(no subject)

[solitary_summer]

[*sigh* What I hate about the time before Christmas is work never leaving me enough energy or focus for anything else. Come home, collapse. Struggled forever with Russian homework yesterday, not really getting anywhere, wishing it would just all go away. Very inclined to entirely skip the baking this year, except I'm feeling vaguely guilty at the thought of giving up the one Christmas tradition I actually used to enjoy, and is even remotely meaningful to me, and not helping my sister any my mother. More guilt because I actually felt good yesterday morning, and then wasted the day procrastinating on the internet and watching bits of German soap on YouTube; and then read Patrick Stewart's article, which sent my mind on a whole different tangent...]


Anyway.

WoM made me think (although vaguely and not very coherently) about the differences between TW and DW, respectively Jack and the Doctor. To me TW seems essentially modern, very existentialist, with three episodes out of twenty-six dealing with suicide and the meaning of life, or lack thereof as a main theme [*], and a bit more upfront about its philosophy, because it addresses these themes rather directly. The whole concept of Jack's immortality and how it's treated also strikes me as modern, because traditionally immortality seems to have been regarded as something desirable, and in a more abstract, religious sense, the ideal (or original) state. OTOH obviously there's also the concept of eternal punishment, but this clearly doesn't apply here, because if Jack needed redemption, he'd already got that, dying on Satellite 5. Rose bringing him back was a wilful, purely emotional act of creation, without thought or logic or purpose, which is in keeping with the essentially atheist worldview of TW, where existence is random and only has what meaning you chose to give it.

And for all Jack isn't really a part of it all any longer, having lost part of his humanity, when he lost his mortality, even if JB is also comparing him to Prometheus now, he still embodies a deeply human concept and his struggles are (still) very much tied up humanity, his own as well as humanity in general, in all kinds of ways. Having lost the freedom of travelling through time, stuck on Earth, no short-cuts, no escape, he was forced to live his life day by day, having to deal with everything he witnessed and did like everyone else, only for a rather longer time than is natural or psychologically healthy.

The fascinating thing is how at a superficial glance Jack and the Doctor seem to be struggling with similar problems, but, looking deeper, embody very different philosophical concepts, which on a textual level comes out in the Doctor running from Jack and what he personified purely on instinct, and on a meta-level is probably the reason why Jack, the Jack we saw on TW, never really fit into Who-verse after S1.

Jack is still the easier character to write about though, because of his essential humanity. The Doctor, OTOH... I'd actually love to write something about (new)DW, but I always feel to do it intelligently I'd have to bring the mythology books, etc., and a lot of knowledge in this area that I don't really have. On average I love TW more, but what fascinates me about DW is how—maybe because it's a family show and has less of an inbuilt? inwritten?... meta level, if that makes any sense?—it goes straight for the epic storylines in an unselfconscious way that gives it the feeling of a modern fairy-tale or myth. Almost old-fashioned, in some respects. It's impossible to really put it into words, because I completely lack the academic tools for this kind of stuff, but IMO that was also what made the Harry Potter books such a success— an appeal that reaches beyond the modern, intellectual, analytical, sceptic layers of our brain and connects straight to the archetypes we were brought up with, all the themes that have been part of our collective cultural subconsciousness for a long time. But HP is more of a modern fairy tale, while DW touches something even deeper and more complex, with an atheist writer throwing pagan and Christian elements together, creating a sort of god that is neither and a bit of both, putting a modern spin on the whole thing.

Merlin sometimes is a bit like that too, but with the show's premise the meta-level is always inherent in the constant comparison to the classical versions of Arthurian mythology, and it has a tendency to pull back from the darker themes and remind you that you're watching a family show, which in itself is a modern element, because traditionally fairy tales and classical mythology were never specifically geared to children.


Does any of this make sense? I wish my brain were less Christmas-impaired...



[*] Sort of tangential sort of rant: on an intellectual level I can understand hating everything TW related post-CoE, but what always baffles me are the people who claim (in so many words) that it was all good clean camp fun until CoE came along and ruined it all. Not counting apocalypses and all the casualties that weren't major plot points, in 26 episodes there wasn't just suicide (and if Owen didn't in Combat, it wasn't for lack of trying, but because Jack is a bit more selfish when it comes to the death wishes of people he cares for), but also parents losing their children, losing family, losing lovers, losing friends, confronting the essential meaninglessness of life, the randomness of death and the ugliness of human nature. The most positive episodes are the ones that still are about death and sacrifice, but at least give it some sort of meaning, putting a positive spin on it, like To the Last Man, or Captain Jack Harkness. And of course A Day in the Death, which I think already says it all. Something Borrowed was the exception, not the rule, and the only other episodes that at least vaguely fall into this category are Everything Changes, possibly maybe and with much squinting and ignoring of the darker themes KKBB, and Day One, if you focus only on the crack factor. CoE only went a couple of steps further in that it was a little more honest and realistic about the consequences.

Comments

[rivier.livejournal.com]

Just a thought on your coda: I've personally never hated on CoE because of the notion that the first two seasons were silly cracky lulz - not only do I hate the derogation inherent in that assessment, but I'm also annoyed at the idea that CoE tackled gritty, realistic concepts that the previous series hadn't squared up to, when every damned theme in CoE, from the self-serving venality of the State, the evil capacity of individual humans and collective human social groups, the dizzying power of any absolute love, suicide in desperation, the sacrifice of one innocent child to save the world, paying in the present for the sins of the past, Jack outlasting the people around him that he loves, the loss of team members... All done before and IMO done far better, because they were set in the context of more reflective, less hysterical, crowd-pleasing narratives.

But the fundamental difference - the philosophical difference - between those hard themes being addressed in the first two seasons and in CoE, is simply, crucially, that Torchwood always maintained and made explicit the possibility of hope and redemption, no matter what terrible things had happened. In the core team most of all, and at every point pretty much from Jack's first resurrection after Suzie shot him, Ianto being forgiven for Lisa and redeemed by Torchwood and Jack (and being told "there's always something left to lose"), Owen's entire arc, Toshiko's resillience in the face of every loss she endures... Jack himself, embodying the man who was forgiven and redeemed, from a selfish waste of a life and then from death itself.

Torchwood's moral coda was always the optimistic one: we carry on for as long as we can, we take comfort in those we love, we look forward with even the slightest strand of hope. It was CoE's absolute rejection and obliteration of every facet of that positive message that still makes me angry: I think that brand of crude, hate-driven nihilism maybe belongs in the Who that RTD is slowly forcing things towards, but it was never a part of what Torchwood was about from inception, and to me it was almost a desecration of a fundamental reason that the original show had held such resonance and emotional meaning for me.

[elisi]

To me TW seems essentially modern, very existentialist, with three episodes out of twenty-six dealing with suicide and the meaning of life, or lack thereof as a main theme [*], and a bit more upfront about its philosophy, because it addresses these themes rather directly. [...] but what fascinates me about DW is how—maybe because it's a family show and has less of an inbuilt? inwritten?... meta level, if that makes any sense?—it goes straight for the epic storylines in an unselfconscious way that gives it the feeling of a modern fairy-tale or myth.
*nods a lot* I think it partly has to do with TW being an adult show, and DW a family one - DW has to have that fairy-tale wrapping, because otherwise it would be too dark. TW can address everything much more directly, and generally feels more hopeless, I think, because Jack *is* only human in his capabilities - he doesn't have the Doctor's power. And although that power can be very dangerous and dark - as WoM showed - the despair of hopelessness, and the things people will do when pushed into a corner, resonates a lot more with our modern world, I think.

(I sincerely hope that made sense. My head's a bit jumbled.)