most of what I was going to say has been hashed out now. Always late to the party, lol.
A couple of points:
-Jack and Ianto has been subtley developed over the two series. I just don't believe for a minute this is a product of thoughtful writing, acting on a certain lead's part, and continuity checking. I view it more as a broken clock being right twice a day, because I don't think the writers and showrunners have demonstrated an appreciation of nuance and subtlety in general.
-Allow me to go OT for a sec? I edited a big report for the State Department the other day. It was clear that the authors of each section were not working with the same set of instructions, parameters, or even sense of what the final message of the report was supposed to be. I had to go in and make the thing sound unified and written by a single writer. Why? Because people don't like to be jarred when they read; it dilutes the message. When I look at TW as a series, I see something written by committee that hasn't yet been edited. And it jars me, what can I say?
-I didn't want Who until after TW, so I was never "sold" this idea of Jack being an omnisexual slut. Now I have gone back and watched Who. Jack had evolved even from Empty Child to Parting of the Ways ("I was much better off a coward."). I don't find it at all unlikely that in the intervening 135ish! years he might have changed a bit here and there. Can't say from personal experience, as I am unlikely to become immortal anytime soon, but "so little species, so little time" isn't quite true anymore. He has time coming out the yin-yang. Therefore I could imagine he would come down with the occasional bout of monogamy; they implied as much with Estelle and the unnamed wife. And if Ianto is not a candidate for this monogamy, fine. Just make sure all your writers are on the same page in that regard.
-The character shifts when he returns to Who are what jar me. But then a lot of people who watch and remember Jack from Who don't necessarily watch TW and I guess they need Jack to be reconizeable?
no subject
A couple of points:
-Jack and Ianto has been subtley developed over the two series. I just don't believe for a minute this is a product of thoughtful writing, acting on a certain lead's part, and continuity checking. I view it more as a broken clock being right twice a day, because I don't think the writers and showrunners have demonstrated an appreciation of nuance and subtlety in general.
-Allow me to go OT for a sec? I edited a big report for the State Department the other day. It was clear that the authors of each section were not working with the same set of instructions, parameters, or even sense of what the final message of the report was supposed to be. I had to go in and make the thing sound unified and written by a single writer. Why? Because people don't like to be jarred when they read; it dilutes the message. When I look at TW as a series, I see something written by committee that hasn't yet been edited. And it jars me, what can I say?
-I didn't want Who until after TW, so I was never "sold" this idea of Jack being an omnisexual slut. Now I have gone back and watched Who. Jack had evolved even from Empty Child to Parting of the Ways ("I was much better off a coward."). I don't find it at all unlikely that in the intervening 135ish! years he might have changed a bit here and there. Can't say from personal experience, as I am unlikely to become immortal anytime soon, but "so little species, so little time" isn't quite true anymore. He has time coming out the yin-yang. Therefore I could imagine he would come down with the occasional bout of monogamy; they implied as much with Estelle and the unnamed wife. And if Ianto is not a candidate for this monogamy, fine. Just make sure all your writers are on the same page in that regard.
-The character shifts when he returns to Who are what jar me. But then a lot of people who watch and remember Jack from Who don't necessarily watch TW and I guess they need Jack to be reconizeable?
Even my few points have become tl;dr. :P