A TW vs. DW morality question

[neadods]

T3, Who-Daily: lj user="neadods"> a href="http://neadods.livejournal.com/705917.html">has a TW vs. DW moral question (Spoilers for Journey's End)

A DW vs TW morality question:

Comments

[shaggydogstail]

I don't see it as an either/or question - both are forms of assault. TW uses retcon in a variety of situations, including many in which I'm sure they'd argue they were doing it for the recipient's own good. Not that any of them, like Donna, get a choice in the matter.

I saw no evidence that Donna was incapable of giving informed consent. Quite the opposite, in fact, since the very reason she was so upset was because she knew exactly what was happening to her. Even if she were incapacitated, it would still have been RTD's choice to write her that way. However you look at it, Donna was textually denied the ability to make her own choices and that - not the question of whether it would be better if she lived or died - was what was wrong with JE.

[spiralsheep]

IAWTC ↑

[neadods]

I wanna know how to code that arrow!

My reply to the original comment is just below this, and boils down to along with RTD's racial issues, he's got consent issues, because the *only* New Who companion to leave on her own steam and without duress is Sarah Jane. Rose was allowed to fall into the void (after the Doctor had snuck up on her with the universe jumper), Jack was left behind, Martha was driven out, and Donna was mindwiped.

At least Moffat doesn't seem to think that there's something defective about people who *don't* want to be joined at the hip to the Doctor 24/7, and hopefully won't be coming up with plots to force them away one way or another.

[spiralsheep]

If you get plain text comment notification emails then the html codes are visible. :-)

The arrows are, with no spaces: & u a r r ;

Also: ↓ & d a r r ; and ← & l a r r ; and → & r a r r ;

← ← ↓ ↑ ↓ → →

;-)

[neadods]

I don't get plain text messages. *makes note, because I really need a "points upwards and nods" icon anyway.*

Brace yourself for more spam; this is inspiring Yet Another Top Post.

[acroyear70]

Yeah - I did make one observation about Rose & Donna: if RTD stopped getting into the habit of having humans go "I'll travel with you forever", then he wouldn't have to go through such convoluted and depressing b.s. to retire them from the tardis when the actor's moving on.

[acroyear70]

update - I see we both hit on that observation at the same time (i hadn't read the other newer post yet). :)

[neadods]

As you've seen, I've come up with a tl;dr about that... :>

[neadods]

I saw no evidence that Donna was incapable of giving informed consent.

The repeated words, the warning that cross-species crosses are unstable - that all read to me as if she was starting to break down, and since the problem was with her head, it means that she was not thinking clearly enough to be able to give informed consent.

I quite like bentleywg's analogy above.

Stepping from characters into meta, yes, she was denied her own agency. Sarah Jane is the only one who hasn't been denied the ability to make her own choices - Jack was abandoned, Rose was let fall, Donna had her memory taken away, and Martha was essentially driven out, especially as she pointed out in her speech that she was leaving because she felt unvalued.

At least SM will bring in a different set of subtextural issues than RTD.

[acroyear70]

Well (having just watched the goodbye again, followed by time crash which is now obligatory), I'd disagree that Martha was "driven out" - but the "rebound" factor was certainly there as was the "stationary friends" thing.

but then again, i'm a guy and that might have something to do with it.