Post by CountClockwise on Nov 20, 2017 9:45:34 GMT
One thing that has bugged me about the Doctor Who fandom (apart from the elitism between different wings of it) is the reaction to a certain kind of story. We praise Stories like Blink, Heaven sent, Chimes of Midnight and Scherzo for being ground-breaking classics but what about those stories that aren't all that original and ground-breaking but are more or less well constructed and fun adventures. Examples for me are most of the Russell T Davies era as well as about half of the 4th Doctor era (excluding from both the masterpieces and stories that are genuinely awful). So what if stories like Planet of the Ood or The Shakespeare Code aren't classics or don't do anything that original, I still like them.
Regardless of which specific stories you like or dislike it still bugs me that we tend to decry anything that isn't 100% new and original as complete garbage. This franchise has done more or less everything under the sun so of course stories are going to be very similar an unoriginal at points. Don't get me wrong, I want to see Doctor Who continually change and put forth new and interesting ideas but sometimes I just want something familiar but skilfully crafted and fun.
I'm probably blowing this all out of proportion and seeing things that aren't there but I've noticed this recurring vibe and was curious if other people had opinions on it.
"It's Okay to be a giant sassy woman, but you don't have to be such a giant sassy woman about it"
I think I've seen this more with Big Finish. In the early years, there seemed to be very little criticism even for the stories which weren't very good. Looking back, they seemed to have a honeymoon period, possibly up to the release of Zagreus. I guess the audios were still new and there wasn't a TV series to compete.
The past few years, a lot of perfectly good audios get panned on forums. I suspect it's because we have 18 plus years of audios behind us and there are maybe up to half a dozen releases each month nowadays. I wonder if there's a form of fatigue that's set in and something has to be outstanding in order to impress.
Fans get so spoiled by the brilliance of the best stories that the rest suffers by comparison. Pro-tip: compare the less brilliant stuff to the years when there was no Who at all. Which of those would you prefer?
"Is there a word for total screaming genius that sounds modest and a tiny bit sexy?"
Certain stories are inspired and very atmospheric. We fans love them because they are so good. Not all can be as good and so they sort of get pushed aside. It's not just Who fans. You'll see in Star Trek a lot as well for instance.
"There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, and the sea's asleep, and the rivers dream; people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice, somewhere else the tea's getting cold. Come on, Ace. We've got work to do."
I'd argue its not one type of story but a general tendency of some fans to claim life is over because they didn't like a particular story. Whether a story is good or bad is really a matter of opinion in most of the ways that count. What I love about Who is that is has catered for pretty much every type of story over the years. So when some fans scream that 'that wasn't proper Doctor Who' they are usually talking rubbish as you can find plenty of examples of anything over the years. What they really mean is 'I prefer Doctor Who to be like...' and thats fine. Just don't try and declare its the only way to do it.
So I oddly rather like it when I see a story that leaves me a bit cold because I know somewhere out here there is another fan who thought it was amazing.
I'd also offer that when I've been doing episode write ups for the RPG, I've often found a new appreciation for an episode after looking at it in more detail. Certainly doing the 7th Doctor book nudged me into putting McCoy as possibly my favourite.
The other issue is the 'this season wasn't much good'. I think we are used to really good episodes so we tend to judge a season by its worst. I've had a couple of conversations where people have said 'I like Capauldi but his stories have all been so rubbish' to which I've replied 'oh so you didn't like X, or Y or Z' and they've replied that actually, those were really good. So they end up amending to say, 'well, there were a lot of stories I didn't like but the season was on average pretty good'.
As always, with any fandom. Love the bits you love, and ignore the people who are shouting the loudest.
Logic, my dear Zoe, simply allows one to be wrong with authority.
Things change. The pacing of stories has changed so that you can fit a whole story into a single episode more often than not. I loved the old multi-part stories but 2 or 3-parters now leave me cold more often than not. And there have been some absolutely outstanding episodes that tower over the rest in terms of sheer genius, which can make otherwise decent episodes feel more average.
I would hate there to be only one way to do Who, though. I've loved it when they've done something that (to me, at least) has been completely different. Doctor-less or Doctor-lite episodes. Stories with no creature you can identify (loved Midnight). It's when they try and re-hash ground that's been well trodden in the past that it gets tiresome.
Long may Dr Who continue to change, evolve, and regenerate.
Just remember who’s standing in your way, remember every black day I ever stopped you and then—AND THEN—do the smart thing: let somebody else try first.