![[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}
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 05:12 pm (UTC)Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 06:49 pm (UTC)The main problems with that scene, the consistantly awful acting of FA, and the fact that in fact the only other person there who had snogged Jack was Ianto. Everyone else hadn't had a go. So it was redundant.
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 06:54 pm (UTC)Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 07:13 pm (UTC)Also with JB, he can do the most lovely whimsical stuff, it is really quietness that he does well. His line delivery can be very nice, but also his use of non verbal cues in the scenes with GDL is very impressive. I love the way he relaxes his shoulders and his expression changes, his voice also drops. I have a lot of friends in London theatre and the RSC and they do genuinely rate him as an actor. He has a good reputation.
The problem really is direction and some wierd forgetting how to act possession that comes over himself and EM during Jack/Gwen moments. She can also act, but annoys the hell out of me in those moments.
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 07:31 pm (UTC)I also think that's part of the attraction of Jack/Ianto for a lot of people, subconsciously anyway. JB and GDL work quite well together, because JB's occasional forays into pantomime disappear when they're met with GDL's infinitessimal eyebrow twitch school of acting. Whereas they're amplified by EM's rather OTT tendency to beat her chest.
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 09:02 pm (UTC)Yes EM can be very shouty and irritating, so he then cranks it up, and their body language gets all gesticulating and then the eyes start. That's when panto comes in.
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-18 11:21 pm (UTC)They keep giving JB cheesy scenes and if they're supposed to be camp that's fine but often they're not and it's laughable. Burn can pull off cheesy lines because he's so good, Gareth can use his skills to alter the scene in ways you would not expect, bringing out comedy or darker meaning that wasn't in the script, so you don't notice the cheese. JB plays OTT emotion and it doesn't work.
Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-27 06:35 pm (UTC)Re: Possessive Ianto....
Date: 2008-07-27 08:18 pm (UTC)Probably just wondering what her lip gloss would taste like on Ianto ;-)
Seriously though, I didn't take that as Jack being interested, more surprized.