I've grown to conclude that the problem with River Song is that she's an experiment in non-linear storytelling that just isn't working for a lot of people.
It's a big, risky, weird thing to introduce a secondary character who has met your POV-character at some unspecified time in the future and then get no omniscient-POV info on her, so that we are "meeting" her out of order as well. We did get a little bit of that in the first few minutes of Time of Angels, and there's a moment at the end, too, where we see River without the Doctor around, and I found myself really latching on to these moments because they are filling in gaps left in her initial characterisation. And they're only filling in teeny weeny gaps when there are HUGE MASSIVE ones still there. Without the stuff filling those gaps in, it's hard to figure out what she's about, whether she's a protagonist or not, whether her smugness is justified or not, and whether her claims about what she knows about our trusty POV-character are legitimate
( ... )
And I am definitely not liking this sinking feeling that I'm getting that Moffat is going to structure his seasons so that short-term everything looks weird and unrelatable but long term it will all make sense. I want to enjoy things *now*, not 2 years from now when the other penny finally drops and we all realise we had it all wrong that whole time.
Dude, this times eleventy billion.
I'm already cranky that the ambivalence I felt about 5.01-5.03 was potentially negated by Amy's bomb drop of "what's a Dalek?"
I'll be really annoyed if we suddenly get information about River Song that explains everything, but I'll still be left with the knowledge that for however long, I maybe disliked her for being a competent, awesome woman.
I just don't like this whiff of "Those things were sucky and nonsensical on purpose! Ha! Fooled you!"
No.
I don't want to have to sit through sucky and nonsensical just so someone who thinks he's too clever by half can prove to me how naive and gullible I am. And basically at this point my prediction is that Amy and this season is pretty much anything except what it/she appears to be. There have been too many winks and nudges. And really I'd just like to get the Big Reveal™ over with so we can get back to Adventures in Time and Space.
It's a big, risky, weird thing to introduce a secondary character who has met your POV-character at some unspecified time in the future and then get no omniscient-POV info on her, so that we are "meeting" her out of order as well.
is it really that big and risky? i recall the time traveler's wife being an incredibly popular book and film. i haven't seen the film, but i've read the book, and it certainly does the same thing -- except there it's in the service of a very run-of-the-mill love story
( ... )
I don't know if henpecked is the right word. She treats the Doctor as you would someone you love dearly, but exasperates you with all their eccentricites.
When she spoke to him sharply, or henpecked him, it was because he was either wandering off down some mental side road, or letting his pride get in the way when stuff needs to happen and be done.
I think a lot of it is that we don't really know River Song, but let me hit you with something.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they've never actually stated that she's his wife. Who else would treat someone like that and would know his birth name? His child. A child lovingly exasperated with her genius father. Could River Song be a regenerated Jenny working under an alias?
I don't think she does. In fact, I know she doesn't. I think there's a raise of an eyebrow, but at no point does she ever say it. Her being the Doctor's wife is an assumption everyone (including the other characters) make, but in the podcast for those episodes, Moffat says that she's something more complicated than that.
Though I think the she's-his-daughter bit is negated by the creeptasticness of the handcuff flirting in FotD.
She is, in many ways, the smug, arrogant hero, and archetype that a lot of people nonetheless enjoy in a variety of incarnations (the most famous being typically male, but my admittedly sketchy knowledge of the extents of genre fiction suggests that there's probably more than a couple female examples in the fantasy/sci-fi/urban fantasy department).
The problem isn't that. The problem is that the show already has one: The Doctor.
The archetype doesn't work when there's more than one. That kind of character either has to be the best at what he or she does, to make the audience feel that, okay, some of that smugness is justified, or the character can be the butt of the joke, the tool we can laugh at for their overinflated ego.
The Doctor's not a joke. He's the big goddamn hero because he is the big goddamn hero. Support characters can save the day too (and they are there to prove the Doctor needs help, too), but in the end we tune in to see the Doctor. Jack Harkness didn't
( ... )
I liked River Song better in SitL/FotD, I find. River Song as I remember her from those two eps struck me as more self-aware and self-confident despite showing occasional bits of vulnerability. Probably because she showed occasional bits of vulnerability; things like surprise and compassion make us human. River Song from 5.04 seemed to have mistaken a brash, dismissive, demanding and frankly condescending attitude for confidence somewhere along the line. And I kind of wonder if, from a character point of view, it's the companions that make the difference. She seemed less pushy and 'claw to mark my territory' when the companion was Donna, who's not so young and conventionally pretty as Amy.
Besides, she actually more or less summons the Doctor - counts on him being there to save her - and that defeats the entire point of the Doctor who comes out of nowhere to help people in need. That doesn't normally mean "I got myself into an entire mess of trouble; save me but don't expect any kind of thanks or gratitude
( ... )
Comments 30
It's a big, risky, weird thing to introduce a secondary character who has met your POV-character at some unspecified time in the future and then get no omniscient-POV info on her, so that we are "meeting" her out of order as well. We did get a little bit of that in the first few minutes of Time of Angels, and there's a moment at the end, too, where we see River without the Doctor around, and I found myself really latching on to these moments because they are filling in gaps left in her initial characterisation. And they're only filling in teeny weeny gaps when there are HUGE MASSIVE ones still there. Without the stuff filling those gaps in, it's hard to figure out what she's about, whether she's a protagonist or not, whether her smugness is justified or not, and whether her claims about what she knows about our trusty POV-character are legitimate ( ... )
Reply
Dude, this times eleventy billion.
I'm already cranky that the ambivalence I felt about 5.01-5.03 was potentially negated by Amy's bomb drop of "what's a Dalek?"
I'll be really annoyed if we suddenly get information about River Song that explains everything, but I'll still be left with the knowledge that for however long, I maybe disliked her for being a competent, awesome woman.
Reply
No.
I don't want to have to sit through sucky and nonsensical just so someone who thinks he's too clever by half can prove to me how naive and gullible I am. And basically at this point my prediction is that Amy and this season is pretty much anything except what it/she appears to be. There have been too many winks and nudges. And really I'd just like to get the Big Reveal™ over with so we can get back to Adventures in Time and Space.
Reply
is it really that big and risky? i recall the time traveler's wife being an incredibly popular book and film. i haven't seen the film, but i've read the book, and it certainly does the same thing -- except there it's in the service of a very run-of-the-mill love story ( ... )
Reply
When she spoke to him sharply, or henpecked him, it was because he was either wandering off down some mental side road, or letting his pride get in the way when stuff needs to happen and be done.
I think a lot of it is that we don't really know River Song, but let me hit you with something.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they've never actually stated that she's his wife. Who else would treat someone like that and would know his birth name? His child. A child lovingly exasperated with her genius father. Could River Song be a regenerated Jenny working under an alias?
Reply
ETA: According to this wiki entry it's not explicitly said that they're married, only strongly implied.
Huh.
Reply
Though I think the she's-his-daughter bit is negated by the creeptasticness of the handcuff flirting in FotD.
Reply
Oooh. Random cracktastic idea: What if she's a future regeneration?
Reply
Reply
She is, in many ways, the smug, arrogant hero, and archetype that a lot of people nonetheless enjoy in a variety of incarnations (the most famous being typically male, but my admittedly sketchy knowledge of the extents of genre fiction suggests that there's probably more than a couple female examples in the fantasy/sci-fi/urban fantasy department).
The problem isn't that. The problem is that the show already has one: The Doctor.
The archetype doesn't work when there's more than one. That kind of character either has to be the best at what he or she does, to make the audience feel that, okay, some of that smugness is justified, or the character can be the butt of the joke, the tool we can laugh at for their overinflated ego.
The Doctor's not a joke. He's the big goddamn hero because he is the big goddamn hero. Support characters can save the day too (and they are there to prove the Doctor needs help, too), but in the end we tune in to see the Doctor. Jack Harkness didn't ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Besides, she actually more or less summons the Doctor - counts on him being there to save her - and that defeats the entire point of the Doctor who comes out of nowhere to help people in need. That doesn't normally mean "I got myself into an entire mess of trouble; save me but don't expect any kind of thanks or gratitude ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment