Round Up: Babylon 5, Blake's 7, Doctor Who
I had an all-around good Thanksgiving. (Happy evening of Thanksgiving, all.) Good food and good company all concluded by around 3 p.m. Having successful negotiated the social adventures of the day, I got to lift the weight from my shoulders and bum around in the fannish labyrinth of my mind for several hours. Now, that's a holiday.
And having a day off, I'm going to do a fannish roundup:
Old shows I have been revisiting:
Babylon 5
I netflixed the first two DVDs of Babylon 5 season 5, the first time I've seen it in years. Byron is just as disturbing the second time around as he was the first. I choose to think it's intentional though: he is a very charismatic cult leader. I was annoyed first time around by Lyta's girlfriending and am slightly more annoyed this time. Lyta is an extremely powerful character (not just in terms of raw telepathic power) who has been on the show for years. I can understand the allure of Byron and his cult, but her utter failure to call him on any of his bullshit is not fair to her. (Case in point, when he tells her to sit then yells "No!" at her for following an order [vs. a request]. Does she really not notice that he has just engineered a situation in which she must follow one of his orders? He's ordered her to sit; he's ordered her not to. There's no third option. That's quite some lesson in how not to let yourself be bossed around.)
Sheridan is less annoying with a beard. Lochley is awesome. Sheridan and Lochley as the ex-couple of twenty years ago who are now both very embarrassed by the fact they were ever together is spot on.
Londo and G'Kar are too friendly. Now, I adore their arc. They are the very best thing in B5. I understand that they've come a long way, and I buy that Londo's apology meant a lot to G'Kar. But... but... All of that doesn't just go away. It's a question of tone. For example, when Delenn tells G'Kar it would be a horrible blow to the Alliance if Londo was assassinated and G'Kar says, "I agree," the problem is not that he says, "I agree," but that he says it as if saying it were no big deal. Now, if he'd pondered a moment and come out with a rather subdued and ever so slightly grudging, "I agree," I would have bought it completely. That's where they should be at this point. And at the best of this season (if I recall), I think that's where they are.
Blake's 7
I have been rewatching series 1 with louderandlouder, which is lots of fun as it makes me attend to the nuances with a freshness I haven't felt in years. Meanwhile, I finally bought series 4. The special features have gotten a lot more special. I enjoyed the long interview with PD; he seems a happy sort of chap (or at least he's happy when discussing Avon). I also liked the little bite of Terry Nation, for all it was way too short. The bloopers, of course, are great. And I enjoyed the studio clips too.
I also rewatched the two episodes of series 4 I lacked on VHS and hadn't seen in at least 15 years: "Traitor" and "Warlord." "Traitor" may win the award for most English television sci fi episode ever, right down to the Federation officer sipping his tea. It reminds me of that filk about the "aliens who speak English like an Oxford classicist." (I went searching for that filk but found this episode guide instead. Enjoy.) This is something of a maligned episode, but I didn't think it was that bad. As a teenager, I hated "Warlord." I'm not sure why. Maybe I just had it in for pink hair. This time around, I thought it started out very well and ended very badly. Do they ever tell us why she took her glove off? Does Crusade have an episode in which Dureena (for clearly stated reason) takes off a glove and nearly dies purely to correct this?
And then, the new:
Doctor Who: The Waters of Mars - light spoilers
It took me a long time to find this, including several unsuccessful downloads and numerous download sites asking me to become a member. (I don't inherently object to membership or paying, but if I go that route, I want it to be for a big, reliable venue, like Netflix, not whateversiteitmaybe.com.)
Anyway, I finally found it, and I very much liked it. Adelaide and her matrilineal line of heroes go a long way toward correcting several years of rampant, if low-grade, sexism.
I would agree that the episode shows the Doctor as a bad role model. Further, I understand why this is of concern to some parents: being a good role model has been his primary reason for existing on TV since 1963. But as others have pointed out, a) New Who isn't really a kids' show and b) WoM is very explicit about when and where the Doctor crosses the line. I thought it was well handled. Moreover, in universe, I think it's in character.
My reading is that, in Old Who, the Doctor and Gallifrey were ideological opponents, annoyed but balanced by each other. The dominant position of Gallifrey/Timelord society seemed to be prime directive-ish. Based in the belief that power corrupts and that even the very advanced can easily get out of their depth if they attempt to "play God," Gallifrey rejected interference with time/other societies, except in cases where Gallifrey itself was threatened or clearly directly involved. The Doctor, however, believed that it was possible to use a Timelord's power in a positive and appropriate way to help people and civilizations without "playing God" or massively messing up the universe. His acting on this belief made him a sometime criminal, but if he and the metropol were not always on good terms, its existence did, by default, check his actions. More or less consciously, he always had to weigh his interference against the displeasure of Gallifrey.
Then came the Time War, and Gallifrey was destroyed. And (pardon an odd analogy) like Achilles without Patroclus, the Doctor needed to internalize the formerly exterior influence, to become his own advisor, his own check. Now, he had always internalized Gallifreyan values to some extent; it's his native culture, after all. He is basically a balanced person and accustomed to walking carefully through time, so this particular transition wasn't that difficult for him. But over time, as he gets increasingly accustomed to being the only one left, the counter-balancing influence of Gallifreyan conservatism wanes. Add to that a rapid succession of profound emotional losses: his grieving the departure of several companions, including Rose who was "special" (like it or lump it). Add his having recently been on his own, which is not a good state for the Doctor. Place him in a situation where his intellectual understanding of what he should do is diametrically opposed to both his personality and his instinctive sense of right and wrong, a situation where he sees himself losing people again, and I buy that he snapped.
I was surprised (and proud) that the Doctor told Adelaide he loved her. Given that it took four years of soap opera for even his rather more human double to be able to whisper those words to Rose, his ability to say it to someone he's just met on the basis of a quick assessment of her character is a remarkable transformation. As far as it goes, I think it's a positive transformation. But it may also be symptomatic of a larger loss of boundaries. The Doctor remains a force for good at the cost of placing rigid limitations on his sphere of action. That's true whether the action is changing history or bonding emotionally with someone. WoM sees those barriers become permeable. Something's got to give.
Minor observations: Adelaide's granddaughter and the Doctor's granddaughter have remarkably similar names. Did I make it up, or did they share a grandparent-to-grandparent moment at one point?
And having a day off, I'm going to do a fannish roundup:
Old shows I have been revisiting:
Babylon 5
I netflixed the first two DVDs of Babylon 5 season 5, the first time I've seen it in years. Byron is just as disturbing the second time around as he was the first. I choose to think it's intentional though: he is a very charismatic cult leader. I was annoyed first time around by Lyta's girlfriending and am slightly more annoyed this time. Lyta is an extremely powerful character (not just in terms of raw telepathic power) who has been on the show for years. I can understand the allure of Byron and his cult, but her utter failure to call him on any of his bullshit is not fair to her. (Case in point, when he tells her to sit then yells "No!" at her for following an order [vs. a request]. Does she really not notice that he has just engineered a situation in which she must follow one of his orders? He's ordered her to sit; he's ordered her not to. There's no third option. That's quite some lesson in how not to let yourself be bossed around.)
Sheridan is less annoying with a beard. Lochley is awesome. Sheridan and Lochley as the ex-couple of twenty years ago who are now both very embarrassed by the fact they were ever together is spot on.
Londo and G'Kar are too friendly. Now, I adore their arc. They are the very best thing in B5. I understand that they've come a long way, and I buy that Londo's apology meant a lot to G'Kar. But... but... All of that doesn't just go away. It's a question of tone. For example, when Delenn tells G'Kar it would be a horrible blow to the Alliance if Londo was assassinated and G'Kar says, "I agree," the problem is not that he says, "I agree," but that he says it as if saying it were no big deal. Now, if he'd pondered a moment and come out with a rather subdued and ever so slightly grudging, "I agree," I would have bought it completely. That's where they should be at this point. And at the best of this season (if I recall), I think that's where they are.
Blake's 7
I have been rewatching series 1 with louderandlouder, which is lots of fun as it makes me attend to the nuances with a freshness I haven't felt in years. Meanwhile, I finally bought series 4. The special features have gotten a lot more special. I enjoyed the long interview with PD; he seems a happy sort of chap (or at least he's happy when discussing Avon). I also liked the little bite of Terry Nation, for all it was way too short. The bloopers, of course, are great. And I enjoyed the studio clips too.
I also rewatched the two episodes of series 4 I lacked on VHS and hadn't seen in at least 15 years: "Traitor" and "Warlord." "Traitor" may win the award for most English television sci fi episode ever, right down to the Federation officer sipping his tea. It reminds me of that filk about the "aliens who speak English like an Oxford classicist." (I went searching for that filk but found this episode guide instead. Enjoy.) This is something of a maligned episode, but I didn't think it was that bad. As a teenager, I hated "Warlord." I'm not sure why. Maybe I just had it in for pink hair. This time around, I thought it started out very well and ended very badly. Do they ever tell us why she took her glove off? Does Crusade have an episode in which Dureena (for clearly stated reason) takes off a glove and nearly dies purely to correct this?
And then, the new:
Doctor Who: The Waters of Mars - light spoilers
It took me a long time to find this, including several unsuccessful downloads and numerous download sites asking me to become a member. (I don't inherently object to membership or paying, but if I go that route, I want it to be for a big, reliable venue, like Netflix, not whateversiteitmaybe.com.)
Anyway, I finally found it, and I very much liked it. Adelaide and her matrilineal line of heroes go a long way toward correcting several years of rampant, if low-grade, sexism.
I would agree that the episode shows the Doctor as a bad role model. Further, I understand why this is of concern to some parents: being a good role model has been his primary reason for existing on TV since 1963. But as others have pointed out, a) New Who isn't really a kids' show and b) WoM is very explicit about when and where the Doctor crosses the line. I thought it was well handled. Moreover, in universe, I think it's in character.
My reading is that, in Old Who, the Doctor and Gallifrey were ideological opponents, annoyed but balanced by each other. The dominant position of Gallifrey/Timelord society seemed to be prime directive-ish. Based in the belief that power corrupts and that even the very advanced can easily get out of their depth if they attempt to "play God," Gallifrey rejected interference with time/other societies, except in cases where Gallifrey itself was threatened or clearly directly involved. The Doctor, however, believed that it was possible to use a Timelord's power in a positive and appropriate way to help people and civilizations without "playing God" or massively messing up the universe. His acting on this belief made him a sometime criminal, but if he and the metropol were not always on good terms, its existence did, by default, check his actions. More or less consciously, he always had to weigh his interference against the displeasure of Gallifrey.
Then came the Time War, and Gallifrey was destroyed. And (pardon an odd analogy) like Achilles without Patroclus, the Doctor needed to internalize the formerly exterior influence, to become his own advisor, his own check. Now, he had always internalized Gallifreyan values to some extent; it's his native culture, after all. He is basically a balanced person and accustomed to walking carefully through time, so this particular transition wasn't that difficult for him. But over time, as he gets increasingly accustomed to being the only one left, the counter-balancing influence of Gallifreyan conservatism wanes. Add to that a rapid succession of profound emotional losses: his grieving the departure of several companions, including Rose who was "special" (like it or lump it). Add his having recently been on his own, which is not a good state for the Doctor. Place him in a situation where his intellectual understanding of what he should do is diametrically opposed to both his personality and his instinctive sense of right and wrong, a situation where he sees himself losing people again, and I buy that he snapped.
I was surprised (and proud) that the Doctor told Adelaide he loved her. Given that it took four years of soap opera for even his rather more human double to be able to whisper those words to Rose, his ability to say it to someone he's just met on the basis of a quick assessment of her character is a remarkable transformation. As far as it goes, I think it's a positive transformation. But it may also be symptomatic of a larger loss of boundaries. The Doctor remains a force for good at the cost of placing rigid limitations on his sphere of action. That's true whether the action is changing history or bonding emotionally with someone. WoM sees those barriers become permeable. Something's got to give.
Minor observations: Adelaide's granddaughter and the Doctor's granddaughter have remarkably similar names. Did I make it up, or did they share a grandparent-to-grandparent moment at one point?