Nov. 15th, 2009 09:25 am
tencrush: (do not want)
I went to post a comment somewhere and found I'd been banned from someone's journal. I've never been banned from anyone's journal before, and I quite like the person in question and don't recall ever having had a disagreement with them of any kind. Random defriendings by people who I thought were my actual friends I can deal with, but banning? Wow. Ouch.

Speaking of which, this is kind of where I am at the moment:
  • There's not a lot of joy for me left in Whovian fandom. I'll probably post something later about how much I hated Waters of Mars. I have no desire to watch anything RTD has produced or DT stars in, and I am only just managing to hold on to a scrap of enthusiasm for when Moffat and Smith come in. I hate Russell, I hate everything he's ever written, I think he's awful. His insistence on bringing all this emotional manpain and trauma into these shows that used to just be a joyful experience for me and, in the case of Who, for my kids, has ruined my fannish experience. I want the last three years of my life back, I wish I'd never started watching Torchwood, I wish I'd stopped watching Who. I don't need television that pisses me off and makes me sad, that's not what I watch television for. Fuck you Russell, I hope LA chews you up and spits you out and fucks you in the ass with a pointy stick.

  • Ianto did make me happy for quite a few years, which is why I'm working on a last epic picspam of my favourite teaboy doing shit. I hope to have it done in a week or two.

  • I'm also working on something of a personal project celebrating Torchwood Series One and Two, which I hope to tell you more about in the coming weeks. Or maybe I'll just abandon it.

  • I was hoping to do a Christmas push on the Ianto Jones Wants a Pony campaign, but the Lluest Horse and Pony Trust's continued inability to update me is starting to annoy me a bit, so maybe I'll leave it. After Christmas, I'm done promoting it because I think I've done enough. I'll leave it up, of course.

  • Any takers for [ profile] ninja_teaboy may give me shout here or in PM. I'm putting it up for adoption per January 1st. If there's no-one interested, I'll close it down.

  • Oh, in case you were wondering, no. If there is a new series of Torchwood, I won't be watching it, as I don't really like Gwen, or Jack. I liked Tosh and Ianto and I quite enjoyed disliking Owen. I liked Ianto, I liked Tosh, I liked the Hub, the embossed SUV, the pteranodon, the old ladies, the poodles, the victorian lesbianism, the cyberbikinis and that stupid fucking invisible lift. In fact, I loved all those things. Apparently I loved those things far too much. Those things are all gone, so there's nothing for me to come back to. Not that there will be a new series.

  • It's been really fun, people, but if you've friended me for Torchwood content, please, feel free to defriend me in the coming weeks, I won't be offended. I am completely spent. Done. Thanks, Rusty.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
A brief post about LOVE, like I promised. Or more specifically, about "I love you" and Children of Earth. I've heard from one of GDL's panels at DragonCon that there was a reciprocal "I love you" in Ianto's death scene in Day Four, but it removed at the request of JB and GDL. You may be surprised to know that I am GODDAMN HAPPY about that. That scene was fucking awful, man. It made me cry, yes, Ianto was soon to be dead, but Christ what a cringeworthy sappy piece of shit scene that was. I was upset at the time that there WASN'T an "I love you" from Jack in that scene, I'll admit, but my actual upset wasn't about those words and that moment, it was about the fact that there wasn't anything even remotely approaching a relationship in which those words could have been spoken up until that scene.

What Children of Earth did, for me, above anything else, was tell me that I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG. Way back when, when I started thinking that Jack/Ianto was a bit squicky, and I talked and I talked and I talked and people talked to me, and everyone started convincing each other that we should be reading between the lines and there was more to their emotional bond than we were being shown, all that stuff was thrown out the window in Days One to Four of Children of Earth. There wasn't. There hadn't been. And so all those thoughts I had back then, that Jack was essentially fucking an employee, not really giving anything back emotionally, despite the fact that that employee, who was younger, less experienced, emotionally broken and vulnerable, was very obviously falling in love with him, all that stuff was true. My inklings and instincts that Jack was being a user and was, in fact, a bit of a dick, that really was the case. Not only was there nothing going on, emotionally, in Series One or Two, but when that subject did start coming up in CoE, it was shot down, their interactions became hugely uncomfortable to watch, and a sudden redemption on that front on Ianto's deathbed did absolutely nothing to change that. Too little, too late. It made me hate Jack, far more than I'm sure it was meant to, but it did. I'm glad Jack didn't say "I love you", it would probably have made me hate him even more.

The reason all this stuff still bothers me is pretty simple. I had these bad feelings about Jack during S2 of Torchwood, this inkling that he used people and acted like an arsehole, and used his immortality as an excuse, in his own head, anyway, for how he treated mere mortals emotionally. For me, those feelings were confirmed in CoE when the big, climactic, dramatic drama happened. And the thing is, I have these same feelings about the Doctor. Well, no, not the Doctor, Ten, specifically. This niggling feeling that he's been acting like a dick, and that he uses his emo as an excuse to treat people like shit. In fact with the Doctor it's far less niggling, and far more blatant. I don't want to feel this way about the Doctor, and I'm very, very afraid that, as with Jack, these things will come into play in the final furlong. I DO NOT WANT.

I never really cared about the fact that I disliked Jack, Jack's not a big deal, but the Doctor? I watch this shit with my kid, man, I don't want to have him squeeing over monsters and sonic screwdrivers and TARDISes while I sit by on the sofa and fume and cringe and hate Ten. I don't want all this serious manpain in Who, and I certainly don't want these HINTS of serious manpain and emotional retardation to become CANON. I don't mind hints, I don't mind it when I can read things into this kiddie show, I like being given ambiguity and subtext, things to enjoy on another level while my child hides behind the sofa, that's all great, it's cool. Actual canonical emo and manpain and emotional manipulation? Not so much.

I hear a lot of people saying that it sounds like Moffat's tenure might be a bit much in the way of jelly babies and crappy monsters and silliness. GOOD. I, for one, cannot wait for this development. Bring it on. And Russell? Go make SRSDRAMA somewhere else. I won't be watching.

ETA: LOL, though. I've been criticising Russell T Davies for like two years now, and what was my major complaint about Jack/Ianto? It was Russell, you're not doing a very good job of showing us a relationship between two equals that isn't mildly emotionally abusive and isn't primarily about sex. I was totally wrong. He did a great job of showing us a relationship that wasn't between two equals, was mildly emotionally abusive and was primarily about sex. Russell is, in fact, very good at his job. Who would have thought?


Jul. 7th, 2009 08:30 am
tencrush: (Default)
So I DO have a few thoughts on Children of Earth, Day One, and I DO have ten minutes to write them down, but probs not to comment. They're randomly here below the cut.
Bender. Lol. )

tencrush: (ninja teaboy)

-Can I be the wife? Please? Please? Pretty please with sprinkles and sparkles on top???
-Yeah, fine, whatever.

I hate this show so much sometimes.

tencrush: (do not want)
Hello! I'm back. And now, Shitty Photoshop Theatre presents a new shitty manip for your shitty delectation. IT IS UNWORKSAFE, and contains kittens.

The art is called:

tencrush: (ianto pie)
It's wrong of me to just be pausing through this new trailer, cursing the fact that there's not enough Ianto in it for me to properly assess the pie situation?


Still no clue about when the hell it's on, though. Arsewipes.

tencrush: (thud)
Random questions that have been on my mind lately:

  • Why do fanfic writers write to prompts and challenges and such? If you need a prompt, isn't that already a basic signal that there's something up with your creative juices? (I'm not being shitty here, I genuinely want to know why people do this.) Also, am I the only person who more or less assumes, upon reading the words "prompt table" that a fic will be on the mediocre-to-shite end of the spectrum? Also, why do people throw "plot bunnies" at each other? If you couldn't write it yourself, isn't that more or less a hint that the idea, in and of itself, doesn't have legs? And why are they called "plot bunnies" and am I the only peron who reads those two words and wants to kill?

  • Who are the Jantomafia? Where do they hang out? I hear talk of them a lot. Are they like the Barrowmafia? I mean, I know I've met one or two people who are quite vehemently pro-Jack/Ianto (I can't even bring myself to write the smooshphrase more than once), but would those people automatically be in said mafia? Or is there like a membership thing? Am I on their shitlist for saying I think it would be a logical progression for the characters and make for more interesting telvision if they split up? Do they even have a shitlist? No, seriously, where do they hang out?

  • Spoiler for Torchwood? )

  • Part of me kind of likes [ profile] theemptywriter, first of all because I think it's good that people get all this anti-Moffat sentiment out now, years before his episodes hit the screen, and I know the whole thing will run out of steam by then. Secondly because I love watching five people constantly telling each other how right they are to hate someone for no real reason. And also because they're all twelve. And love Rose. There's something really cute about them that makes me want to pinch their cheeks and punch them in the face in equal measure.

  • I want to pimp [ profile] ninja_teaboy around the houses again, but I don't really have a legitimate reason for doing so. I'd issue a fic challenge if it weren't for point one up there. And, really, I'm wondering if perhaps less is more when it comes to membership. But on the other hand, I've read some good stuff that I'd love people to post there, but I've been too busy to comment and say "Hey! Bring this over to my pool, I like it." Am torn. Need quality input. Have no idea how to achieve it. Grrr.

  • Shitty photomanips are shitty. Maybe I should take up making them myself? Just for luls? If I did, would people come into my journal and go "Whew! Hawt!!!" Because otherwise I'm not doing it.
tencrush: (it crowd gay)
This article has been linked to extensively on my flist: Why Can't A Kiss Just Be A Kiss?, which I am now linking to as well, because it's an interesting read and all about the American media's EWWGROSS!! approach to onscreen male/male kissing. The Letterman interview with James Franco mentioned in the article is here, watch it:

Wow. Just... wow. When did Letterman turn into Leno with the crowd-pleasing homophobia, by the way? I've been out of the Yank loop for so long. That uncomfortable, embarrased attitude, dudes, it's like Leno and Ryan Phillipe all over again. (If you don't know what I'm talking about just google the phrase "gayest look" and work it out from there.) Just for once, I wish people like Franco wouldn't stoop to tittering along with this homophobic bullshit. He's a young, good-looking actor, who obviously doesn't have a problem with onscreen ghey, and he's in a prime position to call someone like Letterman out on it and tell him it's a stupid fucking question. Someone on [ profile] alba17's journal (which is where I've snagged most of these links from) asked the question why nobody's asked Sean Penn what it's like to kiss a guy. I have to say, I firmly believe it's because Penn would, in fact, probably say "That's a stupid fucking question and you're a pathetic little man for asking it. I'm an actor" (Yeah, I have a bit of a soft spot for Penn. Don't judge me.) Because it's true. Nobody's ever asked Toby Maguire what it was like kissing Kirsten Dunst when she has a face like a slapped arse, yet asking a bloke what it's like to kiss Sean Penn, and implying that it must be really goddamn awful is a perfectly acceptable thing to say. It's fucked up.

Anyway, the interesting counterpoint is of course provided by Teh Barrowman:

And that Welsh beefcake GDL here (I'm referencing this article because I NEVER KNEW IT HAD A PAGE 2. Yeah, I'm a dumbass. Thanks to [ profile] andreth47 for the link.):
"It's not as much of an issue [in the U.K.] at all. I don't get it, I don't understand why it's controversial, I don't understand why it's anyone's business or why it becomes anyone's problem where you stick your dick. Because it's not an issue for me, I don't really see us as pioneers. If we are viewed as pioneers, I just feel sorry for the people that are just coming 'round, because the wankers should have grown up much longer ago.

There's nothing wrong with [two men kissing] and the fact that people are interested in [Jack and Ianto's] relationship – I'd like that to be because of the chemistry. That's the reason I want it to be popular, not because, oh my God, it's a SciFi show with a gay relationship. I know people are going to be like that, but because it's not an issue for me, I sort of haven't got time for people it is an issue for."

Bless you, my son. (I'll just be really quick about saying that GDL might be veering a bit far to the other side of the debate in his vehemence about it "not being an issue", a slight appreciation of the fact that it is an issue for some people, especially across the pond, and therefore, in some circles, an important thing he's involved in here might not be misplaced. Honeypie. Just sayin'.)

And that, my friends, is why LB and GDL will never make it in Hollywood. The acceptable Tinseltown answer to the question of what it's like to kiss a guy is "It made me do a sick in my mouth a little." TRY TO REMEMBER THAT.

Just to prove not all of those crazy yanks are crazy, and to reassure everyone that today's generation of American kids will grow up JUST FINE. Here's Neil Patrick Harris on Sesame Street. As the Shoe Fairy. That's SHOE. FAIRY. Oh, yes. Watch as he imprints on the fragile minds of today's kiddies. GO NPH!

tencrush: (Default)
Oh, alright then, I'll do a post about Jack, Ianto and anal sex. Elsewhere on my flist there's already a rant about the subject, but I still feel inspired enough to contribute my thoughts on the matter.

The lubrication coefficent... )

tencrush: (twplot)

  • In defense of me... First of all, I love how when I post something about Barrowman, it never gets linked in the [ profile] torchwood_three newsletter, because it'll usually be about me thinking he's a bit of a dick. The Barrowmafia is strong. Not that I give a rat's arse, it's just something I've noticed.

  • Secondly, I've noticed that the extreme Barrowman love tends to come from Americans. I find that interesting from a sociological perspective, and I can understand where that comes from. A lot of American fans seem to find his out-and-out outness and happy-go-lucky lifestyle refreshingly different. As a European, I find it a mite tedious, and slightly overly perky and, indeed, American. I get outness on my telly and in my parliament and my newspapers and everywhere else on a daily basis, and as soon as you start going OTT with that outness, it strikes me as being a calculated exploitation of one's sexuality, which I associate with camp light entertainers and panto stars like Paul O'Grady and Julian Clary. But then, that's what Barrowman is. And the US doesn't really have Graham Nortons and Paul O'Gradys, and it certainly doesn't have that not-in-your-face outness of politicians and newspeople and actors and whoever that I take for granted over here, so I guess Barrowman is refreshing to a lot of Americans (As an aside, whatever happened to those uber-camp light entertainers I seem to recall the US having back in the seventies and eighties on things like Hollywood Squares and The Love Boat? Did they disappear into the woodwork out when AIDS hit? Did it cease being funny to be stereotypically gay? Were those guys ever really accepted as being gay by mainstream America, or were they just point-and-laugh funny because they acted gay? And why can't I remember any of their names?) But yeah, anyway, I can see why people think he's cool, and seriously, if you love the guy, go for it. There are far worse people on this earth to love, and apart from anything else, I don't think the man has a nasty bone in his body. Apart from the bone that would probably make a joke about the phrase "nasty bone", and that bone's just crude, but not nasty. And if he's got just one Torchwood fan who's never really been in contact with homosexuality and never known anyone who's gay and never really thought about it, to realise that it's okay to be gay and the world isn't going to end because two guys shack up and get a couple of gay dogs and move into your neighbourhood, then that's a great thing, because that's how it works. Go Barrowmanfans, go forth and be happy, I have nothing against you. I just think he's a bit of a dick. But that's just me.

  • A specific defense of me, not that I've been named, but I can read between the lines, I never claimed that Barrowman has corrupted the virginal GDL and turned him into a waving-his-cock-in-your-face-type monster. Though I did say something along those lines here once that may have been construed that way. Gareth David-Lloyd is a 27-year-old man and I fully believe that he, like most 27-year-olds, will happily and drunkenly wave his cock in anyone's face, stick it down anyone's throat and possibly even try to stick things up it for a bet just like any healthy boy his age, without the need of ANY encouragement from anyone else. What I DID say was in conjunction with all the hullabaloo surrounding the Hub convention, and it was that I think Barrowman, who's been around a bit and is, let's face it a lot older and presumably wiser, has been a bad influence on convention n00bs like Gareth and Naoko, not in inciting bad behaviour, but in giving the impression that this sort of behaviour is perfectly acceptable. None of that would have been an issue for me were it not for the fact that after that particular convention, vibes were being spread around the interwebs that What Happened At The Hub Should Stay At The Hub, and the impression was given that the actors' behaviour at said convention somehow wasn't palatable for the general public. And in that respect I'm probably just too much of an old woman, and more forgiving of the youngsters, in as much as I think Barrowman really is old enough to know better, and the reason I singled out Barrowman specifically, is because those vibes I mentioned were reported to be coming from him solely, and not from anyone else, which I found hypocritical of someone who so eagerly encourages the crudeness in others. In retrospect, like I've said before, I may have misread the fact that JB specifically didn't want his behaviour getting out. Not being a huge fan of his, I kind of misinterpreted some of the uberBarrowmanettes' tone of "JOHN TALKED TO US OMG I TALKED TO JOHN!!" as "JOHN is the one, out of all of them, who specifically felt this way", simply because that first interpretation doesn't really impress me and therefore I kind of just read over it and went straight for the second. But yeah, that's why I went for John. Make of it what you will.

  • Oh, and dudes, I've never claimed that Jack is a subby little bottom. I do, frequently claim Ianto is a dommy little top, which is a hangover from my glee at being proven right in my assertion, all that time ago, that Ianto was a manwhore who pulled the wool over Jack's eyes re. Lisa by distracting him with sex, but I've never once stated that that implies Jack is a subby little bottom. I really should stop reading the anonymeme, I know. I can't help myself.


  • Oh yes, and when Torchwood is axed, everyone will blame Moffat. Everyone from now on will blame Moffat for EVERYTHING. It's got nothing to do with Moffat, though I do believe Moffat wants nothing to do with Torchwood, but that in itself would not be an adequate reason for the BBC to axe the show. The hate for Moffat is strong, and it's completely unfounded, and it's only going to get worse and worse and worse. I weep for this fandom, I really do. I still love you, Steven.

As you were.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
Thank you for all your lovely comments on my slightly anti-JB post, I'll just reiterate what's been said elsewhere, what a lovely, friendly fandom this is that we can have these sane, civilised discussions, even when we don't agree. I LOVE YOU ALL.

I'd like to respond to a few things, and they're best summed up by an anonymous comment I received from Max in the post below, and they're pertaining to Torchwood specifically, as opposed to JB, which is really where I'm going with this whole thing. The comment:

On the subject of TW..... opposed to John himself - RTD has had his owm criticism about his protrayal of gay men, in relation to QAF mostly.

There are some gay men who hated the representation of gay men on QAF as pill-popping man-sluts.

Two things to say about that:

1) I think RTD lived that life in his 20's - going out every night, multiple flings etc, so he was writing what HE knew personally.

2) Why does every gay character have to be the definitive role model - an acceptable face to the straight world?

...So some gay men may live to be on the scene, and some may find a partner and never stray. Some may find a partner, and have lovers on the side - and by the way, I'm not even sure this is what JB does in his own life (I get the impression he's monogamous), but it's not my business - but you can't expect every single gay relationship on the the tv (including on TW) to reflect what you think is the ideal.

First off, as I've said, I'm really not particularly interested in what anyone does in their private life, which is why I had trouble posting what I did, because I think it's a bit intrusive, and the reason I brought up JB's private life, specifically, is because I think it has bearing on the characterisation in Torchwood. As Max rightly points out, Russell himself has also been on the receiving end of this sort of criticism, and I think the same thing Max says applies to John, I think both of them have a past in that free-for-all multiple fling gay scene, and I'm sure John is perfectly monogamous at this point in his life, I never meant to imply that I think he isn't. But I think that history has bearing on how the gay relationships in Torchwood play out. As has been pointed out on many occasions by many different people, including myself, but not only by me, the show treads a very fine line and has a tendency towards portraying the homosexual relationships as somehow less emotionally involving than the heterosexual ones. It's not a thing that's been put in intentionally by anyone involved, but it's a piling of small things on top of other small things that leave that impression.

Let's take Ianto. (Yes! Let's! I'll take him! I'll take him right here and now.) On the one hand, Ianto's a hugely refreshing character. For a start, he's canonically bisexual, which, on the GLBT menu, is surely potentially and stereotypically the most slutty thing one can possibly be, omnisexual notwithstanding. Because, let's face it, as a bisexual you're just not ruling anyone out, everyone's a potential target for your advances. (I'm joking. You all know me well enough by know. If you don't, fuck off out my journal.) And yet, Ianto's... kind of dull. Despite his young age, he's not out clubbing and fucking anything on two legs, in fact, if written canon is to be believed, it's been Lisa and now Jack and that's it. It's one of the things I love about Ianto, he's not a stereotype, which is great. But again, with Ianto, they chose to make his one OMGTRUELOVE relationship a heterosexual one (because there is NO denying that Ianto and Lisa were a big thing. We don't really need any more evidence on that front than the evidence we have, which is that, despite not being an idiot and knowing what she had been turned into, he had to save her. He LOVED her. Lots. End of.) and his kind-of-casual-avant-garde-sexytimes relationship a homosexual one. And there we have yet another one of those little things that, working together create that bigger impression of het-serious/homo-casual. And when you add that, and all the other things that have been dissected to death, to this sort of thing:
"But I don’t think he’d settle down with Ianto. He might do, but he’d let Ianto know that he [Jack] has to play around on the side. If he’d commit to Gwen, however, he knows that he’d have to commit completely."
coming from the guy who plays Jack, it makes me mad. Because there is just no canon to back up this assertion, and so I feel the assertion must be coming from John himself, and that worries me. And on that note, as I've said about Barrowman personally and the way he talks about himself, I feel the portrayal of Jack/Ianto and their "innovations" suffers from that same gay=adventurous-and-wild-and-crazy-and-just-that-little-bit-more-relaxed-and-funner-than-het stereotype that I think attitudes like Russell's and John's about gay relationships help perpetuate.

In the end, no, I've said this before and I'll say it again, every gay character DOES NOT have to be the definitive role model or an acceptable face to the straight world, every gay relationship DOES NOT have to be monogamous and serious, Torchwood DOES NOT have to be an after school special on how gay people are just people, too. BUT... I feel it could do with taking a good long look at itself and the trends in its writing that nobody, not even the token gay representatives like Russell and John, seems to be noticing.

I am hearing good things on the grapevine about Jack/Ianto in series 3, and I hope this post will be proved absolutely wrong by those things. We'll see.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
There's a reason I stopped at Cyberwoman with my hilarious retcon, and that's because the whole Jack and Ianto story from Fragments to Cyberwoman is one that people have very many different takes on. I myself have always believed there was sex going on between Jack and Ianto from the moment we met Ianto in Everything Changes (funnily enough, at the time, I wasn't sure there was any attraction involved on Ianto's part, my views on that only started changing after TKKS).

Jack and Ianto up to Cyberwoman, my serious take on what was going on )

That's my personal take on their relationship up to Cyberwoman. A bit rambly, but there you are. I shall be returing to the regularly scheduled Series One Retcon tomorrow.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
Having read the reports from ComicCon, I was amused to hear that John Barrowman felt Jack was probably jealous of Lisa in Cyberwoman. I think it's great that this big gay show of mine gives one ample opportunity to fankwank away one's own overacting so easily. In hindsight, there's always a reason.

Taking that on board, I felt compelled to look at Torchwood series one again. Because, let's face it, these two were doing it all along, right? Let's see if we can read that into every scene and see what comes out:

Presenting The Jack and Ianto Are at it Like Bunnies Torchwood Series One Retcon Project, part one )

So there you have part one. Part two will explore the exciting world of cannibalism, stopwatches and tummyrats. And fairies, of course. Let's not forget those.

tencrush: (iantobutton)
Yet another trailer for this week's WHO.

Ianto gets first kissings, that's good, yeah? Though I'd like Ianto to have piped up to Gwen and said "they're freaking Daleks, it's their catchphrase, RTFM, bint", because surely, it's not like it wouldn't be well documented even in TW3 the whole Cybermans and Daleks debacle at TW Towers, right?

Observery and speculatory observation: it's about Daleks fighting EACH OTHER in some way, right? I mean Khan's and Davros' lot. Surely? Or not? I don't know, this seems somehow plausible to me.

Watch the trailer for more gratuitous Luke than you can shake a stick at. I shouldn't be excited by one so young.

ETA: ALSO: Should I be excited by the prospect of Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog? Because I kind of am, but I'm not quite sure why.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
Well, no, I wasn't, but apologies if my last post went a bit rambly and weird. Most you have never seen me rambly and weird, though in fact, dealing with people onna OG has made me go rambly and weird before in the past, but it was always about Rose. Must remind myself not to carry my righteous anger over from there to here, because it make NO sense out of context. Sorry, LOL!

Anyway, I kind of promised to explain what the righteous anger was about, so I'll do that now. As an aside, I AM planning on polling to see how widespread the interpretation of Ianto as just the teaboy/Jack's sextoy is, but it's not even really the fact that it is or isn't widespread that bothers me, it's the fact that the writing has even ALLOWED ROOM for that interpretation to exist that gets on my nerves.

So why does it bother me so much? Well, again, it's a question of characterisation. See, to me, interpreting the relationship as Jack using Ianto as a sextoy has a lot of implications for both characters, and it's why I say I don't think it's doing them any favours. The reason I got angry about it isn't because I'm so hugely defensive about Ianto, it's actually down to a few telling statements, statements that I HAVE heard elsewhere in other contexts, about JACK, not Ianto. And all that comes back to a discussion I've had here and elsewhere a few times, about Jack, and whether or not he is still, at this point in the narrative, the omnisexual slut type that he was perceived to be around the time of The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances. The fact that the relationship between Jack and Ianto is open to the sextoy interpretation, in my mind, also immediately implies that it is possible for viewers to perceive Jack as THE SORT OF GUY WHO WOULD DO THAT. Harrassment, of a subordinate. Because that's what that boils down to. The thing that got me so riled up wasn't the fact that people think Ianto is the sort of guy that would allow himself to be used as a sextoy (I think that's a plausible reading if you view the show in a certain way, and I think, given the fact that Ianto hasn't really had a major storyline since Cyberwoman, barring the Jackanto story itself, it's understandable that some people might view him that way), it was the attitude of the posters in question, and of people I have spoken to elsewhere, of "Oh, that's just the kind of guy Jack is." Because, really? No. If the storytelling has allowed room for the interpretation of Jack, the leading man, as the sort of guy who would use one of his employees for sex, given all the fucked up power dynamics that that implies, then the character of Jack, with regards to his sexual/romantic leanings in any case, has not been properly put to paper.

And that angers me greatly, yeah. Because Jack, in everyone's big grandiose words is supposed to be this whole new kind of hero for the 21st century. Someone with a progressive and liberal attitude towards sex and sexuality. Someone like you and me (I would hope), who doesn't like to label people and thinks everyone should be free to explore whatever facets of life turn them on. Someone who will serve as an example to that small faction of 15-year-old boys who are squicked by teh ghey, and maybe open their minds a bit. And allowing room for people to see Jack as a guy who just puts it about a bit, who comes on to one colleague, is rebuffed and moves on to the next, really FUCKS THAT UP for me. That's why I was angry.

Am I making sense yet or am I still rambling? The hormones haven't worn off yet, I can never quite tell lately.

tencrush: (jackanto subtext)
So... my head's been a bit spaced and I've been spending my time on the doctorwhoforum arguing with guys about Ianto. As you do. I say "guys" because doctorwhoforum, of course, has a far larger proportion of people of the male persuasion than LJ has, and I forget that sometimes. Anyway, and so it came to pass that I ended up fighting with some dude about Ianto and Jack/Ianto. The argument was about the relationship, and whether or not there was anything more to it than Jack using Ianto as a sex toy, which, in the dude's opinion, there was not. Now, as you know, I have argued the dude's point in the past, in as much as I, also, felt that the protrayal of the relationship as a LOVING one was somehow lacking. Peaking around the time of Something Borrowed, I thought the relationship was being shown as incredibly superficial and sex-based, and so, if the argument hadn't degenerated into a farcical slanging match, I would have conceded that the dude had a point in seeing it the way he was seeing it. And the whole sorry business made me realise something, and that something is this.

The dude, which is what I shall call him, was not much more than a casual viewer. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the the dude qualified as "the average viewer". He's seen the episodes once or twice, and had missed one or two. He watched Torchwood the same way I watch House. Enough to know who's who, what their history's like, where they stand with each other and who's doing whom, but maybe I've missed the odd episode along the way.

And the thing with this dude is, that he's COMPLETELY RIGHT. Have you seen how much we've analysed this relationship? How many words we have written to try and figure out what's going on? Not just me, [ profile] crabby_lioness, [ profile] antelope_writes, [ profile] fodian, God knows who else, and you know what all of that means, at the end of the day? It's this:

End of story. The writing = FAIL.

The dude thinks Ianto is Jack's sex toy, and that is because the dude has seen what's been shown, has maybe missed one or two episodes and when you do that, THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE. I LIVE with a Dude, he sees the same thing. There is NOTHING in the way this relationship has been written, that, on a gut level tells you that THIS IS A ROMANCE. And if it's not there on a gut level for Average Viewer, then no amount of analysis and rambling on is going to put it there for Average Viewer, because Average Viewer doesn't read pages of analysis about TV. The dude's got Top Gear to be watching.

I often wonder if they WANTED us to see a romance, or if that was never their intention, and I'm starting to think that maybe that was never their intention. I had a bit of a thought, you see, and it was about GDL, who in an interview once expressed his annoyance at the no-bible ting, and at Russell in particular, because when he'd asked Russell where he was supposed to be taking Ianto, Russell had replied something like "That's for me to know and you to find out LOL!" Arsehole. And that led me to thinking, how much were the actors actually told, Gareth and John specifically? To what extent would a question like "So where is this relationship going, are they in love, in lust, what?" even have been answered by TPTB? Because, seriously, look at all our analysis, how much of it is based on ACTOR-DRIVEN CHARACTERISATION??? How much of what we think about this relationship may well be based solely on decisions made by people like Gareth, who upon not receiving an adequate answer with regards to their character's motivations, decide for themselves that they're going with "in love" and they're going to stick with that for 13 episodes? Honestly, if you take out the actor-led stuff from Gareth and John, a few telling moments in the way of direction and a whole lot of pasted on shippery from a weblog, what are you left with, in terms of script, when it comes to Jack/Ianto?

I say a big fat nowt.

ETA, My answer? I wrote it onna OG:
In an ideal world, for me, this relationship would redeem itself very neatly by Ianto dumping Jack in the next series. It would show us who WAS in charge of the relationship's progression and it would give Ianto a nice amount of dignity, something which in some people's eyes he's missing, and it would end this abominable mess of contradictory writing. Blech. I don't really think it can be fixed any other way.
And then, hopefully, the new team will put a bible in place and people's characters can actually develop neatly and all the writers can actually write to the same bloody tune and stop us gnawing our keyboards to bits in frustration and anger.

And the reason I say that, is because I'm quite fond of Ianto as a character and I don't think the Jack/Ianto relationship is doing him any favours. I'll quote tigercheetah from the OG: "When a significant number of fans still regard Ianto as only being "the tea boy, Jack's shag interest and the general support guy" - even if the writers didn't intend for that to be the case - there's something going wrong somewhere when it comes to the writing of the Janto relationship." Word. Even if it isn't a significant number, it's still a worrying effect.


tencrush: (Default)

July 2014

   1 2345
6 7 89101112
1314 1516171819


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 05:38 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios