You are not connected. Please login or register

Is New Who just escapism or is it more like a cult?

+2
Mott1
Tanmann
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

The standard answer I think most of the public would give for the appeal of Doctor Who to them, is that it's just a fun bit of escapism. And indeed RTD or Moffat would probably be the first to say that that's why their dodgy science and magic fairy dust "everybody lives" endings are in keeping with that spirit and intent to just keep it a bit of escapist fun in which for a good 45 minutes the audience can pretend the world's a magical, largely happy place where everyone gets their happy ending.

And the thing is, I don't think I begrudge that much on principle. I think most would agree that when we wanted Doctor Who back, we didn't want it to be along the lines of those really heavy crime dramas about the ugly horrors of the real world and the real monsters and predators lurking in society.

That kind of TV and cinema has its place but it's not really what Doctor Who was to us and not why we watched. It was always an escape from that. An escape that sometimes fumbled the juggle of being that kind of escapism and being a bit more visceral and gritty at the same time in order to draw us in. But the intent was almost always to be divorced enough from real-world grimness to be an untroubling watch that allowed us that escapism.

And yet there are times it does feel to me like New Who has gone beyond that intent of escapism and into the realms of being like a genuine cult that proscribes morality, the emotions we should feel, and how human society is supposed to work under the ideal progressive mindset. It's like the makers felt the show had to go that bit further than just escapism in order to secure and hold captive an audience. That it had to almost proselytize and evangelize itself for that, and that it's gone beyond the bounds of escapism, and more like some cultish high.

And the problem is, because we're all drawn to that escapism, especially if it feels like it takes place more or less in the Doctor Who universe (or a close approximation), that's why we've kept watching the show even when it was getting really rotten. But it's also why there's always been a bit of an unpleasant, numbing, emptying air to what we're watching.

Mott1

Mott1

It's a cult now but it's a cult that still thinks it's the mainstream, partly thanks to social media. And if I were to compare the 3 stages of Nu Who to cultdom it'd be as follows : -

The RTD era won the general public people over as the most powerful cults & religions do, so even those who thought it was all nonsense smilingly tolerated it and allowed it to flourish. Buoyed by the freedom that gave him he moved himself and his followers into the abandoned church of Classic Who, before turning it into a tacky nightclub.

Moffat, his less benevolent deputy, didn't even have the base vision of RTD. He almost seemed more in thrall to pleasing himself than his followers. Having tried to trick sceptics with promises to restore the church back to past glories (Matt Smith's 1st season did that, briefly, as many of us brutalised by Davies' excesses were initially receptive) the power he'd obsessed over for so long caused his ego to explode. Threatened with the first signs of decline and angry at his followers' pining for their old figurehead he set fire to the already-wrecked nightclub, with his remaining acolytes still inside.

And Chibbers? He's the one survivor crawling out from the smouldering wreckage. Blackened, scorched, with increasing irrelevance, twisted and incomprehensible ideas and a horrible knowledge the cult's day is probably done.

REDACTED

avatar

In a weird sense, the original series was both a nice piece of escapist fun and a nice way to blow off steam but at the same time, it confronted real life anxieties and guided us through them. Even the more political stories like The Green Death and The Happiness Patrol can be enjoyed without the context but at the same time feel like they have been handled maturely without being tediously ''right on'' and ''hip with the kids'' as the remake series.

NuWho's fault was at the time of its debut. The Fitzroy Crowd had convinced most people that the original Doctor Who was a complete joke of a series that was just a bit of cheap, childish fun watched by sad basement dwelling anoraks and which was also emotionally vacant. Therefore the public would believe that NuWho was a more intelligently written, sensitive and right on version.

Not to mention the fact that fandom was heavily stereotyped as a bunch of sad anoraks who didn't fit in with today's preachy, plastic, hollow happiness cult so folks like Ian Levine were demonized by RTD and characters like Adam who was written in the style of Adric were brought in to be booted out to prove that the Doctor didn't need an Adric 2.0 in his adventures.

I think Tanmann summed it up perfectly in another thread about NuWho being like the nerdy kid who suddenly comes back hanging out with his new, cooler cliquey friends whilst joining in with the hazing of his old gang.

Sorry for the ramble.



Last edited by Indrid Mercury on 25th January 2020, 12:58 pm; edited 1 time in total

iank

iank

Yes, I think it is. There's always been something incredibly cult-like about New Who with its followers' utter refusal to give it any criticism whatsoever - I still remember goggling in utter disbelief at the endless 10/10s and rapturous reception given to New Earth on GB, a forum seemingly previously dedicated to being as harshly critical as possible to anything post-1977. You fast-forward to today, and the show's embracing of the PC Commie woke brigade - the very definition of a literal cult, and an extremely dangerous one to boot - and, well, say no more...

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKNC69I8Mq_pJfvBireybsg

Pepsi Maxil

Pepsi Maxil
The Grand Master

Nicola Bryant and Colin Baker are like that now. Nicola seems to explode at any criticism directed at Jodie or the new series in general. She removes anyone from her Twitter for saying the slightest negative thing about the new show which is such a Paul Cornell thing to do. I no longer have any fondness for her because of how she sometimes behaves on Twitter.

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

Indrid Mercury wrote:In a weird sense, the original series was both a nice piece of escapist fun and a nice way to blow off steam but at the same time, it confronted real life anxieties and guided us through them.

Well, certainly when the makers knew what they were doing enough to be a worthy and cathartic guide through the murk, yes.

The Tom Baker era definitely had that kind of empowering, cathartic punch about it that felt like it cut through the issues and adversities of the day, whether it was your school bully or your inland revenue bill.

Even the more political stories like The Green Death and The Happiness Patrol can be enjoyed without the context but at the same time feel like they have been handled maturely without being tediously ''right on'' and ''hip with the kids'' as the remake series.

I think they worked because there was a well-conveyed sense of the collective itch that they were scratching as stories. The sense that there was something rotten behind the business world or the industrial and chemical corporations, and they visualized it well in a way that was in keeping with the show's fantasy surrealist leanings.

The New Who examples feel more like smug bits of student agitation just to impress their right-on mates, or indeed like they're trying to unsubtly shake people into caring and almost making them feel stupid if they didn't.

NuWho's fault was at the time of its debut. The Fitzroy Crowd had convinced most people that the original Doctor Who was a complete joke of a series that was just a bit of cheap, childish fun watched by sad basement dwelling anoraks and which was also emotionally vacant. Therefore the public would believe that NuWho was a more intelligently written, sensitive and right on version.

Well, New Who was definitely tailored to the BBC climate that was still in love with its own Eastenders flagship. I found myself rewatching old cast and crew features where say Michelle Ryan and Tracy Ann-Oberman reminisce on the then recent Kat-and-Zoe storyline. They discuss what's going on with the characters and their lives, and reliving those big moments.... and essentially it just strikes me as just another form of geeking out over moments. But, done as the acceptable face of doing so in a way that wouldn't repel wives and girlfriends, and in a way that being a Doctor Who fan geeking out over Cybermen or references wasn't.

Which strikes me as a double standard because with Eastenders they're having to sift through an awful lot of contrived and ugly shite in order to get to those treasured moments. But it's pretty clear to me now that New Who was largely written, contorted and remolded to create the same kind of emotional moments and discussions as Eastenders. Because it's become the more acceptable way to create a geeky sensation. It traded one for the other, with a rather slimy cavalier indifference.

burrunjor

burrunjor

Some great posts here, though quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.

The Fitzroy Crowd were always very cliquey and yes culty, even before Nu Poo started.

This excellent quote from Lawrence Miles sums up their disgusting attitude.

Guy who knew what he was talking about in the 90s and tried to warn us wrote: "But if all this monkey-posturing sounds absurd, then let's put in the context of the late '90s / early 2000s. You may remember a time, in the days before "Doctor Who fans" meant thirteen-year-olds, when the Virgin / BBC novels actually seemed important. The authors certainly thought they were important, and pride was their most valued possession. After all, the reason I gained a reputation as an unhealthy influence was that I broke what Keith Topping called "the unspoken code", the Omerta-like law which held that New Adventures writers should all stick together in the face of fandom and not publicly criticise each others' work. I say "Omerta", but in practice, they behaved more like Medieval overlords than mafiosa: the elite have to form a united front, because otherwise, they'll be revealed as weak, flabby individuals and the peasants will get ideas above their station. Oh, and you're the peasants, by the way. When the new series began, those authors who were promoted to scriptwriter-level went from "overlords" to "royalty", which is why my heartless attack on Mark Gatiss was received with the same shock as if a small-time landowner in the Middle Ages had just referred to the Prince of the Realm as a big spaz.

You think I'm exaggerating…? Then consider this. When Paul Cornell took me to task for the social faux-pas of having opinions, he seemed appalled that I was incapable of respecting the natural hierarchy, and asked whether there was anybody I 'bent the knee' to. Bent the knee…? What is this, geek feudalism? When I told him that I had no interest in serving or reigning, he asked me: 'Do your followers know that?' I found it horrifying that anyone could even think that way, and I still do."


The Fitzroy Crowd are simply put the worst group of people I have ever seen take over a franchise. In terms of what they have done to the franchise, their appalling lack of respect for the original, their vile attitudes towards the fans, how they've sold it out to the very worst audience etc.

They should all be utterly ashamed of themselves.

burrunjor

burrunjor

Pepsi Maxil wrote:Nicola Bryant and Colin Baker are like that now. Nicola seems to explode at any criticism directed at Jodie or the new series in general. She removes anyone from her Twitter for saying the slightest negative thing about the new show which is such a Paul Cornell thing to do. I no longer have any fondness for her because of how she sometimes behaves on Twitter.

That's sad to hear about Nicola going all Janet Fielding on us. UGH what are these people thinking? Who do they think is going to cue up for hours to get their autograph when they act like that? I hate to tell you Nicola but the new woke millenial fans you think you have don't even know who you are!

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

burrunjor wrote:This excellent quote from Lawrence Miles sums up their disgusting attitude.

Guy who knew what he was talking about in the 90s and tried to warn us wrote: "But if all this monkey-posturing sounds absurd, then let's put in the context of the late '90s / early 2000s. You may remember a time, in the days before "Doctor Who fans" meant thirteen-year-olds, when the Virgin / BBC novels actually seemed important. The authors certainly thought they were important, and pride was their most valued possession. After all, the reason I gained a reputation as an unhealthy influence was that I broke what Keith Topping called "the unspoken code", the Omerta-like law which held that New Adventures writers should all stick together in the face of fandom and not publicly criticise each others' work. I say "Omerta", but in practice, they behaved more like Medieval overlords than mafiosa: the elite have to form a united front, because otherwise, they'll be revealed as weak, flabby individuals and the peasants will get ideas above their station. Oh, and you're the peasants, by the way. When the new series began, those authors who were promoted to scriptwriter-level went from "overlords" to "royalty", which is why my heartless attack on Mark Gatiss was received with the same shock as if a small-time landowner in the Middle Ages had just referred to the Prince of the Realm as a big spaz.

You think I'm exaggerating…? Then consider this. When Paul Cornell took me to task for the social faux-pas of having opinions, he seemed appalled that I was incapable of respecting the natural hierarchy, and asked whether there was anybody I 'bent the knee' to. Bent the knee…? What is this, geek feudalism? When I told him that I had no interest in serving or reigning, he asked me: 'Do your followers know that?' I found it horrifying that anyone could even think that way, and I still do."

Sorry, but I think Lawrence Miles is just as much of a vile, noxious wanker as the rest of them.

burrunjor

burrunjor

Tanman wrote:Sorry, but I think Lawrence Miles is just as much of a vile, noxious wanker as the rest of them.

Don't know much about him, but he was spot on about Cornell and the others there.

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

burrunjor wrote:
Tanman wrote:Sorry, but I think Lawrence Miles is just as much of a vile, noxious wanker as the rest of them.

Don't know much about him, but he was spot on about Cornell and the others there.

He was.

But then I suppose a broken clock is right twice a day.

REDACTED

avatar

burrunjor wrote:
Pepsi Maxil wrote:Nicola Bryant and Colin Baker are like that now. Nicola seems to explode at any criticism directed at Jodie or the new series in general. She removes anyone from her Twitter for saying the slightest negative thing about the new show which is such a Paul Cornell thing to do. I no longer have any fondness for her because of how she sometimes behaves on Twitter.

That's sad to hear about Nicola going all Janet Fielding on us. UGH what are these people thinking? Who do they think is going to cue up for hours to get their autograph when they act like that? I hate to tell you Nicola but the new woke millenial fans you think you have don't even know who you are!

Shame to hear that. Sad

REDACTED

avatar

burrunjor wrote:Quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.  

Just experimenting with a different style dude. Might keep it.

Pepsi Maxil

Pepsi Maxil
The Grand Master

Indrid Mercury wrote:
burrunjor wrote:Quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.  

Just experimenting with a different style dude. Might keep it.


Good idea! I'm going to use this style from now on. Hope that won't be a problem.

REDACTED

avatar

Pepsi Maxil wrote:
Indrid Mercury wrote:
burrunjor wrote:Quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.  

Just experimenting with a different style dude. Might keep it.


Good idea! I'm going to use this style from now on. Hope that won't be a problem.



That's cool. After all, it fits your larger than life personality.  Wink

I can't wait to see how it looks when Mistress Shue or Langford get insulted....

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

Indrid Mercury wrote:
burrunjor wrote:Quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.  

Just experimenting with a different style dude. Might keep it.

It's not exactly smooth/easy on the eyes to read Shocked

Pepsi Maxil

Pepsi Maxil
The Grand Master

Indrid Mercury wrote:
Pepsi Maxil wrote:
Indrid Mercury wrote:
burrunjor wrote:Quick question why is the text on Indrid's post different.  

Just experimenting with a different style dude. Might keep it.


Good idea! I'm going to use this style from now on. Hope that won't be a problem.







That's cool. After all, it fits your larger than life personality.  Wink

I can't wait to see how it looks when Mistress Shue or Langford get insulted....

No one here would dare insult goddess Elisabeth. What's there to insult anyway?


I hate to say it, but she makes Bonnie look average in comparison. Same with pretty much every other woman I admire. Liz is head and shoulders above the rest.

REDACTED

avatar

It's not in caps lock but it'll do I suppose. LOL

Pepsi Maxil

Pepsi Maxil
The Grand Master

It just feels like a show that bullies gravitate towards at the moment. They absolutely adore kicking their opponents when they're down and getting their fawning followers to spit on them. They're all connected and will go to extreme lengths to humiliate those who don't enjoy the current dross. Don't reveal where you live or where you work because I'm sure the worst of these cretins will try and track you down and teach you a lesson.

iank

iank

The anti-JNT 80s bashing brigade often comes across as a cult too, I find. Big Grin

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKNC69I8Mq_pJfvBireybsg

Tanmann

Tanmann
Dick Tater

iank wrote:The anti-JNT 80s bashing brigade often comes across as a cult too, I find. Big Grin

It often appears the other way round to us. shrug

REDACTED

avatar

Tanmann wrote:
iank wrote:The anti-JNT 80s bashing brigade often comes across as a cult too, I find. Big Grin

It often appears the other way round to us. shrug

Pepsi Maxil

Pepsi Maxil
The Grand Master

I'm not getting involved.

iank

iank

Tanmann wrote:
iank wrote:The anti-JNT 80s bashing brigade often comes across as a cult too, I find. Big Grin

It often appears the other way round to us. shrug

That's because you're an echo chamber, much the like the SJW crowd. You're convinced you're right, even when you're obviously wrong. You seem obsessed with the idea that people who like the 80s are somehow bound up with a "cult of personality" when the reality is most fans couldn't give a fuck about JNT as a person, and just happen to enjoy the era. It's the anti-brigade who are obsessed with him as an individual to the point of being quite disturbing.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKNC69I8Mq_pJfvBireybsg

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum