Rose and such
Apr. 19th, 2008 02:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
demeter918It's so late right now, but gotta get those two damn cents in. ZOMBIE. Braaaaaaains.
I've been skimming this thread. Same old, same old. If the fandom has a 'significant' (however you choose to quantify that) female character, there bounds to be the same arguments. And I can hardly be surprised it showed up in a show that's wildly popular (um... in certain circles) and has a cast of changing companions to one main, male protagonist.
One thing that always strikes me...
You know, liking one character doesn't mean you're somehow obligated or required to make a post proving another character is much worse. Rose and Martha and Donna are awesome and kickass in their own ways. They have been influenced and changed by the Doctor, but in no way are any of them exclusively defined by him. To say otherwise kindasorta insults them as individuals in their own right.
I'm starting to gather that S2 and S3 of New Who aren't exactly popular among some fans. For wildly different reasons, of course. I just don't find most of them particularly convincing to me. Oh, they're valid. Reasons can be boiled down to personal preference, what one thinks is a 'proper' strong female, what one thinks is a 'companion', the style of the Doctor's hair, and yes, that great equalizer... opinion. Whether we call it meta or a rant, yeah, it's a personal opinion and that alone makes it valid.
But that means I have one of my own, and if I find something smacking of all the arguments I've heard a million and one times before about how this female character A makes that male character A dumb and how this female character A is so much better/worse/ooh a horse than that female character B, then I can say bullshit. Doesn't mean I'm necessarily right (though I think I am. That's the best part about opinions!) or they're necessarily right. I just didn't think the argument was convincing in any whichway. Well.
I think it'd be hard to ever convince me that women need to be one way in order to be the 'right' kind of woman for any man. Rose is great in her own way, Martha is great in her own way, Donna is great in her own way, and if sometime I want to kick the Doctor in the nuts... well, that's just me. He's great in his own way too.
One of the things interesting (to me at least) was the fact that there are many who find Rose's characterization in S2 as 'grating' and 'annoying'. I actually found it really intriguing and interesting. Remember, Rose is an awesome, kickass character and I love her to bits, but she is a human being. As a viewer, we think of the Doctor's regeneration process as a semi-funny way to keep a popular series running. ;) To her, it was a devastating change at first, and she couldn't accept it at first. That, I feel, was rather normal. Her 'clingyness' was just a factor that came out of it. I always viewed the initial touchy-feely stuff as Rose's character trying to come to complete terms with the change and also, to partly assuage her own fears about the Doctor leaving. I think some forget that the first time the Doctor left her was not for another woman, but to go and die to save her life.
Rose doesn't want that to happen. Whether she was right or wrong to swallow the Vortex (that's a can of worms for another time!) and whether she's 'weak' for running back to him (which I think not) is not really the point. In the context of her character change from S1 to S2, it's actually quite understandable and, dare I say it? A sign of good writing.
Characters don't stay the same. They just don't. If they were to stay the same, they'd stagnate and I'd probably lose all interest in this show. Rose is reacting to a phenomenal loss (because regardless of how lovely the 10th Doctor is and how much I miss the 9th, for Rose, it was a huge change). We had the human/alien divide as one of the character struggles in S1, but in S2, we have that and her personal struggle with the change and the knowledge of the Doctor's past. The big issue for the Doctor in S1 was the loss of Gallifrey. With the regeneration and the new Doctor, that didn't show up quite as much as for Nine. Rose is, rather truthfully, adjusting.
One thing that makes me laugh is the fact that people find Rose's characterization a dramatic departure from S1 and that it signified a weakness in the writing for S2.
Well. Duh. Of course Rose is different. The Doctor is different. He's the same person, yeah, but he's also different. He reacts to things differently, he thinks of things differently, he's very different with Rose. They both care for her, a great deal, but the way Nine treated her (with differing amounts of possessiveness, care, love, harshness, gentleness) is wildly different from the way Ten treats her. I'm not saying either way is better (though I miss Nine very, very much sometimes), but I am saying that it's natural for Rose to be thrown off by the difference even if she has accepted the Doctor as the Doctor, regardless of his face. I think that'd be natural for anyone.
She stabilizes by midway through the series, and they're concentrating on the story. They were this rather idealistic pair (forever, Rose?) and they spent several episodes on that fact before tearing them apart. S3 Doctor is a bit of an arse sometimes (Okay, a lot of the time) but he quite literally is only a few months (at most) from the ending of Doomsday. Doesn't excuse his behaviour to Martha, but it does explain it. (And no, I'm not going to get into that. I love the Doctor and I love Martha but I definitely have reservations with how he treated her)
People say that the Doctor was acting like a moping idiot in S3. Which, well, he sometimes was. Rose really was not far from his mouth in most episodes and I found that interesting. Mostly because many tend to forget that she's the first companion he really lost post-destruction of Gallifrey.
That, I felt, was the crux of his characterization in S3 and in part, S2. It was in our faces in S1, partly because that was the way Nine was played by Eccleston. It was less so in S2 and S3. Whether because that was the way he was or Rose changed him or any myriad of reasons, I do think that Rose didn't ruin him. Gallifrey's destruction was arguably the biggest change in the Doctor's life; moreso than the forcible regeneration, moreso than his exile. I'd say that the reasons why his reactions to Rose and subsequently, losing Rose, was so wildly different to his previous incarnations and losses.
... and I just realized I went off on a huge tangent. -_-;;
Gosh, I'm so tired, marshmallow teletubbies sound good. What? But basically!
ROSE AND MARTHA AND DONNA ARE AWESOME. AND THEY HAVE GREAT TEETH.
I've been skimming this thread. Same old, same old. If the fandom has a 'significant' (however you choose to quantify that) female character, there bounds to be the same arguments. And I can hardly be surprised it showed up in a show that's wildly popular (um... in certain circles) and has a cast of changing companions to one main, male protagonist.
One thing that always strikes me...
You know, liking one character doesn't mean you're somehow obligated or required to make a post proving another character is much worse. Rose and Martha and Donna are awesome and kickass in their own ways. They have been influenced and changed by the Doctor, but in no way are any of them exclusively defined by him. To say otherwise kindasorta insults them as individuals in their own right.
I'm starting to gather that S2 and S3 of New Who aren't exactly popular among some fans. For wildly different reasons, of course. I just don't find most of them particularly convincing to me. Oh, they're valid. Reasons can be boiled down to personal preference, what one thinks is a 'proper' strong female, what one thinks is a 'companion', the style of the Doctor's hair, and yes, that great equalizer... opinion. Whether we call it meta or a rant, yeah, it's a personal opinion and that alone makes it valid.
But that means I have one of my own, and if I find something smacking of all the arguments I've heard a million and one times before about how this female character A makes that male character A dumb and how this female character A is so much better/worse/ooh a horse than that female character B, then I can say bullshit. Doesn't mean I'm necessarily right (though I think I am. That's the best part about opinions!) or they're necessarily right. I just didn't think the argument was convincing in any whichway. Well.
I think it'd be hard to ever convince me that women need to be one way in order to be the 'right' kind of woman for any man. Rose is great in her own way, Martha is great in her own way, Donna is great in her own way, and if sometime I want to kick the Doctor in the nuts... well, that's just me. He's great in his own way too.
One of the things interesting (to me at least) was the fact that there are many who find Rose's characterization in S2 as 'grating' and 'annoying'. I actually found it really intriguing and interesting. Remember, Rose is an awesome, kickass character and I love her to bits, but she is a human being. As a viewer, we think of the Doctor's regeneration process as a semi-funny way to keep a popular series running. ;) To her, it was a devastating change at first, and she couldn't accept it at first. That, I feel, was rather normal. Her 'clingyness' was just a factor that came out of it. I always viewed the initial touchy-feely stuff as Rose's character trying to come to complete terms with the change and also, to partly assuage her own fears about the Doctor leaving. I think some forget that the first time the Doctor left her was not for another woman, but to go and die to save her life.
Rose doesn't want that to happen. Whether she was right or wrong to swallow the Vortex (that's a can of worms for another time!) and whether she's 'weak' for running back to him (which I think not) is not really the point. In the context of her character change from S1 to S2, it's actually quite understandable and, dare I say it? A sign of good writing.
Characters don't stay the same. They just don't. If they were to stay the same, they'd stagnate and I'd probably lose all interest in this show. Rose is reacting to a phenomenal loss (because regardless of how lovely the 10th Doctor is and how much I miss the 9th, for Rose, it was a huge change). We had the human/alien divide as one of the character struggles in S1, but in S2, we have that and her personal struggle with the change and the knowledge of the Doctor's past. The big issue for the Doctor in S1 was the loss of Gallifrey. With the regeneration and the new Doctor, that didn't show up quite as much as for Nine. Rose is, rather truthfully, adjusting.
One thing that makes me laugh is the fact that people find Rose's characterization a dramatic departure from S1 and that it signified a weakness in the writing for S2.
Well. Duh. Of course Rose is different. The Doctor is different. He's the same person, yeah, but he's also different. He reacts to things differently, he thinks of things differently, he's very different with Rose. They both care for her, a great deal, but the way Nine treated her (with differing amounts of possessiveness, care, love, harshness, gentleness) is wildly different from the way Ten treats her. I'm not saying either way is better (though I miss Nine very, very much sometimes), but I am saying that it's natural for Rose to be thrown off by the difference even if she has accepted the Doctor as the Doctor, regardless of his face. I think that'd be natural for anyone.
She stabilizes by midway through the series, and they're concentrating on the story. They were this rather idealistic pair (forever, Rose?) and they spent several episodes on that fact before tearing them apart. S3 Doctor is a bit of an arse sometimes (Okay, a lot of the time) but he quite literally is only a few months (at most) from the ending of Doomsday. Doesn't excuse his behaviour to Martha, but it does explain it. (And no, I'm not going to get into that. I love the Doctor and I love Martha but I definitely have reservations with how he treated her)
People say that the Doctor was acting like a moping idiot in S3. Which, well, he sometimes was. Rose really was not far from his mouth in most episodes and I found that interesting. Mostly because many tend to forget that she's the first companion he really lost post-destruction of Gallifrey.
That, I felt, was the crux of his characterization in S3 and in part, S2. It was in our faces in S1, partly because that was the way Nine was played by Eccleston. It was less so in S2 and S3. Whether because that was the way he was or Rose changed him or any myriad of reasons, I do think that Rose didn't ruin him. Gallifrey's destruction was arguably the biggest change in the Doctor's life; moreso than the forcible regeneration, moreso than his exile. I'd say that the reasons why his reactions to Rose and subsequently, losing Rose, was so wildly different to his previous incarnations and losses.
... and I just realized I went off on a huge tangent. -_-;;
Gosh, I'm so tired, marshmallow teletubbies sound good. What? But basically!
ROSE AND MARTHA AND DONNA ARE AWESOME. AND THEY HAVE GREAT TEETH.
