May. 7th, 2011

x_losfic: (Four)
Tired of being treated like a child, an idiot, or a traitor for not liking Day of the Moon/S6/Moffat Who and feeling like The Only One/A Newb/A Bad Person? Tired of being patronized, told Moffat Era is 'classic-influenced' in a way you can't hope to grasp, that the Doctor has 'never been a pacifist' (as Moffat tweeted, annoyed at being questioned),* and that the Epic Poetry of Moffat Era is just beyond you, as if you're not an informed and competent reader of texts? Me. fucking. too.

YANA, guys. Have some excellent links on why recent developments in the Whoniverse are problematic:

Bagheera has a startlingly accurate and affecting post on why DotM is her least favorite New Who episode.

"Does this guy share a single moral principle with the Doctor? He seems callous and arrogant, with no respect for life except the people he chooses to associate with. And the effect he has on people around him is almost opposite to what the Doctor ought to do. The Doctor encourages people to question authority, to be better and more independent and confident than they were. He makes timid people braver, and violent people kinder. Eleven makes people dependent on him (River, Amy), tells them to shut up and do as he says, makes them fanatics (River's trust in him re: jumping off buildings is majorly SCARY), makes them doubt themselves (Rory) and tells them which aliens to shoot (and no: he wasn't bluffing. River shot dozens of them.) And we're not even shown how he does this (which would at least be entertaining in an evil way) but simply have to accept that somehow he does."

Full discussion here:

Aralias's review is comprehensive and considered. It's a strong analytic juxtaposition of the demands of the writing and the demands of the classic series canon, and how this episode fails to meet them.

This guy is on lj as well as his own blog, and did a good 'What Was Wrong with the Christmas Special' review. His commentary is usually structural and articulate:

Alex is the best thinker on Seven-era I know, and also the biggest fan of it. She's normally relatively quiet, but here she takes apart the 'but Seven committed genocide!' comparisons in detail, effectively pin-pointing exactly why attempts to justify Eleven's behavior on those grounds are unworkable and unsatisfying.

Oxidized-moron has an amusing, sharp critique of the Impossible Astronaut:

Who-anon, in its typical withering eloquence, linked to this post with something like 'OMG WHY SO MUCH BUTTHURT FORM THE SAD TEN FANS EUGH'. This is someone's personal lj, it's cogent, the commenters (all two pages of them) have some points and do not focus on comparisons against a rose-colored (aha), venerated RTD era. What sort of disagreement *would* Moffat Defenders find Appropriate?

"Was it really the only solution for Eleven like some out there are claiming? But trust some people in ~fandom~ to turn this around on Ten, because he was the one in the wrong even now dontchaknow?"--I feel like this commenter is right to suggest that people go 'oh but I didn't like when Ten was emo either' as a defense of Moffat era, or 'remember when Ten killed the Racnoss/Those Spider Things?!', which, again, wasn't treated (even by the relatively feeble, under-written TL! Victorious arc) as a Clever Joyful Good Thing? Why are we framing a discussion of how Eleven era works around the failings of Ten era? How is that helpful? None of these people fall back onto 'waaaah I just want Ten/Rose forererrrrrrrrrrr', which it the impression you'd get from the who_anon link.

Here's the full discussion:

Tweedy on whether Eleven, for all his apparent and remarked-upon alien-ness, is now being written as Too Human in his actions:

ALSO: Moffat is a sexist douche. It's documented up the wazoo. I'm linking this where I could *make a damn tumblr of stupid arrogant sexist shit he lets spill from his goddamn mouth like pearls of nutcaseness.* When we let that slide, we forget a fundamental issue with him as a thinker, and thus as a writer. Also we say it's 'not that big a deal', when it fucking is. Oh poor *baby*.


I am not psyched about the Gaiman ep. Sorry, but I think you should read his frankly god-awful War Games essay (which I've talked about before, but it's been years, and it bears repeating) before you get your hopes up. I don't adore him normally, but the problems with his writing come to their worst expression in his thinking on this canon.

"In my head, William Hartnell was the Doctor, and so was Patrick Troughton. All the other Doctors were actors, although Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker were actors playing real Doctors. The rest of them, even Peter Cushing, were faking it.

In my head the Time Lords exist, and are unknowable - primal forces who cannot be named, only described: The Master, the Doctor, and so on. All depictions of the home of the Time Lords are, in my head, utterly non-canonical. The place in which they exist cannot be depicted because it is beyond imagining: a cold place that only exists in black and white.

It’s probably a good thing that I’ve never actually got my hands on the Doctor. I would have unhappened so much."

Neil, my friend, it probably. fucking. was. Unfortunately that's no longer the case. SEVEN-ERA 'MORE THAN A TIME LORD' ARCHETYPAL GODLIKE BEEEEEEEEEINGZ, GUYS!! Brb, voming forever.

* It's not simply the Doctor's willingness to use violence that causes 'the genocide problem' in Day of the Moon, and a list of Times The Doctor Has Killed People to support Day of the Moon could not be more beside the point or show a poorer understanding of the ways in which the writing is flawed. What's objectionable is that episode's poor development and lack of the nuances and context that have informed the Doctor's previous responses to violence.


x_losfic: (Default)

January 2013

   1 2345

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 04:47 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios