I note that I don't, and I never, was much of a fan of doctor-and-rose as romance, but that I -- rather than get annoyed at the romantic-coded scenes -- had a tendency to simply read them from a totally different perspective, and really maybe should have been a sign of sooomething different about me, that I continuously felt that the doctor's concepts of connection must be so alien, that to call it romance would be to diminish the actual Thing that they had, which was presented as such onscreen (to my mind then, now I realise what was happening, but I prefer what I had going on), which is basically that the doctor was a shell of a person, hurtling towards destruction (he would have died without rose in ep1), desperately lonely and sad and traumatised, and she retaught nine -- and by extension ten -- how to love the universe, at the same time as nine and ten taught her the same. (I think about the scene in father's day, where while they're arguing, rose says that she knows how sad he is, and he'll just hang around the tardis waiting for her -- she knew!)
and then on top of that with sarah-jane (which, I never watched the classics as a kid, so I didn't have that context for her beyond what the episode presented) it felt like that was sort of confirmed and made even more canon through this idea that the doctor is constantly mourning the inevitable deaths of their companions and would rather simply leave them behind at some point than watch that happen (and they've seen that happen before, although dying for a cause versus just... dying, because you die, while they don't, they just continue on and on, always seeking connection, always knowing that time will take them away, that's a whole other thing)
and then of course there's ten's... I would call it "sex appeal" because it's david tennant and with his performance there's immediately a bit of a focus on oh he's quite pretty and he faints/is knocked unconscious in both of his first episodes, and a lot more flirting, and the people want to see sparks or what have you... but the doctor as portrayed and written is still... not coming at it that way. yes yes girl in the fireplace but also, once again, doesn't work for me, because I find it soooo much more interesting that the doctor would imprint on A Life - and a life that they admire -- and speedrun the exact thing that they're most afraid of with their companions... that she ages and dies and it's the one thing that the doctor simply cannot stop
meanwhile rose is quite young and swept up in this whole massive adventure and very much reads the doctor not as an alien (frequently surprised by their alien-ness) and gets jealous of sarah-jane as if she's an ex, and renette as if she's... a replacement? but really it's more that the doctor met her at the point when she was about to accept her life as it was. not an exciting life, not a bad life, but always having to ignore the idea that there must be more to it than this. and the idea that she might be unceremoniously dumped back in that after seeing just how This the this could be, of course that's terrifying. and of course she's simultaneously taken with the dashing doctor and the jetset life, and worried she could be replaced, because to her the doctor saved her at 19 years old. in some ways the doctor created her (considering who she becomes after dooms day)
contrasted to martha who initially has a similar kind of experience, but the doctor doesn't meet her at the space she's in with them -- ten is leaning on her, like they did with rose, but not giving anything back unless kicking and screaming and traumatising her whole family. martha's trajectory is so so tragic, because she barely gets a taste of the splendor versus the horrors and the latter marks her for life. but she also knows to walk away from those overwhelming feelings, rather than give into them, she knows they'll never be rewarded and she also grows beyond wanting to be a crutch for the doctor (the fact that she then ends up as a soldier, well... ouch)
and then of course donna, who never has those fucking awe-feelings to begin with and whose connection with the doctor is explicitly de-romanticised but never placed on a lesser pedestal as if there's a hierarchy of alloromanticism. topples those pillars, never sees the doctor as anything but what the doctor is. good old donna. (sobs.) (but also... cautious hope for the specials.) (but also sobs.)
my point being. just don't buy alloromantic doctor, they're a near-immortal alien. it's such a dull simplistic way of reading their relationships to other beings. other point being. all those women who were making heart-eyes at ten, wish they'd met thirteen and had a... "yeah, this still works for me," moment. their horizons, too, are broadened by seeing More. (that or they realise they were never actually "in love" but just thought ten was a sexy skinny little snack and it blinded them.) (although jodie whittaker, too, is a snack.)
and lastly lastly ofc, is that if the doctor has a longterm (by doctor time measurement) intense relationship with anyone, whatever that might be called, it's the tardis. and that relationship is also so alien it cannot be quantified by human words for concepts
23 notes
·
View notes
its almost comical that we are able to see in real time how the "kevin-feigefication" of media is affecting star wars though this new season of the mandalorian. the mandalorian was an honestly brilliant revival of the star wars universe that was the perfect blend of tie-in references and new, fresh ideas that still felt uniquely star wars. but you cant just make movies or shows or tell stories now, now you have to create empires of fan service and merchandise. stranger things, star wars, grishaverse, john wick, even fucking spongebob has spinoffs... everything needs 50 million characters and 20 convoluted plot points so everything can be spun off into 10 different movies and tv shows. and every story needs a super-mega bad guy to build up to because the mcu was able to create a semi-plausible mediocre overarching story out of 30 mediocre movies. what was so good about the first two seasons of the mandalorian is it didnt need 10 new spinoffs to "tie the story together" it worked as a standalone piece of media that you could enjoy if you've seen every star wars movie or zero
21 notes
·
View notes
I wanted to not get so salty about other people’s books because people get salty about mine and it makes me sad, BUT... I think we get angry because of the marketing, right? The absolutely stunning cover, gushing reviews, a PROMISE basically that the interior is really good and you MUST read it. But then when the interior is really shoddy, well, you feel like you were lied to by all the marketing; I think this is why we react so negatively to books when in fact they are just, well, books - to each their own tastes, etc. But wow yeah. I am so disappointed by The Cruel Prince because every edition I’ve ever seen has sold you this amazing complex fae world, complete with neat little illustrations at the chapter headers etc... but... all this lavish appearance for a story that is, in the end, very obviously a “minimum viable product”
I don’t buy the book for the promise of it goddamnit, I buy it for the MEAT and the author’s SPECIAL INTERESTS that they went crazy over; but in the end the book’s appearance is the only reason I’m even keeping it at all, as a book designer (as I’ve seen in other people’s reviews too) and that makes me sad
7 notes
·
View notes
dnd sci-fi anon here! Thanks for the answer, you hit the nail on the head.
As someone who tries to make the best game i can for my players I'm always trying to be aware of where I'm in the wrong about how I run my games, so with so many "it is impossible to do sci-fi in dnd, just play starfinder or lancer" posts I sometimes worry I misstepped by sticking with dnd overall, but I think what it comes down to in the end is that my players directly asked for a dnd campaign in space, with magic-powered tech and space elves and bringing swords to a gunfight, and we all prefer 5e over Starfinder (which would also be a good system for the kind of campaign we all wanted). I had someone who went "I want to play a wizard space cowboy" so I think this was a good pick for the campaign we all wanted.
But i did want to make sure I wasnt just being stupid about it. I agree with you and I think I just run into so many people online who don't see it that way, and that ends up making me second guess and worry that my view on it is just wrong and im being pigheaded by sticking with 5e in the end. I shopped around for a bunch of systems when i first considered this campaign but it came down to "why learn a new system when my players quite literally asked for dnd in space?"
I feel more sure about that decision after hearing from someone I dont know personally who has little reason to worry making me feel bad by telling me if I'm wrong, but also explains thoughts thoroughly enough to convince me if I am. You were more likely to give me a more detailed explanation than the people who just go "there is NOTHING dnd is good for, just play another game" and if i had just asked someone I knew would agree with me it wouldnt do much to help me feel like I made the right choice.
re:
I mean, like, 'your players are comfortable and enjoy D&D and don't want to learn another system' is a perfectly legitimate reason to stick with it! (Certainly the reason I mostly have).
Anyways, I'm super not an authority on TTRPGs at all (I can recommend Legacy and Blades In The Dark and Delta Green as all variously a lot of fun with the right group and Unknown Armies 3e has my favorite session 0/campaign creation chapter ever, but that's about it), but I can absolutely say that you should absolutely positively never take people vitriolically hating something on the internet as being the final word on its quality. Like, about anything.
9 notes
·
View notes