Saturday 10 October 2015

Can we have a vote of No Confidence in Steven Moffat?

A few weeks ago, I decided to write a Liberal Democrat Voice article about whether or not The Doctor should be played by a woman. I never did send it to Caron, and have since had some second thoughts on the matter. Here is what was going to be the introduction:

"Twice in two days I’ve seen posts/comments on Facebook about whether The Doctor could/should be a woman. In the run-up to Peter Capaldi’s reveal, bookies were trying to tempt gamblers with odds on Sue Perkins and Olivia Coleman, among others. This infuriated me, mostly because of its sheer cynicism. Step up to make a fast buck by a fictional character making a massive life choice and going through lightning speed gender reassignment as if it’s no big deal. If you ignore the fact that the show is fictional, then The Doctor is a person just like any other - sort of - and frankly, he’s been entertaining us for over half a century; he deserves to be considered as one."

I stand by every word of this, but my attitude towards the subject has definitely altered since seeing the opening episodes of the new series. In the planned article, I examined the subject from an English Literature perspective, as I seem to do almost everything these days. One of the first things I think about when I come to writing, as well as reading, is character. The characters in Doctor Who have traditionally been some of the most loved and loathed of British pop culture. The Doctor himself is no exception.

The Doctor is essentially a clever, but sometimes unfeeling, man, sort of like Sherlock Holmes. He loves adventure and he loves sharing his travels with friends. He is a perfect children's character. He is thoughtful when his solution will cause collateral damage of any kind. He will risk the Earth to save his friends, but he refrains from wholly destroying his enemies even when they are within his grasp. He is increasingly detached from Earth. His friends constantly worry about him and it's like he doesn't even see it. He does though, and, like with the erasure of himself for Donna's memory, he will do everything within his power to make sure they are safe.

For the period between his regeneration into Christopher Eccleston and his regeneration into Peter Capaldi, the Doctor was gradually getting younger with each new face. In the 50th Anniversary Special, John Hurt's War Doctor spots this trend and asks Matt Smith and David Tennant what they are running from by hiding in their youth. Eleven and Ten both know that they caused the destruction of Gallifrey and the deaths of millions of Time Lord children. They know exactly what they're running from.

I bring this up because their reactions when the War Doctor acknowledges this suggest that they haven't given much thought to this. They are not wearing young faces on purpose. Therefore, even if the Doctor is not consciously able to influence what body he regenerates into it, the process, like the Hogwarts Sorting Hat, takes his unconscious feelings and wishes into account. This would suggest that the Doctor, in twelve regenerations, has never wanted to become a woman.

I ended the potential LDV article by saying:

"However, if all of a sudden his complaint when he regenerated switched from “I want to be ginger!” to “I want to be a woman!”, I would be one hundred per cent on board with him being a woman and would heartily recommend Julie Walters. Still, this cannot be a sudden thing. There would have to be some event or change that after thirteen hundred years made him identify as something he has never identified as before. Even if he doesn’t identify as a woman, but still desires to try out a female body, it makes no difference. As long as there is an interesting storyline that leads to him giving his consent and wish to have a woman’s body the next time he regenerates, then that is all that matters."

Again, I stand by this. Only one thing has changed since I wrote that article to now. Now, I really, really want this to be possible. At the time I wrote this, all I knew of Timelord gender reassignment was that Missy had become a stereotypical 'strong female character' with little depth to her other than that. Now though, having watched the first two episodes of the new series, I have seen suggestions of John Simm's bemused detachment shine through, and it is very very clear that the complex, bizarre character of The Master is present in Missy. And now it's seen with the extra dimension of boredom with cultural norms. I really am impressed.

There is just one issue. This needs to be done right first time. If the Doctor becomes a woman and the first few minutes tank, it will be very difficult to repair the disappointment that personal attachment to such a famous fictional character will result in. And I just don't know if I have confidence in Steven Moffat enough to trust him with such a task. Yes, he may have done well this time, but second time round is not good enough.

The BBC is funded by television licenses, public money, just like the government. For a politician who messes up on the same issue (in this case portrayal of female characters) over and over again, the Vote of No Confidence is in place to ensure that they can be removed from office. Public money should not be wasted on people who are bad at their jobs. I think you must see where I'm going with this.

Steven Moffat is a perfectly good writer of 'Sherlock', and he has had some dazzling moments in his time as writer of 'Doctor Who', but I would say that most of these moments occurred in series five, when we were just getting used to new characters, new themes that he brought with him to the writing table. That was in 2010, a whole parliament ago. If the public can reject my party for "losing touch with the electorate", then they can reject a writer for losing touch with the audience.

2 comments:

  1. I wish you had sent this to LDV. I would happily have published it even though I really don't agree with it. I think Moffat has done some great stories and characters - despite the occasional lapse, the Paternoster Gang are brilliant.

    I have no issue about the Doctor being played by a woman but I do worry, not about Moffatt, but about the reaction of the Daily Fail. If they can be evil about the lovely Nadiya, what would they do to a female Doctor?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The original article was quite different. I still didn't really want a woman to be The Doctor. I thought it would just amount to a cheap stunt. I only actually revisited it after I set up the blog. And hey, I'm on the featured blogs list now so all is good ^.^

      I know I've explained my thoughts to you in more depth on Facebook now, but I'll put them here for anyone who's interested:

      The issue I have with Moffat's women is that they are all remarkably similar. take River, Amy and Idris (pretty sure that was what the TARDIS was called). All three of them are cool characters on their own, but they all behave the same way around the Doctor (putting him in his place, treating him like a child etc) Don't get me wrong, I love watching that, but it seems like Moffat is stuck in a bit of a trope.

      These characters did have their own ways of doing this, yes, and I'm sure Missy would too, but in general it would be nice to see a female character who was completely different. Maybe she was super-smart and ignored the Doctor a lot, maybe she got into trouble a lot but being round the Doctor made her take responsibility more often etc

      The lack of variation just makes me nervous :/

      Delete