i think with dark, complicated female characters who don't emote there's this tendency to want to "fix" them-- to make them get in touch with the feeeeeeelings and get psycholanalyzed and therapy through their shit until they're OKAY (whatever the hell that means.) and frankly, it bothers me. i've also seen it manifest itself as a temptation to break down the character emotionally until they put themselves back together in a way that's more socially acceptable (read 'normal with normal emotions') and that's equally problematic.

I went round and round all day about jumping in here or just having longer rambly think-y thoughts on my journal (answer: both), but this is touching on some things I'm really struggling with in some of the stories I'm writing (which I will grant you are closer to Disney than Cronenburg, but aren't entirely either) - where is the line between "fixing" and a character "healing" as a part of their growth and development? Because I'm a whole-hearted believer in characters coming to places and situations that help to heal them (Tony becoming and embracing Iron Man, for instance) as well as the situations that crop up that can break parts of a character down (Clint being possessed by Loki falls into this category, I'd imagine.)

And I'd think that the position that Natasha ends up in with SHIELD and her partnership with Clint, and eventually with the rest of the Avengers, that has to be a stronger place, a stronger foundation than what she had with the Red Room and would be a situation from which healing arises, which would change her. But I'm not sure I see what the differences are? I don't want to give her flat, pat answers or solutions, but I also want her to have a chance to grow and develop, if that makes any sense?

Or, you know, I could just be having one of those attacks of "oh god, what the hell am I actually doing" sorts of doubt-y moments that sneak up on you when you're not expecting them.