promise, glamor and security in becoming a Companion. They would be able to run their own lives--and be better at running them--when they were through, with the Guild to protect but not interfere with their business.

But is the Guild autonomous in its own right, or does it adhere to the Alliance much as its own members are bound to it? In this much, I think immediately of Pratchett and the guild structure of Ankh-Morpork. Lord Vetinari uses the guilds of the Discworld as primary enforcers without forcing them to do his will. This comparison between 'verse and Disc clarifies things for me in that both worlds have Guilds that represent businesses deemed illegal in most 1st-world nations on Earth. The Disc has a host of guilds devoted to crime--Thieves, Assassins, and Seamstresses*--versus the 'verse's one, the Companion Guild, is all. Vetinari allows the theives to steal without punishment so long as they have a license; the assassins may off whoever they please, so long as it is covered in a contract; and no one dares confront the Seamstresses lest they run afoul of the Agony Aunts.

In return, the possibility of losing one's money to theft is severely limited, provided one pay a tax of sorts to the Thieves' Guild. In exchange for this tax, the Thieves take it upon themselves to mark a person as not to be stolen from and they deal with anyone who tries to steal from that person. Likewise for the Guild of Assassins, the tax you pay provides you with a crime-specific policing--task forces, if you will. Pay regularly, in moderation, and you will be fine.

As demonstrated in Serenity, the Alliance is badly in need of such a system, and perhaps the Companion Guild is part of it. The Alliance cannot patrol and police the entire solar system, and we know they already fund private firms in areas too remote to be worth their effort. In the 'verse, there are dangers for sex workers, too, as we learn in "Heart of Gold," ones that cannot be helped with an appeal to local law (which may often be the problem). Creating a willing fleet of women prepared for violence (one thing I forgot to add to Companion training: they are school in martial arts and weaponry, proved in Serenity's climax and Inara's efforts to stop the Operative at her training school) and backed up with the threat of the resources of the entire Guild behind them, creates an effective buffer against the excesses in the outer rim (I almost said Uncharted Territories--oh dear, mixing fandoms in an essay about mixing fandoms).

But with that protection comes a price, physical, emotional, and monetary, and this is where I begin to see shades of Dune. In Dune, there are guilds aplenty, but the one that interests me most are the Bene Gesserit in relation to the Companion Guild. The two are eerily identical in their mockup, though the Bene Gesserit are more open about pursuing their own agenda (whatsoever the Companion Guild agenda might be--if they have one--is not revealed, though it may have something to do with Inara choosing not to stay and work on the Central Planets). The Bene Gesserit also begin teaching their pupils at young ages, sharpening their minds, bodies, artistic talents, and skills of inducing pleasure. The Bene Gesserit place their trained girls and mothers in strategic locations to further their plans for collecting and directing the flow of genetic information (aka they guide bloodlines through pregnancies to create more of their number and, eventually, a messiah, who, strangely enough, is a man). They are not disinterested or passive about involvement in government because they cannot afford to be. To get what they want, they appease dictators, or use their skill at manipulation to goad those with political or militaristic power to do--often without knowing they do it--according to the Bene Gesserit agenda.

This is a very different read on the Guild from the one in Pratchett, which is a whimsical practical one. The Bene Gesserit in function are more akin to the Companions, but in terms of intent it is less clear. How does the Guild know the Alliance will respond if they bring a complaint on behalf of a Companion? Surely, such threats must be made good upon, or else they would carry no weight. Inara blacklisting Atherton Wing might keep him from hiring a date, yes, but what if she'd not gotten the chance? Suppose he killed her then or later? He threatened to disfigure her, a threat which Mal and she laughed off, but which is a scarily real compromise if she wants to pursue her career (high-minded as we want to be about Companions, we must all confess that they are obligated, out of deference to human nature if nothing else, to be at least average if not attractive--scars and disfiguration do not qualify as 'average').

The Bene Gesserit response to such a threat would be tailored to their need for the person making it. If he or his genetics were unimportant, they might only kill him. In their minds, people who aren't important should be eliminated before they can make themselves dangerous. Inara's response to someone who is of no consequence (Atherton is one man on a middling--not poor, not Central--planet, and is not well-liked from what we can tell) is to brush him off. The only man she comes near to killing is Rance Burgess, but even then, she uses the threat of violence rather than the action. When he does the unforgiveable, Inara is not the one to put him down or even chase after him (those tasks fall to Petaline and Mal, respectively).

A Bene Gesserit, on the other hand, would treat someone who was a threat much more carefully if he was a serious problem. In the Dune prequels, Baron Harkonnen possesses both the power of the spice and a genetic line the sisterhood desires, but he cannot be outright killed because he is in a position of power. Were Inara to have no other choice to protect herself or another Companion, violence must be a right no matter who. The Bene Gesserit, though influential and politically powerful, do not. Their revenge is best when it is subtle, the better to engender fear in those who challenge or oppose them--after all, there are many well-trained non-Bene Gesserit assassins, but few men or women who can control their bodies to the point where they can infect a rapist with a crippling, incurable STD that was stored in the victim's body for just such a purpose (which, sorry if this is a spoiler, is exactly what they unleash on Baron Harkonnen, turning a virile man into a bloated pus-bag).

Either set of women, Companions or the Bene Gesserit, has the right to react, and the expectation of vengeance should keep rowdy types in hand. But are the Companions or their Guild empowered beyond the shadowed expectation they will act, whereas the Bene Gesserit are subject to law and could be pinpointed to being eradicated if they could be proven to have done the act? Are they perhaps expected to react, and, while not strictly legal, forgiven it by people who see the offender as having had it coming a la the Seamstresses, Thieves and Assassins of the Discworld? That, to me, is the real question, which is more interesting than the endless moral debate over what Inara does for a living or the mystery of what she did that caused her to run away (unless it relates to the aforementioned seeking-of-vengeful-justice, in which case I'm all ears).

In fact, my questions about the 'verse are more general and less character-specific. My next long discussion of Firefly might center around the Sino-American Alliance, its origins, the issue of dominant-dependant nation statuses within, the absence of Chinese people but the primacy of the Chinese language (ads are in Chinese, suggesting it is the first language taught to children being reared, as ads and secondary/casual literature like it are good indicators of what the mainstream, predominant language of a people is), and the other nationalities that populate a small corner of the 'verse (Cockneys and Russians and Irish, oh my!).

Look forward to being bored to tears by my verbal runs on that later!

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'm really excited that my post has generated some debate.

That's a really good idea about how the guild could work, but I think there's evidence in the shooting script (and the deleted scenes), that it doesn't work that way. When talking to Inara another woman says that all the students "are from the best families".

My perspective is slightly different from yours, since I'm a historian who doesn't read that much sci-fi, so my comparison is generally other historical societies. Historically I'm not sure I can think of any examples where free training was given by a private organisation that would give them the opportunity for a career that didn't just give them financial security, but high status. We see no evidence about whether they are trained for free, or whether they pay for their training. But given that to get in they have to come from the best families I'd say that, at very least, they'd pay some money in.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

There is no perfect example of a free internship in the past that was coupled with the prestige one might enjoy after completion. A few things come close, and probably should be assimilated into the Guild construct to make it work.

For one, I could see there being an entry fee, akin to the agreement made between master and apprentice. In return for the trade the apprentice learns, he does services, and there could be an additional sum given the master to take on the student. That would incorporate the point you bring up (mysterious poster!) about the 'finest families' quite nicely. I might also point out that the woman talking is a Companion, and they almost never say anything negative about persons, and given her situation out (as we are to assume) on the border worlds, that her calling the girls she teaches well bred would probably be relative to the rest of the population on the rim. Remember, someone like Atherton Wing would be considered to be of good family because of his wealth, but the minute he moved inward in the 'verse, he'd be middle class at best. The fact that someone like Sir Warwick Harrow is out on the Rim does not designate that there is equal transfer of wealth--there are always plenty of nobles who don't have pennies to their name, in this or any other 'verse.

Another good example of a fee being provided to another party who could, potentially, elevate your status would be a matchmaker. While not exactly the same, as matchmakers are marriage arrangers, the idea of the Guild doing something like that--accepting girls with a small payment and educating them to a position of respectability--shares some idealogy in common with matchmakers connecting girls to good husbands (thus ensuring their prosperity by choosing worthy, stable, aka rich candidates as possible). That matchmaking also combines calculation and romance is a coincedence not to be overlooked; we know that the Companion is an amalgamation of many ideals of femininity, entertainment, sexual attraction and desire, so why should it not also encompass this as well?

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry I didn't mean to be anonymous - I'm maia who wrote the original post (I'm just a little bit new to the livejournal thing).

I agree that either of those could be ways the Guild work, and that we'll probably never know for sure how it works now. I just generally don't find it plausible. Which I might have if it was spelled out, but since it wasn't I don't think I'll be able to be convinced.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

The problem, I find, is, as another person stated, why, in an age where women aren't discriminated against, some would chose prostitution. There will always be the disadvantaged who will resort to prostitution for money, but the question becomes when there are outlets for women to work as professionals alongside men, why any would chose to do high-class prostitution. Lack of opportunity or discrimination not being factors, they should be able to apply themselves to other courses of study and get just as far based on talent and aptitude.

I think this is one of the most problematic pieces of the 'verse, the most fantastical next to the method of including the Chinese elements (that American and China merge I have less problem with than the how they have come together--which aspects are run according to Chinese precepts/principles/doctrines and which aren't). The idea of the high-class hooker in a society that doesn't prevent women from using similar talents towards different professions is a bit unrealistic.

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly - that was my main problem to. Not that I think the 'verse is non-discriminatory. We've got plenty of evidence that it isn't. But since I believe women in the core planets have at least as many opportunities as women do today, I don't know why or how high status prostitution would arrive.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

It's possible, I suppose, that women might have created a guild for Companions as a protective measure, since prostitution, both male and female, isn't an evil that any society has ever been able to completely do away with. As it gained respect as an enforcer, the Guild might have risen in social status as would its members--something like officers in an army have more prestige than your average grunt with no better options or who was drafted into the job.

It's interesting, isn't it, what discrimination exists in the 'verse. There's no doubt but that every member of our beloved crew thinks Zoe's the most capable soldier ever created by God (or in Mal's opinion, evolution). Often, she's taken more seriously than Mal, and when she's tough she still manages to be womanly tough about it.

On the flipside, you have someone like Saffron who is able to play at being weak and timid and people are completely put off their guard, meaning that the idea of the retiring woman is not a stereotype that was left behind on Earth-that-was. Saffron wilts and shies away and people expect that of her, despite the fact she's usually brassy enough to lure men in with a bold move that they can't retract once it's finished.

And then there are the truly odd cases of perfectly mixed gender signals, like Kaylee. She works what is predominantly a "man's" job, doesn't mind being sweaty and dirty, and is sexually aggressive. On the flip side, she does enjoy girly activities and clothing, she's nurturing (of both ship and people, since she treats them as equally worthy of her attention and love), and she accepts the traditional role of being taken out on dates rather than the more progressive 'going out' (it's based on the one date that she and Simon have in the series, but seeing as her entire behavior with him seems to involve her hinting she'd like him to pay attention but not giving an inch unless he initiates the explicitly romantic overtures, I'd say that's a fair characterisation).

[inkandalchemy.livejournal.com]

Got here via someone's link (can't even remember whose, now) and found it fascinating reading, as I'm big into all three of those fandoms and have always wondered about the similarities/lack thereof.

The thing about Companions is that, at least in my mind, prostitution isn't necessarily their primary function. It's a part of what they do, surely, and it's the part that gets the most mention on the show given that it's what most irks Mal about Inara - but things like Inara's beautiful gowns, or her tea service, or her comment to Sheydra about how she was trained for years before the physical act was even mentioned, remind me MUCH more of the old Japanese geishas. Sex was a part of what they did, but more than that they were guardians of culture, and every bit as high class as Companions are in the 'verse. You don't hire a Companion for sex; you could get that at any of the better un-registered brothels for a fraction of the price. You hire a Companion for the experience she can provide, for her wit and charm and intelligence and knowledge and yeah, sex might be a part of the overall experience but it isn't the point of it (unless you're Magistrate Higgins, of course. But I get the distinct impression he was an odd one out. *chuckles*)

I think in that way, the Companions are MUCH more like the Bene Gesserit, who are highly trained in everything they do - but on the other hand, unlike the Bene Gesserit, the Companion Guild does not seem to have a hidden goal motivating and directing their actions. It acts in its own best interest but it has no "higher purpose," so to speak.

Of course, perhaps it does, and the show simply never got far enough to touch the subject. It might be very interesting if perhaps THAT had something to do with Inara's leaving. At any rate you've provided much to muse on, so thank you for such a lovely and well-thought-out piece!

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I'm flattered you enjoyed this. Going back over my verbal babbling, I realize there's a lot going on but not much being said.

The bit about the geishas is worth another thousand or so words, but I will attempt to keep it brief. Yes, geishas were entertainers first, and you bought one for an evening that was not meant, usually (from what I understand) to include only yourself. She was to entertain guests, treat them to the very best in music and dance and table/tea service, too, if required.

Sex in Japanese society, however, is exceedingly taboo at the time of the geisha's prominence. Sex was more an unspoken understanding--akin to going to certain types of massage parlors today, if you will--and it was never mentioned or discussed about when you saw a man who had hired a geisha. And, it's important to understand that the geisha were rarely sexually involved with clients as part of their job. The traditional duties were solely related to artistic performance, and there was an acceptance of these powerful, talented women who would then go on to see some clients in a more personal setting. Strictly adhering to the geisha training, a geisha would never sleep with her client. The Western mentality associates any woman willing to entertain (even when that word is used literally) men behind closed doors with a woman who is conveying sexual favors. This is not the case for geisha, even those who then go on to have affairs with current or former clients.

On top of that, you need also consider that women at the height of geishas' popularity were nearly powerless in Japanese society. They were not allowed on stage, were basically wedded servants and mistresses of the household. Being a geisha is an outlet for some of the poorer women to hold some power, whereas in the Firefly 'verse, this male dominance seems to have even less sway than it does in our 21st century, let alone in ancient Japan.

What's most interesting for me with the mention of geishas (which I wouldn't have investigated if you hadn't brought it up, so thank you) is their method of recruitment. It's close to that I postulated for the Guild. A senior geisha would tutor an aspiring girl, who would be taken in and given chores to help offset the cost of her education. Geishas are widely trained from young ages, as are Companions, for many years prior to their service. A system like this, setting up willing, pliable girls and boys would work wonders in building up their confidence and poise prior to introducing to them to turbulent waters of puberty, intimacy, and sex.

Another aspect of geishas which is fascinatingly linked to Companions is the idea of a 'danna.' The danna would support the geisha as something like a sugar daddy might in the Western world, but he would not be able to keep her if he could not afford to keep her in the style of a geisha. Translated for a Companion, that would mean he would have to keep her engaged and entertained and in a style of living to which any Companion could be reasonably expected to be accustomed. It is a business arrangement, wherein the danna would keep a geisha to entertain him, and pay for her services in exclusion of other clients, but one that does not require either sexual favors--an abhorrent thing to ask for upfront, and one not encourage by the geisha code--unlike the 'personal Companion' status Atherton Wing desired from Inara. The concept of a danna keeping a geisha and rich man having a personal Companion are similar up until the sexual act being implied as a given.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

(...continued from above...)

And just how important is sex anyway? I do not disagree that we are biased by Mal's opinion--as our sometimes narrator and always hero--that Inara is primarily a sex worker. However, there are parts of both Firefly and Serenity (mostly in deleted scenes for the latter, but definite canon for the former) that are not guided or formed based on Mal's point of view. For instance, unrelated to this discussion perhaps but very illustrative of my point, there are the flashbacks to Simon's past that are not points of reference any but he or River would have access to among the crew of Serenity. Throughout "Safe," Mal is preoccupied with his job and saving Shepherd Book, so he would not be in a place to have these stories related to him and thus be in a position to filter the information for us, the viewers.

Understood that way, we can then see that the rest of the series is not dependent upon Mal's opinion for us to form our own, and it is very hard to conclude that sex is not in fact essential to a Companion's duties. Yes, there are probably many other skills one employs a Companion for, and we see many of them with Inara--she is a masseuse and therapist for the female Counselor in need of a break; she is Atherton's dance partner as well as his date--but not one is ever displayed as free of both the expectation and provision of sexual favors. Do I think Inara or another Companion might never entertain a client without sleeping with him/her as part of it? No, I'm sure there are many who are delighted to have a Companion at their table or party to welcome and divert his/her guests. However, if one is already paying for the services of a Companion for a quality affair, I doubt there are many who would not also choose to place a request on the Companion's sexual services as well.

Look at Inara's clients to see the pattern. Atherton takes her to dance and be paraded as a sign of his good taste and wealth, but considers her 'bought and paid for' at the end. Fess Higgins does not hire Inara, but she is there specifically to loosen him of some of his feelings of inadequacy specifically related to his sexual experience. The Counselor hires her to help her relieve stress, and the best way to do that in the end is engage in a little romantic relief as well.

And then there is the first client Inara has on the series in "Serenity." Her very first is clearly a boy with little or no confidence other than what his money might grant him. He is a little timid about women, somewhat like Simon, with his stuttering and inability to ask for their affection straight out. Before he leaves Inara, he practically insults her by confusing her polite refusal to be exclusively with him as a sign that she is only there for the time she paid for. I do truly believe Inara when she finds the time so agreeably spent that it seems to have flitted by, but her client does not.

It is that dangerous confusion of her generous investment of her love being sneered at as false that is why Companions as a whole seem so unable to escape the taint of one service they provide even among so many talents they have. Yes, Western society makes its own judgments--and we know Mal does, too, but even within the world, it is clear that not all of the well-bred, manner-born even escape the prejudice. These aspertions on the Companion's honor and training are not made in a vacuum, though I allow for the fact that all who make them on the series that we've seen are not the ideal clients but are only those as Inara has found worthy among the still up-and-coming planets of the mid-to-outer rings of the 'verse.

As to what the Companion Guild was up to, well...that's just a mystery. It's so obscure in the series that any attempts to figure it out would only be hypotheses in the dark. I find trying to puzzle out a system that must hold together beneath a light sketch provided us so much more tantalizing...don't you?

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

few men or women who can control their bodies to the point where they can infect a rapist with a crippling, incurable STD that was stored in the victim's body for just such a purpose

Tim Minear made remarks at an event recently which hint that that was *exactly* what was going on when Inara was toying with a hypodermic when threatened with Reavers in the pilot.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I've heard about this 'missing episode' plot device, and frankly, I'm glad it isn't canon. Even if Tim and Joss think it should have been, the whole sketch of the episode was so irredeemably repugnant that I couldn't hardly imagine still watching and liking the show afterwards. Part of the reason Firefly retains the fans and keeps them devoted is the way it managed to exist without making any serious missteps, but this must be attributed as much to the natural talent of the authors as to the fact it was cancelled before the ideas could run afoul of the audience.

On the one hand, I don't have a problem with Inara's syringe containing such a poison--I hardly think the twin imperatives of Companions, which seem to be hedonism and altruism, would be in sync with suicide, even suicide to prevent a violent death. On the other, ugh the idea that Inara being gang-raped by Reavers? What were they thinking?

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

I have the same reaction to that proposed episode.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Honestly, while irrevocably ruining a character on the show would have been within the reality of the 'verse being a not-so-happy place to live, it could have been done more tactfully. Plus, maybe it's just me, but it seems like an unconscious punishment of the sexually liberated woman. Maybe that's reading too much into it, seeing as Kaylee is fairly liberated, too, but Inara is the only one on the series who makes no compromises in her sexual partners--she is utterly in control of her every encounter, and it seems that this proposed episode which targets her is almost a condemnation of that.

[malfeasanceses.livejournal.com]

Wait, wait. Sorry for the years-later comment (I've been going through old Metafandom links), but–

On the other, ugh the idea that Inara being gang-raped by Reavers? What were they thinking?

I'd heard about the identity of the hypodermic. But there was a proposed episode about it being used like that? There really was? Can you tell me more about it? Holy crap.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

The contents of the hypo would have been revealed in a prospective episode that was never even scripted, only plotted out. After yet another snit about one thing or another, Inara and Mal would separate in bad spirits from one another. Inara would then encounter Reavers, shoot herself up with the hypo, and what Reavers generally do would happen. Except they would not kill her, they'd rape her. When Mal and co. caught up to her, they would find her surrounded by dead Reavers. The only thing I remember specifically is that Mal, after having called her (again) something nasty, would come to her after her horrible ordeal and take her hand and kiss it like a proper lady, showing his respect for her integrity and what she was capable of surviving.

[malfeasanceses.livejournal.com]

Aaaaaack. Thanks for responding. & I'm very glad that never made it to the screen.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

You're welcome & you and me both...

[conuly]

scars and disfiguration do not qualify as 'average'

No, but some scars can be considered attractive - signs of an interesting life.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

You are right, of course, but keep in mind the popular wisdom is that scars look good more on men than women. Few men would probably find scars that bordered disfiguration attractive in that reason. It would severely limit the client base, might even lead to problems if clients were not satisfied with a Companion's looks.

[conuly]

Popular wisdom, as often, is wrong. But duly noted.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I'm just keeping my thought processes in the realm of 'likely' and 'probably' when I reason. No, it's not foolproof, but I tend to reason more or less along the lines of the majority. It would seem that most rich people would want to be surounded by beautiful, flawless things (as they're the only ones who can afford them), but there are very probably a few who would enjoy someone with battle scars/history to entertain them at a Companion's salary.

It's just that then you have to multiply that fraction by the fraction of those applying that the Companion herself would accept, and it gets to be so small a number that I'm not sure a Companion could maintain his/her style of living at that point.

[stakebait.livejournal.com]

If illegitimacy either still exists or has an equivilent, one major source of recruiting might be the illegitimate children of the wealthy, since Companion training would give them a respected status in the world of their parents *and* remove a potential embarassment/expense. Kind of like a nunnery in the middle ages. And I would think middle class children would be another rich source (poor enough to need an apprenticeship in a gainful trade, rich enough to aspire to one with opportunities for upward mobility).

And, of course, the children of Companions themselves. Unless they're all sterilized by policy (which would be an interesting premise for a fanfic but not I think a most-likely assumption), there are likely to be either children of active Companions, concieved deliberately (a la Bene Gesserit), children of active Companions, conceived either on individual purpose but with the Guild either indifferent or censurious, children of active Guildmembers concieved by accident, and children of retired Guildmembers (unless they don't retire till after menopause, and there would still be those male Companions). I don't know about how it got started, but surely that would be a fruitful source of recruitment thereafter.

Have you read Jaqueline Carey's Kushiel books? That's another sexual guild system.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I have my doubts about illegitimacy existing in the 'verse. For one, the issue of monarchies seems to be a joke--in "Serenity," Mal says on whim that he'd love to be "king of all Londinium" as a parallel to an equally unfulfillable wish of Kaylee's. Not direct proof, granted, but something to consider. Where there are still monarchies on Earth, the issue of legitimacy amongst the citizens is still a major concern--and those deemed to be not worthy (as has plagued the empress of Japan until recently, I believe) are often treated extremely harshly. I don't doubt that Mal's dislike of the Alliance would lead him to snipe about the monarchy if there were such a system, but I don't think the passing references to possibly such a system existing are proof that it does (Sir Warwick Harrow, for instance, might have been knighted but that doesn't mean there is a king to have done it--it may be a relic from the Sino part of the Sino-American Alliance).

As for the children of companions, it's a tricky question. In the series, no Companion was conscripted for the express purpose of bearing an heir or just to have children for a client, but I have to believe that, given how Inara defines the freedom to pursue their own hearts and likes within the strictures of the Guild's teaching, there are some Companions who are free to do so. Actually, it might be encouraged as another form of trade, a la the Bene Gesserit, such that wealthy folk could obtain children in a legal transaction where there would be not lingering fear of the mother returning to usurp their place and claim the child--with the adoption system in the US, there is a fear that many parents and children have that the natural parents might return to reclaim the kids or at least interfere in their life; if a Companion were to do the birthing, the exact details would be worked out by having done so before and would be contracted.

I do not believe that Companions are sterilized. Their autonomy is absolute so long as they obey the rules of the Guild. Sterilization would compromise that autonomy. As far as we know, it is possible to renegotiate your position in the Guild--Companions like Inara who travel with given ships, Companions travelling outward to train new students at schools, et al--so it seems physically compromising a Companion's reproductive ability permanently would be contrary to that idea of freedom.

Then again, if freedom is, as it is with all things in the Alliance, only an illusion, so, too, might be the Guild's policy. I have no doubt that there is pressure exerted on some of the students to go with certain clients to curry and maintain favor. The line is blurry as to how much that is abused, and only an assumption of the Guild's benevolence can make it clear. Since we believe that Inara believes it is so, and she's pretty smart and clever with headgames, it's reasonable to assume that while some freedom is curtailed unwillingly, it's not done overly much (certainly not on the scale the Alliance does it) so as to offend the Guild's members.

No, I have not read the Kushiel series, but I may have to. I have heard good things.

[stakebait.livejournal.com]

Interesting point about the monarchies -- I never made the connection. I was thinking that they still have inherited money and power, and therefore illegitimacy would likely be an issue as regards inheritance.

I don't think the Companions autonomy can be totally absolute -- we have the example of Inara's friend, who quit the Guild because she found it too confining, and of Inara implying that any romantic relationship with Mal would be frowned on -- not just because he's the captain, I got the impression, but because ongoing romantic relationships themselves were viewed with suspicion, if not outright forbidden.

It seems to me if the Guild involves itself in romance it is quite likely to involve itself in childbearing, which is even more likely to impact Companions' ability to work, but requiring birth control or temporary reversible sterilization are more likely than permanent. And your point, about a form of surrogate motherhood as a possible Companion function, is even more fascinating.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

You're absolutely right about the romantic entanglements being controlled in some respect. Inara says it would be complicated for her to simply date someone, which may be one method of controlling Companions right there--when the Companion wants for company, she must satisfy it in her work. That might be the guiding method of the Guild, in fact--finding your own satisfaction in providing and receiving the pleasure of others. The fact that you would not then be able to pursue a relationship outside of a client-worker basis seems most unfair as that would, ideally, be the same thing (you'd want to be in the relationship for the give and take and exchange). I can only assume that it is curtailed to save confusion and keep people from attempting to romance Companions for free (as was the problem with certain whore houses in ancient Japan, where lotharios would try to make the whores love them so that they'd basically make themselves unsellable to other clients when they'd give their lovers tokens of their affection like fingers). The Guild is a business, after all, and, unfortunately, they can't have the cows giving the milk away for free except to those with whom they cannot help but having some kind of interaction with (like the captains of ships that Companions travel on). Basically, Companions are Companions all the time, not just when they're specifically being romantic with a client, so they can't just turn off their services. The Guild accepts this to a point and draws the line at the obvious, fairly sexist definition of romantic intent, probably because of the popular misconception that sex is essential to the Companion's duties with a client.

And, in that, I could see there also being the question of legitimacy in the sense of direct, unconfused paternity. If a Companion were to maintain a romantic interest who wasn't a client, and she'd arrange to go off her birth control for a client, there's a not unreasonable assumption a mistake might occur such that she would have to prove that she had not entertained or been intimate with anyone other than her client. It's easy enough to prove she's not scheduled clients (there's the Guild's database for that). It would be less so for her to eliminate the possibility of a lover being the sperm donor to a child conceived. This is very patriarchal as concerns go, but I think I've established that the 'verse isn't nearly so egalitarian with regards the war between the sexes as it's sometimes thought to be. Plus, this could also be a strong Chinese influence, with the emphasis on young generations upholding the honor and name of earlier ones (not to mention the subtle, but still present prejudices of males being responsible for females, such as with Simon being the Number One Son who must look after River--I don't doubt he loves her in the extreme, but I can't divorce his actions of protecting her from a cultural bias implied by the origins of these human transplants).

I'm sorry I brought up the babies-as-trade bit about the Guild, only because now I'm dead curious about it and there's zero evidence or ground to argue about it in the series itself. Alas.