The Bells of Akhaten, also rantiness
Apr. 8th, 2013 12:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lizbeeWell, this one's been divisive, and not just because no one can agree on how to spell "Akhaten"! (At first I read that as "Akhenaten", and got really excited because I thought it was an episode about Egypt's foray into monotheism, with bonus Return!Nefertiti! Alas, it's not to be. But the BBC should get onto that, because a sun god with hands reaching down to humans? YOU CAN'T TELL ME THAT WOULDN'T LOOK CGI-TASTICALLY AMAZING.)
Anyway, yes, divisive episode. People seem to either love it or feel aggressively apathetic towards it. I'm in the first category, with an option to deem it mostly forgettable by the end of the season.
What I have to rant about, though, is thatcalapine got an immediately-deleted (so she therefore couldn't reply to it) comment telling her off for being negative about the RTD era in her review post -- I didn't think she was especially negative myself, but I'm hardly unbiased), and settiai got a comment telling her that anyone who liked this episode must be stupid.
Was it last year that I had to make a post asking that, if people hated this episode, they do so other than in my LJ? That still stands. I really love having a few hours or days where I'm incredibly happy and floaty and basically on a post-Doctor Who high, and I resent when people try to burst that bubble. I'll come to be more critical in my own time, thanks. As far as I'm concerned, as long as spoilers, large images and major triggers are behind cuts, people's journals can hold whatever opinions they want.
(Having said that, the etiquette of cutting spoilers seems to be a thing of the past. I'd blame Tumblr, only it's not just Tumblr users who do it. First Downton Abbey, then Legend of Korra and now Elementary, there seems to be this adorable idea that if you don't like Media Property X, then there's no need to cut for spoilers. "If you don't want to be spoiled, stay off the internet" tends to be the standard response, especially if it's an American responding, because spoiler warnings only matter if you're in the US, watching a British property. Apparently. It makes me a bit cross. I'm not entirely anti-spoiler, but I like to have a choice in the matter, you know?)
Anyway, I really enjoyed this episode, although I don't think it's going to go down as a classic, and I have a few things to say about it.
One reason why I don't think "The Rings of Akhaten" is going to be a classic in the long run is that it's ... "derivative" is too strong a word, but it contains many, many echoes to previous episodes, especially New Who episodes, which are comparatively recent. A list:
- "The End of the World" (companion's first trip to the future, lots of aliens, large windows with unfriendly orange gassy CGI things outside);
- "Gridlock" (companion's first trip to the future, people brought together by singing hymns);
- "The Satan Pit" (the Doctor giving a speech to a hostile CGI alien with pretensions to godhood;
- "The Beast Below" (companion's first trip to the future, queens, red cloaks, a general fairytale sensibility, heavily female-driven with few or no significant male guest stars);
- "A Christmas Carol" (singing to sooth an angry beast).
There may be even more.
The reason I hesitate to call this derivative is that I think it's deliberately building on everything we've seen and experienced. In some ways, parts of Moffat era are, in fannish terms, remixing RTD's, and I think this is one such case.
For one thing, I do not think it's coincidence that Martha's journey started out with the Doctor reassuring her that she wasn't there was a replacement for Rose (a statement constantly undermined by his actions and behavior) and giving her "just one trip", whereas Clara herself refuses to be a stand-in, even for her own past and future selves, and it's Clara herself who insists on returning home between adventures, at least for now.
I've long believed that Amy and Rory were Moffat's attempt at redressing the mistreatment of Rose and Mickey -- one having her agency constantly downgraded until her entire motivations revolved around the Doctor, the other consistently disrespected -- and now, with Clara, he's demonstrating that the first companion to follow an iconic character needn't be treated as second best.
It doesn't actually serve to fix the problems with Mickey and Martha, because Rory and Clara are both white characters getting the respect that Mickey and Martha were denied, but I'm pretty sure Moffat Doesn't See Race (tm).
(I don't think the parallels to "A Christmas Carol" were intentional. But then, I thought that was a bit rubbish, so, y'know.)
Another point which, in my opinion, excuses the familiarity of a lot of elements of "Rings" is that it also does something we've never seen before in Doctor Who, and that's the heavy use of music. The closest we've come is, okay, "The Snowmen", and I especially didn't care for the music in that. (Confession: Katherine Jenkins makes me want to spork my ears out.)
There's one parallel which I don't think anyone has spotted yet, though, so let me ramble for a few minutes here.
The Doctor came here with his granddaughter, and since he doesn't mention anyone else, we can assume this was before coming to earth and meeting Barbara and Ian. Now he's back, and he seems terribly unsurprised to learn that there's a bit of human sacrifice going on. Lots of people have suggested that he came to the Rings of Akhaten with the intention of shutting all that down, but also wanted to see what Clara would do.
So what we can assume is that the First Doctor, still a believer in non-interference (but also bloody selfish and quite cowardly), saw what was going on, but decided not to do anything.
And a few years later, he meets a stubborn human woman who, on encountering a culture that practices human sacrifice, decides to put a stop to all that.
I'm not saying that the link to "The Aztecs" is close, but it's interesting, isn't it?
(Why did it take him X number of centuries to get back there? Let's blame the TARDIS.)
One other thing I was reminded of: the Doctor's talk to Merry about the atoms of the universe reminded me of Delenn's "we are starstuff" speech in Babylon 5. Of course, it's partially that the Doctor talks to children as if they're adults, and Delenn talks to Sheridan as if he's a child, but, you know. I thought that was lovely.
Finally, and this may be stretching, but the prominence of the colour red, the robes in general, and the Gregorian-derived singing made me think of the Catholic Church, and I've found myself wondering whether "Rings" is a very, very loose metaphor for abusive clergy. Certainly, there are lots of reports of victims being told that God wants them to sacrifice their virginity/sexuality/etc. Frankly, being eaten by a gas giant might be preferable. But as I said, it may be reaching.
Finally:
CLARA!
Last week was about establishing contemporary!Clara as competent and likeable. This week we got some more meaty characterisation, with the look back at her family and her life.
I think it wasprof_pangaea who spotted that Clara's mother died on the same date as the Auton attack in "Rose". I had assumed cancer, but I find myself really hoping that Ellie's death is the result of something we've already seen.
Anyway, we have now firmly established that Clara is good with children, and part of the reason she stays with her friend's family is that she herself lost her mother at a young age - 16, I think someone calculated. Incidentally, Oswin's mother was still alive, if you're wondering.
I like Clara a lot, but I have to admit, she hasn't marched into my heart and demanded space the way Amy did. But then, not every character can be as aggressive as Amy, and I'm happy for Clara's character to be revealed slowly. At this stage we don't even know whether she's straight!
And the Doctor! I quite enjoyed his speech and his single emo tear, but nothing will ever top the bluff of "The Pandorica Opens" for me.
On the other hand, Clara is now aware of prior grandfatherhood and the Time War (which hasn't been a significant feature of Moffat Who up until now, but I'm wondering if the anniversary special will deal with it), so she knows nearly everything important. You know, give or take a milennia or two.
Anyway, yes, divisive episode. People seem to either love it or feel aggressively apathetic towards it. I'm in the first category, with an option to deem it mostly forgettable by the end of the season.
What I have to rant about, though, is that
calapine got an immediately-deleted (so she therefore couldn't reply to it) comment telling her off for being negative about the RTD era in her review post -- I didn't think she was especially negative myself, but I'm hardly unbiased), and settiai got a comment telling her that anyone who liked this episode must be stupid.Was it last year that I had to make a post asking that, if people hated this episode, they do so other than in my LJ? That still stands. I really love having a few hours or days where I'm incredibly happy and floaty and basically on a post-Doctor Who high, and I resent when people try to burst that bubble. I'll come to be more critical in my own time, thanks. As far as I'm concerned, as long as spoilers, large images and major triggers are behind cuts, people's journals can hold whatever opinions they want.
(Having said that, the etiquette of cutting spoilers seems to be a thing of the past. I'd blame Tumblr, only it's not just Tumblr users who do it. First Downton Abbey, then Legend of Korra and now Elementary, there seems to be this adorable idea that if you don't like Media Property X, then there's no need to cut for spoilers. "If you don't want to be spoiled, stay off the internet" tends to be the standard response, especially if it's an American responding, because spoiler warnings only matter if you're in the US, watching a British property. Apparently. It makes me a bit cross. I'm not entirely anti-spoiler, but I like to have a choice in the matter, you know?)
Anyway, I really enjoyed this episode, although I don't think it's going to go down as a classic, and I have a few things to say about it.
One reason why I don't think "The Rings of Akhaten" is going to be a classic in the long run is that it's ... "derivative" is too strong a word, but it contains many, many echoes to previous episodes, especially New Who episodes, which are comparatively recent. A list:
- "The End of the World" (companion's first trip to the future, lots of aliens, large windows with unfriendly orange gassy CGI things outside);
- "Gridlock" (companion's first trip to the future, people brought together by singing hymns);
- "The Satan Pit" (the Doctor giving a speech to a hostile CGI alien with pretensions to godhood;
- "The Beast Below" (companion's first trip to the future, queens, red cloaks, a general fairytale sensibility, heavily female-driven with few or no significant male guest stars);
- "A Christmas Carol" (singing to sooth an angry beast).
There may be even more.
The reason I hesitate to call this derivative is that I think it's deliberately building on everything we've seen and experienced. In some ways, parts of Moffat era are, in fannish terms, remixing RTD's, and I think this is one such case.
For one thing, I do not think it's coincidence that Martha's journey started out with the Doctor reassuring her that she wasn't there was a replacement for Rose (a statement constantly undermined by his actions and behavior) and giving her "just one trip", whereas Clara herself refuses to be a stand-in, even for her own past and future selves, and it's Clara herself who insists on returning home between adventures, at least for now.
I've long believed that Amy and Rory were Moffat's attempt at redressing the mistreatment of Rose and Mickey -- one having her agency constantly downgraded until her entire motivations revolved around the Doctor, the other consistently disrespected -- and now, with Clara, he's demonstrating that the first companion to follow an iconic character needn't be treated as second best.
It doesn't actually serve to fix the problems with Mickey and Martha, because Rory and Clara are both white characters getting the respect that Mickey and Martha were denied, but I'm pretty sure Moffat Doesn't See Race (tm).
(I don't think the parallels to "A Christmas Carol" were intentional. But then, I thought that was a bit rubbish, so, y'know.)
Another point which, in my opinion, excuses the familiarity of a lot of elements of "Rings" is that it also does something we've never seen before in Doctor Who, and that's the heavy use of music. The closest we've come is, okay, "The Snowmen", and I especially didn't care for the music in that. (Confession: Katherine Jenkins makes me want to spork my ears out.)
There's one parallel which I don't think anyone has spotted yet, though, so let me ramble for a few minutes here.
The Doctor came here with his granddaughter, and since he doesn't mention anyone else, we can assume this was before coming to earth and meeting Barbara and Ian. Now he's back, and he seems terribly unsurprised to learn that there's a bit of human sacrifice going on. Lots of people have suggested that he came to the Rings of Akhaten with the intention of shutting all that down, but also wanted to see what Clara would do.
So what we can assume is that the First Doctor, still a believer in non-interference (but also bloody selfish and quite cowardly), saw what was going on, but decided not to do anything.
And a few years later, he meets a stubborn human woman who, on encountering a culture that practices human sacrifice, decides to put a stop to all that.
I'm not saying that the link to "The Aztecs" is close, but it's interesting, isn't it?
(Why did it take him X number of centuries to get back there? Let's blame the TARDIS.)
One other thing I was reminded of: the Doctor's talk to Merry about the atoms of the universe reminded me of Delenn's "we are starstuff" speech in Babylon 5. Of course, it's partially that the Doctor talks to children as if they're adults, and Delenn talks to Sheridan as if he's a child, but, you know. I thought that was lovely.
Finally, and this may be stretching, but the prominence of the colour red, the robes in general, and the Gregorian-derived singing made me think of the Catholic Church, and I've found myself wondering whether "Rings" is a very, very loose metaphor for abusive clergy. Certainly, there are lots of reports of victims being told that God wants them to sacrifice their virginity/sexuality/etc. Frankly, being eaten by a gas giant might be preferable. But as I said, it may be reaching.
Finally:
CLARA!
Last week was about establishing contemporary!Clara as competent and likeable. This week we got some more meaty characterisation, with the look back at her family and her life.
I think it was
prof_pangaea who spotted that Clara's mother died on the same date as the Auton attack in "Rose". I had assumed cancer, but I find myself really hoping that Ellie's death is the result of something we've already seen. Anyway, we have now firmly established that Clara is good with children, and part of the reason she stays with her friend's family is that she herself lost her mother at a young age - 16, I think someone calculated. Incidentally, Oswin's mother was still alive, if you're wondering.
I like Clara a lot, but I have to admit, she hasn't marched into my heart and demanded space the way Amy did. But then, not every character can be as aggressive as Amy, and I'm happy for Clara's character to be revealed slowly. At this stage we don't even know whether she's straight!
And the Doctor! I quite enjoyed his speech and his single emo tear, but nothing will ever top the bluff of "The Pandorica Opens" for me.
On the other hand, Clara is now aware of prior grandfatherhood and the Time War (which hasn't been a significant feature of Moffat Who up until now, but I'm wondering if the anniversary special will deal with it), so she knows nearly everything important. You know, give or take a milennia or two.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 04:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 05:04 am (UTC)And I'd be kind of eyerolly if I thought it was just a "yay secularism" episode, because it's such an SF cliche, and I've never met a mindlessly religious person in my life. (Although some people, I wonder just where their minds are at.)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 07:26 am (UTC)Yes, I wasn't a fan of the (perceived) general anti-religion theme. Something specific (such as sexual abuse of children, or even just general sexism etc) works much better, so let's assume they meant that :)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 05:22 am (UTC)The grandfather comment was interesting, though...I'm guessing we'll be seeing more little bits and asides like that as the 50th anniversary draws nearer.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 05:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 08:56 am (UTC)That is a very cool thought.
I loved how casually he talked about 'my granddaughter'.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 09:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:25 am (UTC)I enjoyed it, on the whole. Not really sure why it's so divisive. It's certainly a bit of an unusual episode in Doctor Who terms, and a massive change of pace from last week's ep (space-travelling moped not-withstanding), but I'm not sure why that should be a bad thing.
The past episode that this one most reminded me of was The Doctor Dances, simply because I got a vague "just this once, nobody dies" vibe. Could be wrong about that, but apart from Clara's mum (but only reported, in flashback) and the parasite itself, I don't think there were any deaths?
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 12:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 02:21 pm (UTC)The God bit didn't bother me, mainly because I don't come to Who looking for a nuanced treatment of religion. Whether it was meant as a stab at the idea of religion as a whole or was intended as an allegory for sexual abuse of children by clergy, I kinda don't care? It's a good theory, but I'm willing to take the plot at face value without looking too deeply at it. I don't know why I'm so passive about Who in that way. I'm not that way about other shows. I just can't take Who seriously as a commentary on social issues. I have no idea why that is.
I love Matt Smith, even with the emo tear. During his tenure, even when I otherwise hate an episode, I still love him. I'm not as much an Amy lover as you, I don't hate her but she's never hit the right notes for me, and I love more the devotion Rory represents than I do Rory himself. I've kept watching for Matt Smith. I've come to love his portrayal of the Doctor the most of all the New Who Doctors - and I adored Eccleston's Doctor so that was a high bar to pass.
Ten is a weird case where I loved watching David Tennant on screen and it was clear that he was having so much fun but the Doctor who was written for him to play was kind of a jerk and rubbed me the wrong way sometimes. Which I think mostly had to do with the Rose obsession and the way Martha was dumped on, which is why Donna felt like such a breath of fresh air and their camaderie made Ten fun again. In the same way, I'm enjoying Clara. Though we did not linger overlong on depressed!Eleven (thank goodness) Clara and the Doctor and their respective actors seem to be having so much fun on screen together and that is what I watch Who for.
The way I described Ten also kinda describes how I feel about River Song...but in an effort not to harsh your squee I'm going to shut up now.
Edit - come to think of it, I think "The Aztecs" was one of the few nuanced, respectful treatments of religion I have seen on TV. Writers could learn a lot from studying that episode.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-09 12:22 am (UTC)Just wanted to say WORD. I adored Nine and never thought another Doctor would be *mine*. Eleven, and Matt's recent portrayals (and I really think he came into his own over the last 12-18 months) have stolen my heart, completely.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:30 pm (UTC)Having said that, the etiquette of cutting spoilers seems to be a thing of the past. I'd blame Tumblr, only it's not just Tumblr users who do it. First Downton Abbey, then Legend of Korra and now Elementary, there seems to be this adorable idea that if you don't like Media Property X, then there's no need to cut for spoilers. "If you don't want to be spoiled, stay off the internet" tends to be the standard response...
I ranted about this on Twitter recently. What is the DEAL with the abandonment of spoiler etiquette? I was spoiled twice for major character death on The Walking Dead on INSTAGRAM of all places, mere minutes after the show finished airing. GRUMPY CAT spoiled me! I had to unfollow a Grumpy Cat account for it, and then someone else did it the next week. Not to mention people just posting random uncut spoilers or spoilery live-blog comments on Twitter and Facebook.
I just don't get it. I understand the logic of avoiding reviews and recap sites or genre sites generally that discuss such shows, but seriously, I'm supposed to just stay out of social media entirely? Come on. Back in THE DAY, in Harry Potter fandom, we warned/cut for spoilers MONTHS after the books were released. People can't reel in the spoilers for a few days after a show airs? Where are your manners, you whippersnappers??
In conclusion: Get off my lawn.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-08 11:32 pm (UTC)I didn't notice that! I got caught up in how she had my birthday in my mother's birth year and just glanced at her death date.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-09 12:20 am (UTC)Yes, yes. I loved Cross' speech and Matt Smith's delivery - adored the nod to Carroll - but failed to notice how it harks back to the speech of Delenn's. One of my favourite moments in B5.
And I'm the 'loved this episode' camp.