The Hive

You are not connected. Please login or register

The Questions We Daren't Bring Up.

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:03 pm

When fans moaned about the 'supposed' gay/lgbt/social justice agendas in early new who, they'd get colossally chewed-out for being prejudicial, delusional and conspiratorial by the same people who are now exalting the fact that the show is one big pomo, identitarian circle-jerk.

It appears to me that those genuinely concerned by the injection of identity politics into the show were on to something. Not necessarily because of any underlying prejudices, but because reorganising the entire concept of the show to patronisingly proselytise to an unwilling general public is a recipe for ratings disaster.

Don't get me wrong, it's probably superb if you have purple hair, a fragmented gender/sexual identity and are transracial (I include all the people pretending to be mixed race in that category too). However, these poor, confused people are but a toenail-scraping when it comes to the body populous, and yet seem to wield huge, disproportionate power not only on social media, but within the writing community itself.

Listen, I hate to say it, but I think Who is lost. We're not getting it back unless it goes to sleep for a long time, and comes back at least 2 generations later.


Is it enough to simply allow these attempts to manipulate social norms and public perception to fail?

Can the extreme social left be curtailed in terms of their influence on the arts, or are the two inextricable now?

What part does social media necessarily play in amplifying these ideologies?

Was the pomo wankshuffle of Who inevitable given a: the seemingly playdoh liberal politics of the founders, and b: the hard-line demands of an increasingly vociferous and amplified minority who formed fan bubbles on GB and in all other online spaces?

Indeed, was any public consultation done, or did our taxpayer-funded, trepidatious plasticine scribes and producers simply bow to the pressure of the social justice bubble without even considering the views of the vast majority of people on the normative end of the social politics spectrum?

View user profile

2 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:13 pm

Sorry Boofs, I disagree with the initial premise. Representation to break down barriers isn’t identity politics. I detest the essentialism of identity politics. If you are seeking greater representation which should surely be with the aim of inclusivity then a certain amount of essentialism becomes unavoidable. However, I don’t think that Doctor Who is the best vehicle for that because of its format and intended audience. I do agree that the fore-grounding of these elements are the main problem and that is linked to the tonal imbalance which has been a problem since day one. And I am not sure I agree with our thorough dismissal of Postmodernism, some of the Frankfurt School stuff is just as culpable.

The disproportionate power balance in the writing staff highlights a champagne socialist problem. Ben what’s-his-name (Cook?) on twitter who was responsible for putting together the latest Time Team farrago is a prime example of this. Identity Politics is anti-utilitarianism, and therefore, undemocratic. But look at the ‘80s (And I say that as a fan of the '80s). Writing by committee doesn’t sound like an attractive option if the committee is composed of Fanboys. It’s just a different type of myopicness.

Yeah, Nu-Who needs a long break.

As for social media, as probably any student of Media Studies could tell you, the effects of any media are so divergent that the results are mostly next to useless.

But why would the BBC do that kind of market research? Don’t you think they should trust their writers? Going for the popular vote leads to mediocrity and going for representation can lead to a niche audience.

I agree with many of the things you have said, but, interpretation of audience feedback is often a complex affair even for big studios and that’s with actually screening of a finished product. I think it was Torn Curtain where Hitchcock had equally dire feedback about two ending and ended up shooting a third when he should have just stuck with the original.

View user profile

3 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:40 pm

@Boofer wrote:Listen, I hate to say it, but I think Who is lost.

Wow, really?

View user profile

4 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:47 pm

Sadly, Maxil, I do.

Monsieur Rawkuss,

Don't 'representation' and identity politics often occupy the same place though, especially when you concede that both are predicated on essentialism? Just because the prima facie intentions behind 'positive' discrimination are good, it doesn't mean that it's not being administered and pushed by identitarian factions.

As for the stuff about tonal imbalance and the prominence and salience placed upon the changes, such prominence strongly infers that this is less to do with representation, and more to do with pushing a political agenda which exalts identity above the narrative. Ask yourself, what the fuck did any of that trailer or any of the early promo stuff have to do with a time-travelling eccentric beating monsters away with their wits? Answer: Nothing, but Jodie does have a rainbow on her outfit, a big smile and a load of piercings.

"Yeah, don't worry about stories, just make sure some minorities' vulvas wibble so they can post their bubble Who shit to tumblr."

The Frankfurt school and postmodernism are indelibly marked by their own cross-pollination. Both destroyed/undermined the old Marxist notion of dialectical materialism, and have helped replace it with random ejaculations of pluralistic, unobjective, unscientific and reactionary philosophical woo. It's all very well to piss on modernism and the enlightenment, but when you've nothing to replace them with other than a form of echt chaos, you won't invite anything other than more chaos.

There are a number of competing theories of media influence. Media studies is unfortunately replete with the same sociological/philiosophical theories that other disciplines in the humanities and social science are. 'There's no answer' *rips paper up and chucks in the air* seems like a pretty pomo response. There's definitely some robust research regarding the bubbles people find themselves in on social media. The 'filter bubble' - as it's known - is objectively shaped by the user and the company in a symbiotic relationship which gives the user what they 'want' (or at least what they think they want). If these algorithms were useless at shaping human behaviour and choices, social media would rapidly disappear as there would be no investment for it. Most people are totally unaware that such curation and selection is going on, and from what I've seen from most media studies courses, they are way behind when it comes to the realities of social media and the amount of behavioural data it's producing.

Why would the BBC do general demographic research for family show which spans all ages and types of households? Well, I guess it might be in order to sample the tastes and representative demographics of the actual audience. I don't see how this somehow transmutes to mediocrity though. It doesn't mean you 'appeal to everyone', but that the appeal of the show remains broad enough to sustain an audience. It doesn't mean you forego complexity or nuance.

View user profile

5 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:47 pm

@Rawkuss wrote:Sorry Boofs, I disagree with the initial premise. Representation to break down barriers isn’t identity politics. I detest the essentialism of identity politics. If you are seeking greater representation which should surely be with the aim of inclusivity then a certain amount of essentialism becomes unavoidable.

Until churches are being built in Saudi Arabia, all African "countries" are 20% white, China has a strong minority white population, Mexico has open borders and the second world countries of the EU know their place in the world, I and a surprisingly large minority of others not only don't support but ruthlessly bitterly oppose "inclusivity", "greater representation" and any other form of bias against the builders, producers and makers ie white men.

Who is dead because too much middle ground has already been cheerfully conceded. There is no middle ground and there can be no compromise with cultural marxists and their mentally ill foot soldiers.

View user profile

6 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 7:19 pm

Great post Boofer, well not really in that it just highlights how a show we all loved was destroyed and dragged through the gutter Sad Sad Sad

I obviously have 0 objection to LGBT/black and female characters in either DW or other things.

I think the same is true of everybody here. In fact we'd all be supportive if someone wanted to create a new hero for women. Hell I've written stories about female heroes myself.

The SJWs however are bigots who HATE white men and want to take roles away from them. As I have pointed out before, why do you think so many of them like Whovian Feminism never bother with female led shows?

Think if she had a blog that was just going on about how awesome female heroes like WW, Xena, Buffy, the Charmed ones were, and looked at the history of women in the genre people would hate her? Nope, its because she attacks anything starring a white man for being sexist, insults the white male fans, and wants to take roles away from white men that people hate her, and others like her.

In hindsight itt was obvious from the start that New Who was heading that way. The real pandering began in 2014, but as Iank said the germ was there in 2005.

Not because RTD had LGBT characters. If he'd just kept it at introducing new LGBT characters I wouldn't have cared. Hell I liked Jack.

RTD instead as I have covered before to start with undermined the Doctor for his female companions because he was white and a man. In a show starring a female hero like Xena, we had a female hero who was allowed to be dashing whilst her bumbling male sidekick, Joxer stumbled beside her.

In a show with a male hero like DW however we weren't allowed to have him be the hero or else it was sexist, so he was constantly undermined for his sidekick.

That alone is a bigoted double standard, and really it should have stopped there.

On top of this RTD also rewrote the Master to be in love with the Doctor. The Master was NEVER intended to be the Doctors lover. He was intended to be his Moriarty and that's what he was for 26 years, that's why most fans loved him.

However RTD felt he had the right to completely change the characters dynamic and relationship with the hero and hid behind some stupid representation bullshit.

All of this sowed the seeds for the Moff era. It brought the likes of Whovian Feminism to the show, and that coupled with Moffat's spinelessness ultimately is what caused a combo of this anti men attitude and lets completely change iconic characters and their history for MUH representation, to dominate the series with Missy, and eventually Jodie.

The show does need to go away for a long while, and then be brought back as a direct sequel to the original which ignores New Who. We wouldn't need McGann back. Just have a new guy show up and have him mention casually being on his 9th life a few years into it and then. BAM, no female Doctors, no female Masters, no Moon egg, and no Clara.

View user profile

7 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 7:29 pm

Nu Who is a bit like The Office, generally seen as a turning point for situation comedies but one I think that has done severe damage to the 'classic' British sitcom, or how the (brilliant) action-oriented Resident Evil 4, back in 2005, affected the survival-horror genre: at a stroke the slow-paced, Hitchcock-style suspense of the old games looked old hat.

Part of me wonders whether a Corbyn government would mean that the endless hard-left satires etc would have to be more even-balanced - as well as Nu Who - to prevent them being swallowed up by the establishment, or dying altogether: Spitting Image declined once the Tories were finally defeated by Blair-Brown after their political domination of the 80s and early-mid 90s. But it was around then that right-wing voices became deeply unfashionable. There's an argument that Trump/Brexit/Rees-Mogg are the final reaction to an increasingly extreme expunging of traditional views, whether one agrees with them or not.

Finally, isn't the Doctor, as he was originally written, the perfect example of individualism rather than identity politics? He tries to fit in when he comes across new communities, he rejected the Time Lords' philosophies, he travels endlessly from place to place, time to time rather than permanently representing one group... etc. Another way the character has been buggered up in the new show!

Nu Who: The Beast Must Die.
View user profile

8 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 8:41 pm

This guys videos are good.

Its nice to see not all Who fans on youtube are self loathing fanboy cucks like Mr Tardis, Five Who Fans etc.

View user profile

9 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:25 pm

I agree that Who is lost. I cannot see any way back for it, at least not without, as Seal says, a very long hibernation and eventual reboot. I'll stick to hoping for missing episode finds/animations. We're not getting any new new stuff that's worth jack.

View user profile

10 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:24 pm

I hope it all goes wrong and someone from the appreciation society shows Chibnall up live on television. Would he be able to compose himself as well as Pip and Jane Baker did back in 1986?

I can't see it getting any better now. There are no consequences anymore. There are no true heroes to speak of.  Remember in Resurrection when Styles and her crew were prepared to kill themselves if it meant that Davros died with them? No magic dust saved them from their brutal slaying at the hands of Lytton and his men. We got a sense that there was no safe zone. Anyone could snuff it at any moment. That's what made stories like Androzani, Earthshock and Revelation so compelling. The new series can NOT be as suspenseful as those stories because it has been established that things can be reversed and people can be brought back to life. God bless Eric Saward for at least taking a show he clearly didn't like seriously.

View user profile

11 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:03 am


Comic book pimping;
Cultural marxism;

Chibnall has felt very free to play the Grande Auteur, supervising a season-long story.

His female Who spinoff is basically going to be Broadchurch meets Class.

View user profile

12 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:46 am

So sad about MrTardisReviews. Used to like some of his videos.

He is the biggest sell out, shill in all of fandom right now (apart from 5 Who Fans.) The reason is because he wants to work on tv so not surprisingly round about that time he ended up becoming an uber cuck. Sold his soul and testicles for a quick shot at the top.

Take a look at some of the things he's retweeted or said recently.

This GIF Belongs in a Museum

Dudes Online

Trilbee Twitter

What can you say except this.

PS Mr TARDIS not only do I not recall you reviewing ANY female led films and tv series from Xena to Buffy to Charmed to Ghost Whisperer to Alien to Resident Evil etc, but I also remember your nasty videos directed towards the Twilight fandom (comprised almost universally of young girls), when you called anyone who liked it a moron?

Hypocritical, sell out, feminist arse licker and sheep if there ever was one.

View user profile

13 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:52 am

FiveWhoFans are largely cynics who look down on any form of Nu Who that is'nt RTD's era.  They're on board with the feminism elements, but they recently made a video with Stubagful mocking most of Chibnall's Doctor Who and Torchwood episodes, so I've a feeling when push comes to shove they won't be backing the show at all.

View user profile

14 Re: The Questions We Daren't Bring Up. on Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:48 am

There's no "buzz" around FemWho at all that I can see. The lapdog media has its manufactured hype but no one else is keen on it at all, and the bullying of those who dislike it has turned off the general audience too.

The McCoyvian levels of unpleasantness and audience loss in the Capaldi years has been followed up by this non-event.

View user profile

Sponsored content

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

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