1) I like Harriet Jones, but the Sycorax were retreating, and that makes what she did murder. Sympathetic characters can commit terrible acts -- what Harriet did isn't right just because we like her. I think the Doctor had as much right to take her down as he did to defend the Earth from the Sycorax in the first place -- which is actually, none at all when you think about it. The Doctor does what he does not because he has the right, but because it's the right thing to do. And I love the reminder that as much as the Doctor loves humanity, he's not going to turn a blind eye to the murder of another species that was no longer in conflict with Earth. Go Ten, says I.
2) I have never understood why the Doctor and Rose are perceived as so freakin' awful for enjoying their adventures through time and space. That's one of the reasons I love them -- because they do enjoy themselves so much together. And while Rose's joke was a little stupid in Tooth & Claw, I certainly don't think some irreverence meant she "deserved" to have her heart broken. Torchwood's imperialist greed had far more direct responsibility for Rose being trapped in Pete's World, especially since it happened because she and the Doctor were in the process of saving the world from Torchwood's near-destruction of it. The people who make the actual decision to punch a hole through dimensions out of greed have more responsibility than the people who made a bad joke nearly 150 years ago. Crazy idea, eh?
3) The Doctor actually doesn't bring Rose up in Gridlock -- Martha references her. The Doctor brings up Rose himself all of twice in series three, in just the first two episodes, and yet somehow, this is perceived to be "constant" and that the Doctor is somehow stuck on Rose. Honestly, I think the Doctor will always miss Rose, but he's pretty much gotten over the worst of the grief by the mid-point of the series at the latest. Much as I loathe that Dalek two-parter, I think encountering the Daleks again and trying to help them change is actually healing for him in terms of all he's lost thanks to the Daleks (at least until the Master brings the pain of Gallifrey back again). I think it's notable that it's after this encounter that the Doctor gives up the "just one trip" bit with Martha and makes her a full-fledged companion. The Doctor is able to move on, IMO...
4)...but the problem I guess is that the Doctor never moves on to Martha romantically. So therefore, all of his hugs and his thanks and his trusting Martha to take care of human him in 1913 and having faith in Martha to spread the story that would save the world -- none of that matters, because the Doctor doesn't return Martha's romantic feelings and somehow, the only way one can appreciate someone is to fall in love with them. That argument is just totally ridiculous to me -- you have to actively ignore what happens on-screen to make it. Like the Doctor saying thank you a lot!
5) The usual situation is people are dying, the Doctor shows up, he and his companions help save the day, and people stop dying. Not everything the Doctor does is right, but what about the responsibility of the people in the situation to make the right choices? Don't they have at least as much responsibility for what happens next, if not more? If the Doctor helps clean up your mess, why is it his job to keep you from making another one -- isn't that your job?
6) Which goes to the final point -- the Doctor isn't a god, and he knows it. He does his best, but he still loses. The courage of the Doctor is he keeps trying. I don't see how the better alternative would be for the Doctor to believe he can't make a difference when he can, or not act rather than act to save lives. The Doctor makes changes in history every time he saves someone or cures someone or stops someone -- and with his level of knowledge, even choosing not to act is a choice that will affect others. I think the Doctor acts not because he thinks he's a god, but because he thinks he's right -- and most of the time, he is.
Ahh, that was fun -- although mostly just repeating your well-stated points. But still fun! ;-)
(no subject)
Date: 2008-01-26 06:06 am (UTC)A few comments:
1) I like Harriet Jones, but the Sycorax were retreating, and that makes what she did murder. Sympathetic characters can commit terrible acts -- what Harriet did isn't right just because we like her. I think the Doctor had as much right to take her down as he did to defend the Earth from the Sycorax in the first place -- which is actually, none at all when you think about it. The Doctor does what he does not because he has the right, but because it's the right thing to do. And I love the reminder that as much as the Doctor loves humanity, he's not going to turn a blind eye to the murder of another species that was no longer in conflict with Earth. Go Ten, says I.
2) I have never understood why the Doctor and Rose are perceived as so freakin' awful for enjoying their adventures through time and space. That's one of the reasons I love them -- because they do enjoy themselves so much together. And while Rose's joke was a little stupid in Tooth & Claw, I certainly don't think some irreverence meant she "deserved" to have her heart broken. Torchwood's imperialist greed had far more direct responsibility for Rose being trapped in Pete's World, especially since it happened because she and the Doctor were in the process of saving the world from Torchwood's near-destruction of it. The people who make the actual decision to punch a hole through dimensions out of greed have more responsibility than the people who made a bad joke nearly 150 years ago. Crazy idea, eh?
3) The Doctor actually doesn't bring Rose up in Gridlock -- Martha references her. The Doctor brings up Rose himself all of twice in series three, in just the first two episodes, and yet somehow, this is perceived to be "constant" and that the Doctor is somehow stuck on Rose. Honestly, I think the Doctor will always miss Rose, but he's pretty much gotten over the worst of the grief by the mid-point of the series at the latest. Much as I loathe that Dalek two-parter, I think encountering the Daleks again and trying to help them change is actually healing for him in terms of all he's lost thanks to the Daleks (at least until the Master brings the pain of Gallifrey back again). I think it's notable that it's after this encounter that the Doctor gives up the "just one trip" bit with Martha and makes her a full-fledged companion. The Doctor is able to move on, IMO...
4)...but the problem I guess is that the Doctor never moves on to Martha romantically. So therefore, all of his hugs and his thanks and his trusting Martha to take care of human him in 1913 and having faith in Martha to spread the story that would save the world -- none of that matters, because the Doctor doesn't return Martha's romantic feelings and somehow, the only way one can appreciate someone is to fall in love with them. That argument is just totally ridiculous to me -- you have to actively ignore what happens on-screen to make it. Like the Doctor saying thank you a lot!
5) The usual situation is people are dying, the Doctor shows up, he and his companions help save the day, and people stop dying. Not everything the Doctor does is right, but what about the responsibility of the people in the situation to make the right choices? Don't they have at least as much responsibility for what happens next, if not more? If the Doctor helps clean up your mess, why is it his job to keep you from making another one -- isn't that your job?
6) Which goes to the final point -- the Doctor isn't a god, and he knows it. He does his best, but he still loses. The courage of the Doctor is he keeps trying. I don't see how the better alternative would be for the Doctor to believe he can't make a difference when he can, or not act rather than act to save lives. The Doctor makes changes in history every time he saves someone or cures someone or stops someone -- and with his level of knowledge, even choosing not to act is a choice that will affect others. I think the Doctor acts not because he thinks he's a god, but because he thinks he's right -- and most of the time, he is.
Ahh, that was fun -- although mostly just repeating your well-stated points. But still fun! ;-)