You are not connected. Please login or register

New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday

Go to page : Previous  1 ... 6 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 10 of 14]

226 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:42 am

BULLSHIT. Almost every online poll shows its against

View user profile

227 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:45 am

@Genkimonk wrote:Teresa May has come out saying how great it is to have a female Doctor.
Mike agrees with her.
May is a tory.
Mike agrees with a tory.
Mike is now a tory Wink

He obviously thinks "there are boy-jobs and girl-jobs" also....

View user profile http://www.thefuckingobvious.com

228 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:49 am

Mike

avatar
Dick Tater
@Genkimonk wrote:Teresa May has come out saying how great it is to have a female Doctor.
Mike agrees with her.
May is a tory.
Mike agrees with a tory.
Mike is now a tory Wink
Now that is a logical fallacy. A false equivalency. From an ex-card-carrying Tory.

View user profile

229 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:49 am

Mike

avatar
Dick Tater
@Rob Filth wrote:
@Genkimonk wrote:Teresa May has come out saying how great it is to have a female Doctor.
Mike agrees with her.
May is a tory.
Mike agrees with a tory.
Mike is now a tory Wink

He obviously thinks "there are boy-jobs and girl-jobs" also....
By accepting men and women can do the same jobs?

View user profile

230 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:52 am

@Genkimonk wrote:BULLSHIT. Almost every online poll shows its against

Online polls such as ... ?

View user profile

231 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:00 am

Polls or it didn't happen LOL

View user profile

232 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:31 am

@Mike wrote:
It isn't a logical fallacy.

Yes it is, and it's this wonky rhetoric that's abounding on Twitter right now, defending the move.

View user profile

233 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:10 am

Mike

avatar
Dick Tater
@The Talking Cabbage wrote:
@Mike wrote:
It isn't a logical fallacy.

Yes it is, and it's this wonky rhetoric that's abounding on Twitter right now, defending the move.
No, it isn't.

You seem to be implying that Seal is wrong to equate casting a man to casting a woman in terms of its political context, thus implying a possible apolitical stance, a default tabula rasa. What you seen to fail to realise is that it is impossible for art to be apolitical. All art contains what is called 'import', a kind of message in a bottle, and also appears within a certain ideological context conveying a set of values, imprinted in the work through both form and content.

For the sake of argument, let's class new Who as art, which, very broadly, it is. It certainly functions in the same way for the purpose at hand.

As Seal has explained, over the past few years the show has altered such that the casting of the lead has become acutely political. It always has been, subliminally, in that it reproduced (and will continue to do so, in a different way) the dominant ideology. The notion that the casting should by default fall to a man, the idea that casting a woman is a joke, the very fact the Doctor was conceived of as a man in the first place, is political.

Do not equate 'political' with 'nefarious'; I am not saying this makes classic Who somehow inherently conservative simply because the Doctor was always a man. My point is that the Doctor as a character fulfilled a certain structural role in the fiction, a role it was felt should be filled by a man.

Over the years, this consciousness has altered. Newman himself was among the first to advocate a woman being cast. The oblique way in which the show has brought the very idea of gender to the fore recently defamiliarises the politics in which the show operates, the sort of values it reproduces. Given, therefore, that the casting of the Doctor is now obviously political, as the show keeps step with the fluidity of identity which characteristics our society, for better or for worse, there is a certain valuation attached to the casting of a man, just as there is a woman.

The show has, in its way, always been about transcendental homelessness and the loss and renewal, and thus fluidity, of identity; the self as fluid and quick to alter to new environments; the flexible outsider, able to fit in everywhere, and yet belonging to nowhere, always an alien, never alone.

View user profile

234 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:13 am

@Mike wrote:For the sake of argument, let's class new Who as art,
Okay, and this instance is equivalent to Marcel Duchamp drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa.

@Mike wrote:Newman himself was among the first to advocate a woman being cast.

No he wasn't, Tom Baker predated him by about 5 years. Sue Lawley by about 4 years.

Are we to have ‘a trumpet playing schoolgirl in “John Lennon-type spectacles” and her graffiti-spraying “yobbo” elder brother’ as companions too then?

LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL  LOL

@Mike wrote: The oblique way in which the show has brought the very idea of gender to the fore recently defamiliarises the politics in which the show operates, the sort of values it reproduces.
Ah, you're talking about revisionism now. It's okay, I've caught up with you.

@Mike wrote:Given, therefore, that the casting of the Doctor is now obviously political, as the show keeps step with the fluidity of identity which characteristics our society, for better or for worse, there is a certain valuation attached to the casting of a man, just as there is a woman.
Yes, it's called continuity.

Shouldn't casting be concerned with the best person to play the role rather than on political bias? Do you seriously consider that the actors playing characters like Jamie, Victoria, Ian, Barbara or indeed actors such as Sylvester McCoy or Tom Baker were cast for political reasons rather than their ability to play the part?


@Mike wrote:the fluidity of identity which characteristics our society, for better or for worse

REALLY?

In all of my life and out of the many hundreds of different people I have met within half a century from all backgrounds and cultures, I have only met and talked to about three or four transgender people. You're talking as if they are mainstream and universally accepted within society.

Mike, I have a great deal of respect for you as a person, but here you are just waffling pseudo-intellectual bollocks to defend lame stunt casting which is nothing more than a revisionist approach to one of Doctor Who's main planks of conventions(regeneration)

@Mike wrote:The show has, in its way, always been about transcendental homelessness and the loss and renewal, and thus fluidity, of identity; the self as fluid and quick to alter to new environments; the flexible outsider, able to fit in everywhere, and yet belonging to nowhere, always an alien, never alone.
What the fuck has this got to do with revising one of it's main conventions to something which is just appeasing tokenism rather than for any coherent narrative reason.

This decision has painted all future casting into a corner because now every single time a new Doctor is cast people are going to demand a box-ticking exercise on physical identity-politics rather than just cast the actor best suited to the characteristics of the part they are playing.



Last edited by Rob Filth on Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:26 am; edited 4 times in total

View user profile http://www.thefuckingobvious.com

235 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:16 am

Rawkus wrote:
@Genkimonk wrote:BULLSHIT. Almost every online poll shows its against

Online polls such as ... ?

There is one on the Daily Mirror where 63% are against the decision, but it's only a sample of about 500 people.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/doctor-who-jodie-whittaker-reaction-10811248

Most of the people I've seen vehemently supporting and dismissing this casting stunt aren't even fans of the show, amongst them I'd say the majority are supportive - however within fandom it is more evenly split at around 50/50.

View user profile http://www.thefuckingobvious.com

236 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:10 am

Daily Mail readers LOL

View user profile

237 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:07 am

I posted this before but here you go.
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-there-ever-be-a-female-doctor-who

View user profile

238 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:07 am

The Sun are scum: http://www.salon.com/2017/07/17/jodie-whittaker-doctor-who-the-sun/

View user profile

239 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:08 am

@Genkimonk wrote:I posted this before but here you go.
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-there-ever-be-a-female-doctor-who

That's 'all' the polls you were talking about LOL LOL LOL

View user profile

240 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:09 am

The Radio Times polled 12,000 people but... debate.org Smile

View user profile

241 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:13 am

Im not your personal google. Go get your own. You asked for a poll and I provided.

Also, the fact that the DM is the leading selling newspaper and one of the most visited sites online suggests it is more likely to have the larger group discussing this topic and thus is a closer reality to the overall sentiment. This is, of course, if the moderation has been fair.

View user profile

242 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:15 am

Radio Times has been BBC properganda since day 1. Look how much it praises DW when it has been utter shit. It isn't a trust worthy source.

The only reason the DM is more reliable is that you can see the sentiment from the real time comments section. Half of which wont have had time to be moderated.

View user profile

243 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:35 pm

And according to the Mirror, she's only signed a one year contract. And as we've seen from previous Doctors, one year isn't enough. It wasn't enough for Chris but we still got one.
In Today's paper. Not been put online. Great, now you think I'm lying!
Sorry but a one year contract for a TV show is not exactly the vote of confidence this has been reported as.

View user profile

244 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:36 pm

(Thank you, Mike for discussing 'Import', so I didn't have to. study )

Some of you feel so strongly about this issue that you might have to consider avoiding the show during Whittaker's tenure in the role. And no, that's not me telling you to fuck off or anything, it just seems like the ultimate destination of your arguments right now.

The show stopped being bona fide Doctor Who back in 2005. Yes, it's bound in the continuity of the old show, but it's undergone such a tremendous shift in tone and content, that JW's casting hasn't had much of an effect on me. Had the show stayed truer to it's original premise I might have felt differently.

As I said, this decision was to be expected. I don't think the Doctor's gender is a sacred cow any more - because NewWho has no sacred cows. It's a product; it only ever does what is expedient to the writer and the franchise (a word I hate, btw). The show has had a degree of freedom to do things it's never done before, to be as bold and as crazy as it wants to be without the trappings of the old show weighing it down. New Who has operated this way from it's inception, and the casting of Whittaker is just a component of that.

It's why I see it as a mildly-entertaining populist pastiche of the old show. Indeed, there's no point in being proprietorial over something that I never really felt I 'owned' in the first place.


_________________
View user profile

245 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:46 pm

@Mike wrote:No, it isn't.

Yes it is, for reasons already given.

@Mike wrote:You seem to be implying that Seal is wrong to equate casting a man to casting a woman in terms of its political context, thus implying a possible apolitical stance, a default tabula rasa.

Nope. But carry on with your strawmen. The reason why casting a woman as the Doctor is a crap idea ought to be self evident. It fucks around with the core formula, which you should never do in the same way you don't loosen the screws in a speeding car. It's not progression, it's hubris, and the culmination of the show becoming Who In Name Only. (WINO.)

@Mike wrote:What you seen to fail to realise is that it is impossible for art to be apolitical. All art contains what is called 'import', a kind of message in a bottle, and also appears within a certain ideological context conveying a set of values, imprinted in the work through both form and content.

I'm reminded of that scene in "I'm Alan Partridge" where he ends up ranting at an empty chair. Yeah, stick it to that strawman! Give him hell

@Mike wrote:For the sake of argument, let's class new Who as art, which, very broadly, it is. It certainly functions in the same way for the purpose at hand.

Pseuds Corner, here we come...

@Mike wrote:As Seal has explained,

That's a funny way of summarising a load of drivel.

@Mike wrote:over the past few years the show has altered such that the casting of the lead has become acutely political. It always has been, subliminally, in that it reproduced (and will continue to do so, in a different way) the dominant ideology. The notion that the casting should by default fall to a man, the idea that casting a woman is a joke, the very fact the Doctor was conceived of as a man in the first place, is political.

You're using a lot of verbosity to defend a fundamentally stupid idea.

@Mike wrote:Do not equate 'political' with 'nefarious'; I am not saying this makes classic Who somehow inherently conservative simply because the Doctor was always a man. My point is that the Doctor as a character fulfilled a certain structural role in the fiction, a role it was felt should be filled by a man.

Avoid strawmen.

@Mike wrote:Over the years, this consciousness has altered.

???

@Mike wrote:Newman himself was among the first to advocate a woman being cast.

Avoid appeals to authority.

@Mike wrote:The oblique way in which the show has brought the very idea of gender to the fore recently defamiliarises the politics in which the show operates, the sort of values it reproduces. Given, therefore, that the casting of the Doctor is now obviously political, as the show keeps step with the fluidity of identity which characteristics our society, for better or for worse, there is a certain valuation attached to the casting of a man, just as there is a woman.

This is circular logic - it is because it is because it is.

@Mike wrote:The show has, in its way, always been about transcendental homelessness

Please tell me you're taking the piss.

@Mike wrote: and the loss and renewal, and thus fluidity, of identity; the self as fluid and quick to alter to new environments; the flexible outsider, able to fit in everywhere, and yet belonging to nowhere, always an alien, never alone.

You sound like yet another no-mark, wannabe showrunner trying to shoehorn their shitty fanfic into an existing show, rather than take the risk and see if anyone would tune in without the Doctor Who brand.

View user profile

246 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:49 pm

@Boofer wrote:(Thank you, Mike for discussing 'Import', so I didn't have to. study )

Some of you feel so strongly about this issue that you might have to consider avoiding the show during Whittaker's tenure in the role. And no, that's not me telling you to fuck off or anything, it just seems like the ultimate destination of your arguments right now.

The show stopped being bona fide Doctor Who back in 2005. Yes, it's bound in the continuity of the old show, but it's undergone such a tremendous shift in tone and content, that JW's casting hasn't had much of an effect on me. Had the show stayed truer to it's original premise I might have felt differently.

As I said, this decision was to be expected. I don't think the Doctor's gender is a sacred cow any more - because NewWho has no sacred cows. It's a product; it only ever does what is expedient to the writer and the franchise (a word I hate, btw). The show has had a degree of freedom to do things it's never done before, to be as bold and as crazy as it wants to be without the trappings of the old show weighing it down. New Who has operated this way from it's inception, and the casting of Whittaker is just a component of that.

It's why I see it as a mildly-entertaining populist pastiche of the old show. Indeed, there's no point in being proprietorial over something that I never really felt I 'owned' in the first place.


Surely you can come up with a better argument than 'like it or lump it'? The idea's crap. The decision is self-harming. It should be criticised, and all your post hoc pollyanna won't mask that fundamental fact.

View user profile

247 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:52 pm

Talking Crappage. LOL

See what I did there? Wink LOL


_________________
View user profile

248 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:55 pm

@Boofer wrote:Talking Crappage. LOL

See what I did there? Wink  LOL

Make yourself look like an even bigger putz than usual?

View user profile

249 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:04 pm

@The Talking Cabbage wrote:
Surely you can come up with a better argument than 'like it or lump it'? The idea's crap. The decision is self-harming. It should be criticised, and all your post hoc pollyanna won't mask that fundamental fact.

Darth Vader wrote: Now, release your anger!
 LOL

That wasn't an argument endorsing the decision though, it was a suggestion as to what you could do with your spare 45 minutes during New Who broadcasts.  Wink

And to be fair, what do you hope to achieve by being a salty cunt about it? Do you somehow have hope that they'll overturn the decision and cast a man just because Talking Crappage had a load of conniptions on some far flung outpost of the internet?  LOL  LOL  LOL

The truth is that you're going to have to learn to deal with it. No amount of flouncing, crying or sub-Peter Hitchens broken fallacy detection is going to change things and you know it.

You're angry, we get it.


_________________
View user profile

250 Re: New Doctor To Be Announced This Sunday on Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:05 pm

@The Talking Cabbage wrote:
@Boofer wrote:Talking Crappage. LOL

See what I did there? Wink  LOL

Make yourself look like an even bigger putz than usual?

I'm not the one anger-spunking all over this thread. Wink

Most angry people don't appear all that rational, btw. Wink


_________________
View user profile

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 10 of 14]

Go to page : Previous  1 ... 6 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

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