15 March 2013 @ 07:48 pm
ATTF: Sir Gawain and the Labyrinth (or, headcanons and where to find them)  
Hello folks, I am apologizing for (relative) lateness of this post – I had a long day and writing this thing required some thinking and concentration on my part. Our topic today is something we often mention here – headcanons. My first post to this comm (as I recall, very fondly) was a question about Clint's canon background, and I remember, very clearly, a lovely bunch of people giving me very kind answers that there are, in fact, different canons in comics, that we don't know a lot about MCU Clint and that I'm free to pick what I like and run with it, because it's completely cool. It proved to be true, also this comm proved to accept different approaches to our favorite characters, and that people here are very open to various interpretations of Clint and Natasha and the nature of our relationship. As a new fan and new fic writer (for this couple) I didn't have a detailed, exact ideas about who Clint and Nat are, and what they're like. Just that they were awesome and badass and had incredible chemistry and wanted to know more about them. The people who taught me are – all of you.

I can pinpoint a certain “point in origin” for my learning - when I started to write my own fic(s), I was a lurker here, and mostly read discussions and things. The second story I read was “Of Languages” (funnily, I don't remember the first one; but “Of Languages” was second, I'm certain of that) and I think it laid ground for my own characterizations of entire team, not just Clint and Natasha. I know I read bunch of meta, and later, discussed things with many wonderful people here, and I don't want to single out anyone for two reasons. One, I don't remember everyone who influenced me with their ideas, and two, I really don't want anyone to feel “left behind/left out”. What's so amazing about this comm is the feeling of community that discusses, creates and is willing to share (their own views and ideas) and accepting new members and their (new) ideas. The point of this post is to invite you all to share your headcanon(s) and swap them with your fellow members.

For me headcanons are somewhat like a map – bunch of my own views (imagined facts, imagined, because they're my ideas and opinions) about our characters, their personalities, their pasts, their motivations etc. I'll try to do a comprehensive and hopefully not too long list of them, and I invite you to comment, discuss and share your own ideas :)

*difficult childhoods – it's one thing that's mutual to Natasha and Clint, you could say a first parallel between them – they're both orphaned children who ended up in hands of not very good people and had to fight for their own survival since then. I imagine Nat was taken by the Red Room when she was ten or eleven – I have an impression that many people imagine she was younger, but I like to think she had a normal childhood and loving parents through earliest, formative years. Without that (without experiencing genuine love, care and a healthy connection to someone) she wouldn't be able to recover from everything that Red Room did to her. As for Clint, I imagine he also had people he was able to connect to – that his mother was loving and tried to protect him and his brother the best she could, that some, if not many, foster parents weren't so bad (something I actually know from experience), that there were positive role models in circus, military and finally in SHIELD.

*personalities and therapy – I believe both had to go through therapy after their rough pasts (just as Clint needs it after Loki, as it is very likely for him to develop PTSD or at least post traumatic stress reaction). When I talk about personalities, I mostly think of Natasha – I don't think the meaning of “being unmade” means having her own personality completely deleted and turned into a blank slate. In real world, that's a very difficult thing to do, if not completely impossible. Also, had her personality been completely erased, there would be nothing left to reclaim. This is a further reason why I believe she wasn't a tiny kidlet when RR took her – ten or eleven is young enough to be influenced, conditioned and trained (to act and believe the things they order her to, so she'd stay alive); but also, it gives her a basis she can go back to once she decides she doesn't want to spend her life like someone's killing puppet. As for Clint, I believe he worked through most of his issues at the point when he met Natasha, and thus, he was able to be a steady companion, fellow agent, partner and friend, when she needed that stability. Which leads me to

*empathy – and the fact that both need it in order not to become unpredictable sociopaths. (SHIELD, or any organization, needs loyal members. Sociopaths and psychopaths lack the loyalty mechanism, and can't be trusted or counted upon). Clint doesn't shoot Natasha because of empathy, IMO – because he sees himself in her, his younger self looking for a way out of entire mess her life has become since she let RR and tried to settle the score with them and do some kind of warped justice. He also recognizes the basic empathy in her, while he follows her and learns about her through her actions; that's why he makes the different call – yes she is amazing and she has the skillset SHIELD could really use, but she also has the potential that's preserved in her empathy (which is why I can't subscribe to “Natasha is unkind” point of view. She is kind to people she's loyal to, but her loyalty is selective and hard won. Just as Clint's is.)

*knowing your own darnkess – basically comes down to dealing with their own issues. It's an ongoing process for both of them, but I tend to see Clint as the more steady (for me, he is the earth, and Natasha is the water). Both can be scary and destructive, but when combined, they can create amazing things. (Also, I tend to think of post – Loki Clint as cracked earth injured by earthquake; and Natasha, being the water, is able to wash away the rough edges – aka help him heal.) I was told this particular take on Nat and Clint is pretty kind? It's how I roll, I like providing my characters with chances for stability and normal-ish lives.

*trust – is a crucial thing between them. I believe that, in order to achieve this, Clint treats her with respect for her boundaries in her beginner days at SHIELD; that he treats her with honesty, and also with no fear. It's a new experience for her, considering what her life was like all through Red Room and after – she wasn't able to rely on anyone or truly trust anyone, because everything was unsafe and everything was a possible means to her own end. Clint is one of new people who treat her without ulterior motives, but also, he offers to be her friend, and she slowly learns to let him in and drop her guard, because he's proven, over and over, that he won't hurt her (not in physical, but in emotional sense). Trust is crucial, I believe, for them becoming SHIELD's strike team – their employers would pair them as partners only after they're certain they can work tohether, they trust each other and rely on each other. And that leads me to

*intimacy and consent – when they reach the point of becoming intimate, Clint is careful to follow her lead and respect her boundaries (again). When we're talking about smut fics, I'm a huge fan of enthusiastic consent; I subscribe to the school of “Natasha didn't have many (or any) genuine experiences before Clint” which is another fascinating area for them to explore. Ultimately, intimacy consists of trust, friendship and not being afraid to be yourself with that other (special) person, and it's an amazing contrast with two characters who lead this kind of lifestyle. I love when they're able to be genuine, gentle and caring around each other.

*mythology parallels – finally, I had a kick with this one. Finding parallels for Natasha wasn't very difficult; I find she is more or less typical manifestation of Persephone (and I apologize for my very basic interpretation – it's mostly the language barrier, not my lack of understanding or knowledge about the myth) – basically, a young woman who was kidnapped and taken into darkness (underground); she emerges strong, and she has also mastered that darkness and learned her way around. However I love the idea of Natasha as Minotaur, labyrinth and the labyrinth's keeper all at the same time – she is the mysterious, ever shifting landscape of the labyrinth, capable of changing personae, she is the death waiting inside that intriguing trap, but she is also the person wrapped and hidden underneath that image (and beyond “Black Widow”). I played with this idea a lot in my fics. Finding a mythology parallel for Clint was a bit more difficult, since he is treated like a supporting character in MCU – however I find arthurian Sir Gawain amazingly fitting. Depending on the version/story/a legend, Sir Gawain is portrayed differently (one could say, he suffers from characterization inconsistencies, much like Clint across comic!verse.) But, traits which are ascribed to him most often are chivalry, loyalty (to superior knights, or, in some legends, his uncle, King Arthur); bravery. He is a great warrior, and most of the time a honorable person. Also, Gawain is a background player most of the time – well liked knight, yes, but often, in modern legends, he doesn't take the front and center role. What fascinates me about Gawain the most is the legend about Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnell – in order to save his uncle, King Arthur, Gawain agrees to marry a loathy lady, Lady Ragnell. Despite her unattractive appearance, Gawain decides to treat his new bride as he would if she were desirable, and at that moment her true looks are revealed – she is beautiful, but cursed to look incredibly unappealing. She tells him then he can choose if he prefers her to be beautiful during the day (in front of others) or during the night (when they’re alone in their chambers). Gawain gives her sovereignty (the point of this legend is that what women want the most is sovereignty, aka, to be able to make their own decisions – something King Arthur learns, but Sir Gawain doesn't know of)– the chance to make her own decision; which breaks the spell for good, and she remains beautiful day and night. There are several ways to interpret this legend, however, one of the reasons I like Gawain as the mythic representation of Clint Barton is the fact that he allows Ragnell this freedom to choose – something I find very, very important in Clint's way of treating Natasha.

Long post was long! I hope I didn't make your eyes cross! Share, comment, discuss and have fun!
 
 
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] anuna-81.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2013 08:33 pm (UTC)
Re what Natasha told Bruce - yeah, possible, but it's also possible that she lied or didn't tell him the exact truth. (Spy and manipulator, anyone?) My own headcanon makes sense to me (basics of development psychology); which is why I run with it, but by all means, I like hearing and seeing different takes... and sometimes trying them out and playing with different versions than my default ones. But, when I say if she didn't have a developed personality and learned basic things like trust (and love) in her early age, she would have nothing to reclaim. (My own professional training is something I can't handwave). The age of ten is something I picked, as psychology isn't hard science and you can't measure someone's personality in inches and say this is where something ends and something else begins. But... secure attachment, trust, unconditional love, those are basic requirements for a healthy personality, or a semblance of it/chances of recovery, if you survived some kind of trauma.

Of course, if you don't want Nat to have a healthy, stable personality, that's a whole different game. I prefer her mostly healthy.

Also.... if Nat didn't have emotions, if she didn't know her own emotions, didn't know how to govern and control them, she would never be a master spy. Also, Clint, I can't see a brash personality, short fuse and being a sniper. Also.... I can't see Clint as just being a guard dog, or a kill switch/someone who pulls the trigger. In the movie he obviously has a brain (Doors open from both sides, they DO), and if he made that different call and let Natasha live, he saw something that deserved to live in her. I.... don't see how something like that can be seen, without basic empathy.

I agree on the trust, I mean there is something like trust won under fire. But I also see them as having learned to trust each other during Nat's training. It was a slow process and it worked out well in the end. As everything with these two is slow when it comes to the emotional part. Both are scarred and wary in my eyes, they would need space to let things progress. Again, nurturing comes to mind. They feed off of each other, learning steadily.

YES. And I particularly love "They feed off each other" (but it's a consensual process, they allow it) and OMG. OMG. ALL THE FEELS THAT THIS GIVES ME!!!!!!


Other than that, I believe Clint said "I love you" first, but Natasha initiated the first kiss :)


YEEEEEEEES THIS!

[identity profile] alphaflyer.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2013 09:33 pm (UTC)
Comment crash! Can't be too long or too thinky (too much beach and sun getting into my brain) but I think we do share quite a bit of head canon here. I agree with Shen about the age -- judging by the little girls I saw begging in India that looked like the one in the movie, I'd say she is about 7 or 8. Some stuff I've seen (not sure whether it was comic-based) had Natasha be recruited by RR at around 6, so that fits. It certainly fits with my HC.

My HC concerning Clint's childhood is as set out in "Warmth" and "Five Times Clint Barton Loses His Train of Thought". So -- death of parents around 6, shunted around "the system" for 3-4 years, joined the circus at about 10 years old and left it at around 18.

Not so sure on the Earth/Water image. It's lovely, but I see Natasha as fire, if anything (maybe that's a hair cliche -- sue me ...) ;-) I also don't see any mythology parallels or need to find them. Sir Gawain? I think you lose me on two point five of the knightly virtues for Clint : beneficence boundless -- maybe; brotherly love -- check (but not for his brother); a pure mind (uh-uh, no way, he's Hawkeye! maybe undercover ...?); and manners that none can impair (uh-uh; see previous); and compassion, most precious (check).

My head canon has them NOT be a couple until post-Loki (see "Going to Ground") but realize how they feel about/need/complement each other in the aftermath. Trust? Absolutely. A fundamental part of who they are to each other even before they get together (since I'm on a roll about citing/pimping my own stuff here, see "Bound" and "In the Service").

So, yeah -- by and large we're on the same wavelength, with some (minor) exceptions. :-)
[identity profile] anuna-81.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2013 09:45 pm (UTC)
Well, it's entirely possible Natasha lied to Bruce about her recruitment age. I really prefer headcanon that makes sense to me, based on my knowledge. The younger you have her recruited, the more irreparable damage there's going to be, based on everything psychology knows about early development, trauma and personality. And because I prefer her damaged but with hope, I lean towards older years.

As for comparing Natasha with fire - it's too destructive for me, too volatile, and I think she's not volatile - she can control her every word and every action (for example in Loki scene), and water can be more tempered, while fire rarely is. Also - added - water can change shapes (liquid, ice, vapor....) just like Natasha changes shapes, she can.... trick you, look calm and turn dangerous in the next moment. Also, I like how you can't destroy water, you freeze it but then it spreads and can destroy, or you heat it, but it comes down like heavy rain. Also, it can be nurturing, soothing, quiet; just like Nat can be. So that's my logic.

As for mythology, I was going for close but not exact and perhaps should have explained it a bit better but the post was already getting long, anyway - close parallels - not like my opinion is a fact. Sir Gawain was portrayed in different ways all over arthuriana - from flawless knight, a man who fails his inner quest and later blames it on a woman, a merciless and very impulsive warrior, to someone very loyal to his family and friends and it's the latest that strikes me as Clint the most. Also, when you put it all together, Gawain comes across as virtuous but certainly not flawless (and also, trying to do things right); but mostly the way he acts in "The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Lady Ragnell" is what settles him as mythology - counterpart for Clint. (I think you can compare Clint to Apollo, but only based on archery, also, you can compare him to Artemis, but then you lose a huge part of Clint's characteristics, if you see him as someone who can be playful, kind, sympathetic... Artemis is pretty single minded and scary; also, she kills a guy who accidentally saw her naked.)

Just don't take everything I say ad literam. ;)

Edited 2013-03-15 10:16 pm (UTC)
[identity profile] alphaflyer.livejournal.com on March 16th, 2013 11:34 am (UTC)
Well, I was going to the root of what Sir G was supposed to embody, namely the five nightly virtues, and there when it comes to Clint I'm with Loki -- "a man no more virtuous than yourself ..." -- and can come up with 2.5 at best. They're good ones, I grant, but not a knight in shining armour make. Flawed, yes.

As for the age thing, I can see you bringing your professional experience to bear (it's what I do on certain plot elements and reactions as well). But in a world based on comics, magic, monsters and underground brain laundries even the best-founded disbelief does require suspension, so I'll accept a government institution that hires people for their killing skills as readily as I can accept a kid brainwashed and turned into a superspy/assassin, yet left somewhat intact at 6.

But hey, we all carry our own iconography in our heads, and that's what makes this bar so fun! :-)
[identity profile] anuna-81.livejournal.com on March 16th, 2013 12:16 pm (UTC)
Oh yes, definitely, we all bring our iconography with us. And, when you professionally know something, it's much harder to ignore. Also, I don't rely on comics so much as I do on MCU, and movies do have more realism to them, I think, more emotional reality to the characters (what comics do to Natasha is sometimes.... ridiculous, from emotional POV, so that's another reason why I'm not that much into comics). I would find it hard to write something that I know doesn't make sense, just as you do it with your own professional experiences. But well, monsters, magic, government organization that hires people for killing skills - but the army does the same, doesn't it? The purpose of a soldier, ultimately, is to kill.

As for knights... well they're supposed to have those virtues, but I find none of them do. Take Lancelot for example - I don't think you could go as far from virtue as he does, and depends which legend or author you're reading, he sleeps with king's wife, and in some works, he's pretty much a mass murdering psychopath. So... pretty far from virtue he's supposed to uphold, and yet, he's the most popular knight of them all. The thing is, in most mythologies, heroes are supposed to be flawless but they aren't, and I actually like that. It gives ordinary man hope that he, too, can be a hero; besides, flawless characters are boring. There's nothing to work on, nothing to improve. Clint is a knight-ish type of character, I'd say; one who's tainted, who had rough past and tries his best in the present. I love that about him (also, that's why he fits in Springsteen music, which we discussed too. Working class hero is not a flawless hero, and I wouldn't have him any other way). My point is, not a single knight in shining armor was the exact embodiment of what they were supposed to be. Just trying to explain my reasoning, you know? (Also, there's a reason why I stayed far far away from Greek mythology with Clint. 99% of their male heroes are giant douchebags.)

Edited 2013-03-16 12:20 pm (UTC)
[identity profile] alphaflyer.livejournal.com on March 16th, 2013 12:35 pm (UTC)
Government organization that hires people for killing skills - but the army does the same, doesn't it? The purpose of a soldier, ultimately, is to kill.

Yes, it does. But killing in the context of an armed conflict (within the constraints of the laws of war and international humanitarian law) is not prohibited. extra-judicial killings of civilians (no matter how much they might deserve it) is. That's where I draw the line -- based on my own professional experience ... and why I find the characters of Clint and Natasha so interesting.
[identity profile] anuna-81.livejournal.com on March 16th, 2013 12:41 pm (UTC)
*nods* Yes, I agree with this up to some point - but there's a part of me that screams NO at any kind of killing, because war... terrible thing nobody should go through.

It's something I don't have a single attitude about, and that's because of the things I've been through. Ideal thing would be no killing. But then again ... don't know if you watched TV show Bones? Anyway the main character, forensic anthropologist, comes from digging out a mass grave somewhere and says, people who did this to unarmed civilians don't deserve to live. And I found myself agreeing with that.
[identity profile] shenshen77.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2013 10:37 pm (UTC)
Yes, I see where you're coming from with the age. And of course she could have lied, manipulative manipulator that she is ;) And yes, it would make sense for her to have a developed personality already before being taken. Because she has to come back to something as you said. I just see her as kind of an old soul, she would have a pretty much formed personality from an early age. But that is just me, I honestly never really thought about how old she was, just that she was young :) And dude, I SO want a mostly healthy Nat!

I absolutely agree on your view of Clint here. As I said before, he does have empathy, brains and a heart. He is calm when on the job, he has to be. I think Nat called him "her rock" in Breathe and that fits with my headcanon. But that's just me :)

YES. And I particularly love "They feed off each other" (but it's a consensual process, they allow it) and OMG. OMG. ALL THE FEELS THAT THIS GIVES ME!!!!!!
Exactly, it is the mutuality of that sentiment that makes it work for me.

And I just lol'ed at that last statement :D And I also firmly believe that that much sexual tension won't take years and years to resolve. Which is also why they end up as more than friends and partners within less than two years in all of my fics, my takes on them :D But who knows, that might change with the next one, you never know.

And that's another thing I love so much about these two, they work in all kinds of different scenarios. And there are so many talented writers out there who all have their own take on them. And if it's well written I'll read anything, no matter how far the characterization is from my own. If it is written believably, I'll give it a go :D
[identity profile] anuna-81.livejournal.com on March 15th, 2013 10:51 pm (UTC)
Oh dude, I don't want anyone to take my words ad literam - first - it is my second language, and sometimes, despite all the words and my best effort I fail to say things with the precision I desire. Also, my opinions are not facts :) and I love seeing and hearing what other people think, and especially why. That's how my own headcanons develop - sometimes there's nothing better but to rethink your own points and find something unexpected and new that works. :D Also, as many people have already said, there is no one true way of writing. The more variety, the better.

And I also firmly believe that that much sexual tension won't take years and years to resolve.

I subscribe to this!! Because I do think there's quite lot of attraction going on, and the more trust and companionship and friendship is there, the less likely it is to me for them to "resist" (also the idea of resisting love, and also frat rules - seen it so many times, especially in TV shows so I'm not a huge fan). I give them four years tops.

Re age.... that's something I have pretty solid opinion about, because of my profession and experience. So, if I write Nat taken by RR early, the damage they do on her is bigger, and less likely to be fixed. And because I want her mostly fixed, damaged but hopeful, I like to think she had some happiness in her life that gave her strength to endure.