Eric Rosenfield's Tumblings RSS

I write stuff.

My homepage is http://www.ericrosenfield.com

Sep
1st
Mon
permalink
Aug
31st
Sun
permalink

ericrosenfield said: Crushing and scarring of Mary Marvel worse than Sue Dibny?

philsandifer:

In terms of damage to the character, certainly. I mean, there’s a sense in which I like the retconned rape of Sue Dibny, not because I think comics needed more rape (they needed, and still need, less sexual violence), but because of its odd status as a retcon, which in turn means there are decades of stories with Sue in which she’s a rape survivor, and this matters not a whit to anything she’s doing. I feel about that much like I do about Barbara Gordon as Oracle - the story that caused it to exist is awful, but there’s a neat effect, although, unlike with Oracle, in this case a neat effect that lacks anyone deliberately trying to create it. 

Second, Sue was killed over the course of one issue. It brought her story basically to its conclusion, though applause to the writers of 52 for fixing that up a bit. It’s an ugly end, but it’s an end - you stop looking after it. Ultimately, it was DC deciding this was an expendable character. I think there was more that could have been done with her, but ultimately, she was just violently erased from the books. Awful, but limited.

Whereas the evil dominatrix Mary Marvel was a slow motion car crash over the course of a year, and appeared to be a sincerely held view about how best to revamp the character and make her functional. 

Put another way, Sue Dibny showed what Dan Didio isn’t interested in within DC. Mary Marvel showed what he is.

permalink

philsandifer:

The factually correct description of Batman is “created by Bill Finger, from an idea by Bob Kane.”

permalink
permalink

Day of the Capaldi Doctor

I think I figured out why Capaldi Doctor could appear in Day of the Doctor and not any more future doctors (in the context of show logic). The other Time Lords didn’t know that 10 had used up 2 generations, and so if 13 doctors showed up that would make perfect sense to them. If any more doctors showed up, then the Time Lords would know that the Doctor had been given a new set of regenerations, which is something they themselves did and would therefore be a paradox.

Aug
30th
Sat
permalink
The less you eat, drink and buy books; the less you go to the theatre, the dance hall, the public house; the less you think, love, theorise, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you save – the greater becomes your treasure which neither moths nor rust will devour – your capital. The less you are, the less you express your own life, the more you have, i.e., the greater is your alienated life, the greater is the store of your estranged being.

Karl Marx - Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts 1844 (via dailymarx)

God, I love the 1844 manuscripts.  I don’t believe there is any serious rupture in his thought, and that what you get in Capital is a project stemming from the mature and refined version of essentially the same philosophy expounded in 1844. 

(via shabogangraffiti)

(via shabogangraffiti)

Aug
28th
Thu
permalink
Aug
27th
Wed
permalink
Aug
25th
Mon
permalink

philsandifer:

shabogangraffiti:

philsandifer:

skalja:

  • Favorite thing about this scene: the Doctor acknowledging his part in sending a companion mixed signals instead of blaming their response to his signals on irrational human-ness (and femaleness). Now go back and say this to Martha, Doctor, preferably with an actual “I’m sorry.”
  • Least favorite thing about this scene: fandom missing the point and continuing to insist that Clara’s a horrible shallow person who just wanted Eleven to be her boyfriend and dislikes Twelve because of that

Overture to a post. 

That’s a good scene.  A great moment.

But I feel I must point out that the issue isn’t just fandom thinking Clara is horrible and shallow.  The issue is also that the episode sends mixed signals, just like the Doctor does.  This is yet another example of Moffat texts talking out of both sides of their mouths (so to speak), and wanting to have their cake and eat it, of them telling the audience one thing while showing the audience another. 

This scene by itself is excellent.  But it isn’t by itself.  It coexists with scenes in which Clara is clearly horrified by the Doctor’s transformation, despite her supposedly having seen every incarnation of the Doctor.  It coexists with scenes in which she defends herself against the horrifying charge of being a horrible, shallow person (i.e. the kind of girl who has the temerity to have pop stars on her wall as a kid) by proving her appreciation for wise old blokes with a name drop of Marcus Aurelius.  It coexists with scenes in which she is described as a control freak and a narcissist and needy gameplayer.  Yes, we are supposed to frown at this stuff coming from the Doctor… we’re supposed to think he’s being a prick… yet we’re also clearly supposed to find it funny (according to the gender essentialist ‘wars of the sexes’ logic of sitcoms). 

We’re also clearly supposed to find him funny when he displays all the characteristics he charges against Clara and which she charges against him.  It doesn’t really matter if the writer has strong women declaring “men are monkeys” if the text ultimately and implicitly invites us to find the monkeyish behaviour vastly charming.

I think it is more accurate to say that Clara is horrified by the fact that her best friend had a psychotic break and put her in real and not fun danger while confusing her with a robot, and that he seemingly looks old and weathered prematurely, as though there’s something wrong with this regeneration (since she just spent her Christmas learning that the Doctor grows old over centuries), and requires reassurance after this genuinely terrifying experience that was followed by a maybe not so fun time nearly dying and thinking that she’d been abandoned by the Doctor (even if this was never actually true - and note that it’s the Doctor who catches her when she passes out and that he is there to step in the moment her confrontation with the bad guy gets out of hand). And part of the Doctor’s effort to reassure her is to admit that he gave the wrong impression to her in the first place, and that he is not nearly so safe a friend as he might have at times pretended, but that he is still her friend. 

I think the degree to which Clara self-identifies as a bossy control freak is a part of why this was particularly traumatic for her despite her familiarity with regeneration, and is an interesting wrinkle in her as a character. It’s at once a flaw that generates compelling stories and something that can be used for the sort of comedy that modern Doctor Who needs to provide every so often. This seems to me a prime example of Moffat’s effectiveness as a writer.

This.

(Source: storybrookewinchesters)

permalink

Anonymous said: The doctor will never be a woman. There are plenty of women in the show that are admirable role models. I think you're just full ofsh it. Stop pushing your american views onto Doctor Who, a BRITISH show, with BRITISH values. It's unbelievable how obnoxious and hypocritical feminists are, especially you third-wave feminists. Always spouting "equal rights" but, "Can't hit me, cause I'm a girl!" You probably won't respond to this because you know I'm right and the whovianfeminism stance is weak.

philsandifer:

ten-and-donna:

markdoesstuff:

whovianfeminism:

This was so beautiful that I had to put it up on my wall and examine it as if it were an exquisite piece of art. 

image

"Manpain" by Anonymous

Above we have a quintessential example of early 21st Century prose by an aggrieved man. The author of this piece is unknown, but we can surmise by his inability to properly say “shit” to a woman and his assurance that he likes “admirable” female characters that he is most likely a “Nice Guy.”

The anonymous author employs deliberate obtuseness in order to provoke a reaction from his audience. Notice how he pretends no British individual supports the idea of a woman portraying the Doctor, despite clear evidence to the contrary, even amongst actors who have portrayed the titular character on the show. Then there is the stunning self-centeredness regarding his perception of third wave feminism; he is only interested in equality it grants him the “right” to hit the women whose arguments make him so incoherently angry that he is unable to rationally reply.

His final challenge attempts to trap the reader. Do we respond and grant him the audience and validation he so desperately seeks, or do we ignore him and let him believe he has won? But perhaps we have a third option: to turn the focus back on him and examine how his comments display his deep insecurity in his own sense of masculinity, something he feels can only be reclaimed by challenging a girl on the internet to a fight and preemptively declaring victory because he fears he cannot engage with her on an intellectual level.

a work of goddamn art oh my god

This lady wins a medal, and another follower.

I tend to starkly disagree with whovianfeminism on a lot of things, most notably the Moffat era, but this is basically perfection incarnate.