![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tencrushSo... it transpires that James Moran wrote the BBCA Captain's Blogs. Interesting. And when I say "interesting", I mean, of course, "weird". I have in the past accused the blogs of having been written by a gushing demented 15-year-old fangirl. So, either James Moran is secretly a gushing, demented 15-year-old fangirl, or James Moran has cynically pandered to the gushing, demented 15-year-old fangirl in all of us. I mean, it's either one or the other, right? I WISH I COULD TALK TO JAMES MORAN RIGHT NOW, SERIOUSLY.
My problem with the Captain's Blogs, which I've expressed on numerous occasions, is the way they are in many instances, completely at odds with what we've been shown on screen when it comes to the Jack/Ianto relationship. And on one level, it's kind of heartening to know that they're the product of the production team, because it means that all that shizzle that we've been talking about all these months, all those interpretations (because that's what they are, let's face it) we have of there being more to Jack/Ianto than handjobs in the hub, there being more depth to it than the shallow sexxings and innuendo we've been unambiguously shown, are supported by at least some sort of opinion by someone on the team somewhere, that yes, there is more to this relationship that the stuff they've chosen to show. It shows promise for the future, right? But, then again, there's the cynical aspect of the whole thing, that aspect that has got up a few people's noses. I guess the question really is, WERE THEY PANDERING TO US?
Well, there's a few possibilities, the first, of course being that James Moran just ships Jack and Ianto. James Moran, personally, is a fan of the relationship and wants to see it played out in the way the blogs play it out. Now, that possibility is all well and good, but if that's the case then it brings me back to the point I have made countless times before about Torchwood, which is that there is no-one in charge. Nobody is taking it upon themselves to make sure all the writers are on the same page when it comes to the interpersonal relationships on the show and it makes for a mess in the area of character continuity. It just doesn't work to let one writer play up Jack/Gwen, and the next Jack/Ianto completely randomly, because all it serves to do at the end of the day is make everybody look bad. Gwen looks like an insensitive slut, Jack looks like a fickle spacewhore and Ianto looks like a trodden-upon boytoy who just takes it (in the ass, yes I know you were thinking it, well done, you). So, yeah, if James ships Jack/Ianto, good for him, a lot of us do, and if that's all it is, then that's fine, but somebody, somewhere, please bear in mind that evidently not all the writers do. And that's hella confusing for those of us watching.
Now the second, and I would hope more plausible, possibility is that James Moran was writing to some sort of brief from up above. But that brings a whole different can of worms to the table and they're just as unpleasant as the other worms (the other worms, up there, which I hadn't yet mentioned, but let's just assume there was a metaphor about worms involved somehow in the first possibility and move along, yeah?) Because that implies first of all that the powers that be were all too aware that they were showing the Jack/Ianto relationship, on screen, in a rather superficial light, because let's face it, of all the interactions we could have been shown between Jack and Ianto, we all agree that perhaps one or two sexual innuendoes should have been dropped in favour of even the vaguest hint that these two have some sort of emotional connection along the lines of the one the blog seems to be telling us they have. Now this brings up an interesting question, which is, when exactly were these blogs written? Because it could quite easily be the case that the blogs were written at a very late date, at a time when negative fan reaction was already starting to filter through, or at least at a time when positive reaction and the popularity of the Jack/Ianto relationship were becoming more clear to the production team, more clear, at least, than at the scripting and shooting stages of season 2. So was James Moran briefed to play catch-up in what the production team realised was a rather too ambiguous portrayal of a relationship the fanbase was rallying around? It's possible. And if so, yeah, you could call that pandering, but at least it's not cynical pandering, right? It's the kind of pandering that makes us fans feel kind of smug and good about ourselves because it tells us that someone's listening. And that promises great things for the future. Cool.
The other possibility though, the other worm in the can, if you will, is that Moran was briefed to add this layer to the relationship purely because the powers that be had no intention of going into it on screen. Now that's cynical pandering. That's the having your cake and eating it scenario and it's the one most people fear is the case. And that fear is reasonably justified, I feel. I mean, here's a team of writers and producers and whatnot who are perfectly happy to take Jack out of Torchwood, plonk him back into Who, rewind his character by a couple of years and turn him back into an omnisexual spaceslut who'll come onto anything with a pulse, despite having had him develop on Torchwood for two years into a man who seems, from what we can gather from the text, reasonably romantic, more than capable of monogamy and a person who places a huge emphasis on protecting those he loves. Not the kind of guy who just leaves you in the Hub with a bunch of Daleks, because hey, you guys can take care of yourselves, right? I'm taking the big gun, smoke me a kipper, helloooo there Sarah Jane. That sort of thing. These are the people we're dealing with here. The people who didn't bat an eyelid when the script said Owen, the guy who's been a doctor for at least five years that we know of, was 27 years old. The sort of people who from our fannish perspective, just don't seem to think twice about the bigger picture they're painting. Or at least once more (bonus points for the reference, peeps, just seeing if you're still paying attention, I realise this is all getting a bit tl;dr.) I hate to break it to the powers that be, but this last scenario is one that a lot of people wouldn't put past you in the slightest. I'm just sayin', you know?
What do I think? I think it's a little bit from columns A, B and C. I think the big problem Torchwood suffers from, and it's one I've had a bit of time to think about, is that they just don't quite know where they want to go with Jack. He was an omnisexual whore, but they've realised that that's just a bit too much of a whoreish thing for the romantic lead of a show to be(especially one that you've touted as such a sexually liberated icon, it gives the impression that sexual liberation=sluttiness and that looks bad and isn't what they meant). But giving him a romantic relationship that's anything more than casual kind of takes away his appeal as a 51st century happy-go-lucky player type, and it bogs him down as a character with nowhere to go. In making Jack our hero, they're kind of stuck now between a rock and a hard place. I sympathise, and I think it's a hard dilemma to resolve. What I do know, though, is that trying to approach him, and his relationship with Ianto, from all angles at once, trying to cover all the bases and please everyone, isn't the solution, and that's an approach a lot of people thought the Captain's Blogs were symptomatic of. I wasn't convinced that Rusty and co. were in the business of trying to please everyone, but, having seen Rose and Handy snog in the sunset in Journey's End, I'm no longer so sure about that one. There's having a cake, there's eating it, and then there's eating every pastry based snack in the whole damned shop.
My problem with the Captain's Blogs, which I've expressed on numerous occasions, is the way they are in many instances, completely at odds with what we've been shown on screen when it comes to the Jack/Ianto relationship. And on one level, it's kind of heartening to know that they're the product of the production team, because it means that all that shizzle that we've been talking about all these months, all those interpretations (because that's what they are, let's face it) we have of there being more to Jack/Ianto than handjobs in the hub, there being more depth to it than the shallow sexxings and innuendo we've been unambiguously shown, are supported by at least some sort of opinion by someone on the team somewhere, that yes, there is more to this relationship that the stuff they've chosen to show. It shows promise for the future, right? But, then again, there's the cynical aspect of the whole thing, that aspect that has got up a few people's noses. I guess the question really is, WERE THEY PANDERING TO US?
Well, there's a few possibilities, the first, of course being that James Moran just ships Jack and Ianto. James Moran, personally, is a fan of the relationship and wants to see it played out in the way the blogs play it out. Now, that possibility is all well and good, but if that's the case then it brings me back to the point I have made countless times before about Torchwood, which is that there is no-one in charge. Nobody is taking it upon themselves to make sure all the writers are on the same page when it comes to the interpersonal relationships on the show and it makes for a mess in the area of character continuity. It just doesn't work to let one writer play up Jack/Gwen, and the next Jack/Ianto completely randomly, because all it serves to do at the end of the day is make everybody look bad. Gwen looks like an insensitive slut, Jack looks like a fickle spacewhore and Ianto looks like a trodden-upon boytoy who just takes it (in the ass, yes I know you were thinking it, well done, you). So, yeah, if James ships Jack/Ianto, good for him, a lot of us do, and if that's all it is, then that's fine, but somebody, somewhere, please bear in mind that evidently not all the writers do. And that's hella confusing for those of us watching.
Now the second, and I would hope more plausible, possibility is that James Moran was writing to some sort of brief from up above. But that brings a whole different can of worms to the table and they're just as unpleasant as the other worms (the other worms, up there, which I hadn't yet mentioned, but let's just assume there was a metaphor about worms involved somehow in the first possibility and move along, yeah?) Because that implies first of all that the powers that be were all too aware that they were showing the Jack/Ianto relationship, on screen, in a rather superficial light, because let's face it, of all the interactions we could have been shown between Jack and Ianto, we all agree that perhaps one or two sexual innuendoes should have been dropped in favour of even the vaguest hint that these two have some sort of emotional connection along the lines of the one the blog seems to be telling us they have. Now this brings up an interesting question, which is, when exactly were these blogs written? Because it could quite easily be the case that the blogs were written at a very late date, at a time when negative fan reaction was already starting to filter through, or at least at a time when positive reaction and the popularity of the Jack/Ianto relationship were becoming more clear to the production team, more clear, at least, than at the scripting and shooting stages of season 2. So was James Moran briefed to play catch-up in what the production team realised was a rather too ambiguous portrayal of a relationship the fanbase was rallying around? It's possible. And if so, yeah, you could call that pandering, but at least it's not cynical pandering, right? It's the kind of pandering that makes us fans feel kind of smug and good about ourselves because it tells us that someone's listening. And that promises great things for the future. Cool.
The other possibility though, the other worm in the can, if you will, is that Moran was briefed to add this layer to the relationship purely because the powers that be had no intention of going into it on screen. Now that's cynical pandering. That's the having your cake and eating it scenario and it's the one most people fear is the case. And that fear is reasonably justified, I feel. I mean, here's a team of writers and producers and whatnot who are perfectly happy to take Jack out of Torchwood, plonk him back into Who, rewind his character by a couple of years and turn him back into an omnisexual spaceslut who'll come onto anything with a pulse, despite having had him develop on Torchwood for two years into a man who seems, from what we can gather from the text, reasonably romantic, more than capable of monogamy and a person who places a huge emphasis on protecting those he loves. Not the kind of guy who just leaves you in the Hub with a bunch of Daleks, because hey, you guys can take care of yourselves, right? I'm taking the big gun, smoke me a kipper, helloooo there Sarah Jane. That sort of thing. These are the people we're dealing with here. The people who didn't bat an eyelid when the script said Owen, the guy who's been a doctor for at least five years that we know of, was 27 years old. The sort of people who from our fannish perspective, just don't seem to think twice about the bigger picture they're painting. Or at least once more (bonus points for the reference, peeps, just seeing if you're still paying attention, I realise this is all getting a bit tl;dr.) I hate to break it to the powers that be, but this last scenario is one that a lot of people wouldn't put past you in the slightest. I'm just sayin', you know?
What do I think? I think it's a little bit from columns A, B and C. I think the big problem Torchwood suffers from, and it's one I've had a bit of time to think about, is that they just don't quite know where they want to go with Jack. He was an omnisexual whore, but they've realised that that's just a bit too much of a whoreish thing for the romantic lead of a show to be(especially one that you've touted as such a sexually liberated icon, it gives the impression that sexual liberation=sluttiness and that looks bad and isn't what they meant). But giving him a romantic relationship that's anything more than casual kind of takes away his appeal as a 51st century happy-go-lucky player type, and it bogs him down as a character with nowhere to go. In making Jack our hero, they're kind of stuck now between a rock and a hard place. I sympathise, and I think it's a hard dilemma to resolve. What I do know, though, is that trying to approach him, and his relationship with Ianto, from all angles at once, trying to cover all the bases and please everyone, isn't the solution, and that's an approach a lot of people thought the Captain's Blogs were symptomatic of. I wasn't convinced that Rusty and co. were in the business of trying to please everyone, but, having seen Rose and Handy snog in the sunset in Journey's End, I'm no longer so sure about that one. There's having a cake, there's eating it, and then there's eating every pastry based snack in the whole damned shop.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-17 10:41 pm (UTC)Personally, with the above caveat, I don't see the onscreen depiction of Jack/Ianto as too much of a problem, because we've seen primarily work-related interaction. But we know they do spend time together out of working hours-- they have to-- and to me that is where the Captain's Blog fits in.
In fact, to be honest, I tend to see the Jack/Ianto relationship much the same way the Captain's Blog describes-- yes, down to Jack being free to cling to Ianto for a few hours. I don't think that interpretation has been negated by anything we've shown onscreen, but unfortunately it hasn't truly been supported either.
I'd like very much to see it. I would have loved something after Out of the Rain, when instead Jack was ominous and oblivious. Or Exit Wounds, which had Gwen/Rhys and a complete absence of Jack and Ianto.
There are many hints as to what their relationship is or isn't. The date scene and Jack's nervousness, the dynamics of the flirting in Sleeper, the convo in TtLM, the fondness of the forehead-kiss in Adam, the "it's not like that, me and Jack" in DitD, the dance in SB... I like this list quite a bit, but in the grand scheme of things they're really just hints. We've gotten no real glimpse at what Jack and Ianto do when they're not onscreen, except have sex.
It wouldn't be so noticable or problematic if Gwen didn't get coupley, domestic scenes with Rhys. That's the problem, IMO. I'm glad Torchwood isn't just about the main characters romantic exploits, but... there are two main relationships, and when it comes to getting a look at the team's personal lives, it's only the same-sex couple that's getting ignored. It's why it seems like it's being presented as superificial.
I'm not sure whether that's what they were going for or not. Maybe it was, or maybe they just aren't willing to show the softer moments. It does make it very frustrating, as I'm sure you're aware.
You're right, too, that a great deal of the problem is that TPTB haven't decided what to do with Jack, but I think it's also they haven't figured out what to do with Ianto. We haven't even seen his flat! He got his own personal episode and we found out more about him in Gwen's wedding episode! In Fragments, they fleshed out his backstory primarily with things we already knew. So, yeah, one ambiguous person in a couple is fine, especially if it's a character like Jack. But two is kind of ridiculous.
I hope that made some sense! I admit to being a fan of Jack/Ianto, so I hope this doesn't sound too biased or skewed.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-17 10:49 pm (UTC)x
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 01:49 am (UTC)I so totally agree about the inconsistency with Jack's character from TW to DW. That is just incredibly annoying.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 03:54 am (UTC)That juxtaposition is a large part of the problem, I agree. It really struck a lot of people in Exit Wounds that there wasn't a single Jack/Ianto moment to counteract Gwen and Rhys winding down from the emo and cuddling on the sofa. NOT THAT I WANT JACK AND IANTO CUDDLING ON THE SOFA. But I would have liked to have seen what the Jack and Ianto equivalent of cuddling on the sofa might be, even if that's just having a scotch in Jack's office and staring into space silently like real men. And also, like I said at the time, wouldn't that, just from an artistic point of view, been a nice little thing to show us? These two relationships and how they are different and yet also the same? Wouldn't that have been a nice note to end on? No? Ah well, all right then, whatever.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 04:13 am (UTC)But no, you're exactly right, on all counts. A shared scotch, maybe a quiet understated touch of hands-- that's all it would have taken. Even just standing shoulder-to-shoulder and looking out over the bay. There are several ways it could have been done. And quite frankly, these are things Jack and Ianto could be doing as friends. There wouldn't even be a terrible risk of over-defining the relationship, if indeed that's something that TPTB worry about.
These two relationships and how they are different and yet also the same?
Yes, please! That sort of parallel was introduced in Meat, after all, but was never satisfactorily carried though.
That juxtaposition is a large part of the problem, I agree.
It's why I also find fault with the 'it's a crime drama/sci-fi show!' rebuttal. Yes, it is, but we still get tons of insight into Gwen's personal life. Not so much into anyone else's. In season one, that wasn't so bad, because that 'real world' aspect of Gwen was what was supposed to make her special. But now that Jack, as the male lead, also has a personal life, it's very odd (and slightly suspicious) that his isn't featured too.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 04:28 am (UTC)The story of Torchwood summed up in a single sentence, that. Such wasted potential. Someone up there ^^ mentioned Sleeper and the Beth/Lisa parallels that never went anywhere because there just seemed to be one scene too many about Gwen and how much she cares about people. The same episode, funnily enough, where I saw Gwen and Ianto as being in the same boat, disagreeing with Jack's methods but each using their own ways to express that, something that again just didn't quite make it onto the screen, because there were some lovely parallels between the two of them in that episode. It is weird. The whole show is full of weird.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 04:40 am (UTC)Sleeper could have been a big turning point for Ianto, actually. At the end, he was one of the four firing at Beth, with Gwen protesting. It's quite the role reversal from what we saw Cyberwoman. I wish that hadn't been ignored. Gwen can lecture the others all she wants about being human, but she's been on the other side too.
Full of weird and yet we love it anyway. Ah, Torchwood.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 12:00 pm (UTC)I think that's exactly where the problem is -- If either Jack or Ianto was a women, no body will give a damn if we see they relationship on screen or not. We would be complaining that there was only hints of it, but we wouldn't get irritated. However, because this is a same-sex relationship, people got extremely sensitive about it, not enough on screen time, not enough clarity, etc. The thing is, like you said, Jack and Ianto are both ambiguous characters, all those secrets and unknowns which are still waiting to be shed light on, won't it be even weirder if we get to see a lot of their private moments without knowing their past? Furthermore, won't it be too much to have 2 couple doing private things on screen in a sifi/action show? And if we have to pick one couple only, from writing/artistic prospect, who should we choose? Janto? Really?
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 02:43 pm (UTC)This is very true. It is a sensitive (and to many fans, at least online, a personal) topic. Unfortunately it is still incredibly new for a same-sex relationship to feature heavily in a 'mainstream' drama. Therefore, I don't think you can blame fans for expecting a little less ambiguity from a show that touts itself as progressive.
The thing is, like you said, Jack and Ianto are both ambiguous characters, all those secrets and unknowns which are still waiting to be shed light on, won't it be even weirder if we get to see a lot of their private moments without knowing their past?
Well, perhaps, but I don't think that's a good reason to continue refusing to give them a) private moments or b) a past. I definitely see what you're saying, but I can't help but think that's evidence of two problems rather than an explanation.
And if we have to pick one couple only, from writing/artistic prospect, who should we choose? Janto? Really?
Well, why not? Jack's the male lead, isn't he? The star? From a writing/artistic standpoint, I would think that showing that couple he's a part of would make narrative sense. And furthermore, Jack and Ianto are both main characters and both team members.
Don't get me wrong. I don't (as much as it pains me to say this) think it should be all Janto, all the time. Not in the least. I just don't quite understand why Gwen/Rhys is intrinsically more well-suited to screentime.
The story of Gwen/Rhys is, largely, the story of what Torchwood does to a relationship. You also get this in Ianto/Lisa, Owen/Diane, Tosh/Tommy, and of course Owen/Tosh; in fact, it's something of a consistent subplot. But Jack/Ianto, a relationship born of Torchwood and therefore infinitely more complicated and twisted, is undefined. Maybe it's because it's complicated (or maybe because it appears very healthy and that's no fun), I don't know.
As I said, I was generally happy with the way series two dealt with Jack/Ianto (and Gwen/Rhys, and even Jack/Gwen, gasp!). I'm just not sure that series three can carry on with the same patterns without it getting very problematic.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-18 08:31 pm (UTC)That is it exactly - thank you.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-27 06:45 pm (UTC)