do u consider the first 5 minutes/all of henry's weird behavior toward will as a metaphor for sa? ive seen some takes abt that, curious what ur thoughts are
CW: discussion of child abuse and exploitation, suicide.
Thanks for this, anon. I've been meaning to discuss this topic further, outside of just pointing out visual storytelling and subtext.
Well, I'll start by stating it's both figurative and literal in my opinion.
The vine isn't metaphorical because it was not like assault, it was assault. Prior to that scene, we didn't understand how exactly Will ended up with the vine inside him, so it was a matter of interpretation. The imagery was all we had to go off, but now we have the context, and it's about as obvious as the Alien facehuggers.
What could be allegorical is the idea that Will had previously suffered from a similar kind of abuse from a living person (namely Lonnie). This is plausible, because amplifying the triumphant story of a male abuse victim seems to be the kind of thing a show about outcasts in a conservative 1980s society would do. It's one thing to be gay in the 1980s, and another thing to be gay and a survivor of abuse — especially with the added context of the AIDs crisis (the framing of gay men as diseased predators), and the belief that childhood abuse "turned" boys gay.
Rant incoming, because I find this topic very fascinating, and I think a lot of people misunderstand or simplify the meaning behind why Stranger Things focusses on "outcasts" in the 1980s.
I mentioned it very briefly in my analysis here but I think it's important to consider just how many "sex scandals" gripped and shocked America in the 1980s. The 80's saw the rise of "purity culture" which framed teen sexuality as something dangerous. On the other hand, child exploitation was still rampant in both the church and Hollywood — I think the Brooke Shields biopic explained it really well, especially with how this may have been conservative "pushback" to the sexual liberation movement (60s and 70s).
This frames 1980s cultural conservatism as a double-edged sword: Something which both admonished, and upheld child exploitation. It was a confusing time for young people.
Couple this with societal pressure to maintain the image of the "perfect" family life (something which keeps victims silent out of shame) and Gen X's complicated relationship with substance abuse and mental health (indicating unresolved issues)...
It paints a much clearer picture of what Stranger Things is really about: It's not just about people who are outcasts because they are deemed "weird" — a bit uninspiring if that were the case.
It's about children of the 80s who are outcasts because their suffering highlights the problem with a conservative, purity-based, post-sex lib America which wishes not to examine itself. Their pain, differences, and experiences are dismissed because America refuses to acknowledge how cultural conservatism both enabled and hid their exploitation.
tldr: Conservative 1980s attitudes regarding sex, sexual identity, gender, and politics was really F*cked Up™ and "sex scandals" framed sexual violence and exploitation as entertainment and media fodder, which F*cked Up™ the kids aka Gen X who are still dealing with the trauma to this day, hence why they're the cohort most likely to have substance abuse issues or commit suicide.
This is why our two leading characters are both surviors of child abuse and exploitation, with one being a girl who plays a non-traditionally feminine role (El Hopper), and a boy who is queer (Will Byers).
Rant over — the point of that was to clarify why Will being portrayed as a potential survivor of CSA is not a "reach" and is actually extremely relevant to the context.
So, yes, I do think there is an ongoing allegory in this show which explores this theme. Will is possibly representing a survivor of CSA, whereas El likely represents a different kind of exploitation — that of child soldiers. Not surprising when we consider the writer's very apparent fascination with military history and WWII.
And the thing is, you don't really make these kinds of inferences unless it's supposed to lead to some kind of explanation or catharsis. In Alien there was catharsis because the sole survivor was the female protagonist, aboard a ship of men. The commentary was largely concerning the intentional eroticism of women's pain and sufferring in the horror genre. (Half-dressed women moaning in agony from the first person POV in a slasher film, for example).
There needs to be a similar kind of catharsis in Stranger Things, and I believe (and hope) this will be done by elevating Will's story from the subtext to the text. I think the same may be done for Henry, and his relationship to Dr. Brenner or the Mind Flayer.
And if we're getting technical, everything that has been done to Will has been done by Vecna and/ or the Mind Flayer, not Henry to be exact. I do see them as two separate entities, even moreso since s5 as it appears that Henry is unable to enter the "cave" or "hub" whereas Vecna likely can, if that's indeed the same place where he's keeping the children. (I believe it's the same space due to the imagery of the wall and the infinity symbol shape).
(I ramble about it a bit here, and I think I'll keep thinking on what this cave represents in the coming weeks until we get Volume II).
But basically, I want to clarify that although I think Vecna, the Mind Flayer/ shadow monster, and possibly even the demogorgons all play a role in this allegory, I do not think Henry is a paedophile.
Not that you implied this anon, because you didn't, but it is a take I see around here. I understand why people interpret it this way, but intention behind abuse does matter in this context, as does the subtle separation between Henry and Vecna.
To me, Henry is a perpetual child who is frozen in time (ghost-like) because he not ready to confront his darkness, his trauma — almost like a traumatized spirit who cannot cross over to the other side.
Vecna is his undead shadow (In D&D he is a lich, which is an undead wizard) that has consumed what was left of the shell of Henry.
Vecna is the child abuser here, as is the Mind Flayer that influences him. And the behviour of the Mind Flayer? It seems to resemble that of a domineering father or patriarch: controlling, manipulative, bigger and more powerful than the children it exploits.
The "real" villain here is the Father or Patriarch — "Papa" and Lonnie.
The Mind Flayer's motivations are to dominate, possess, control, and spread. (At least, as far as we're aware). This lines up with the D&D lore and The Illithid Empire, as well as the motivation behind an abusive patriarch who wishes to control his children and family — particularly within the context of 1980s conservatism discussed above ^
So, there are no motivations regarding attraction or sexual fixation of any kind here. Therefore, if this allegory is about Lonnie, we must ask ourselves what Lonnie could have possibly been trying to control or conserve within the Byers family.
Lonnie wanted to conserve a traditional, heterosexual, masculine ideal in both Will and Jonathan.
His attempts to "butch" them up involved sports such as hunting and baseball. Jonathan eventually met these expectations — at least to some extent — which could explain why Lonnie seemed proud when Jonathan shoved him back, and noted that he was "stronger."
Heck, he even follows this reunion up by suggesting Jonathan move to the city so he can see him more. Lonnie may be a deadbeat abuser, but he genuinely likes the "improved" Jonathan he sees before him because he's now become a "man."
Will was a more difficult case for Lonnie, because he was likely more effeminate, and possibly already began showing signs of attraction to other boys. I mean, Will gifted Mike his drawings for who knows how many years, and that definitely seems like the kind of thing a kid with a crush would do.
This is likely why Lonnie's visitations with Will continued after he left, whereas it appears he never had visitations with Jonathan. Lonnie felt his "job" was unfinished with Will — this is why I think the baseball field was a site of trauma for him. (Hence it being the site of his possession, and a site of Billy's trauma as shown in s3).
So, Lonnie's abuse was motivated by a desire to punish Will for being effeminate, in the hopes that it would put him on a "straighter path", and have him associate queerness with pain.
Luckily, Will seems to have realized that queer romance and queer joy exists through his friendship with Robin. His powers reveal accompanied his self-acceptance — particularly the love and acceptance of his uninhibited childhood self. This was the version of Will who was unapologetically himself, before Lonnie (and society at large) told him who he was is wrong.
So, I'm interested to see where Will goes in Volume II, and if there will be any exploration of his relationship with Lonnie. Noah's repeated mentions of Will's "abusive father" make me believe this will be the case. I think confronting his childhood trauma might be the final frontier in his character arc.
