[LMB] Re: OT: Sex and Captain Jack and the themes of Torchwood

Ruth Frey solsticebiz at yahoo.com
Mon Dec 18 20:53:51 GMT 2006

       Whoa.  Take a weekend away from the computer and watch those digests multiply!  I'll dig back and answer a few direct responses to comments of my own, then I think I'll just skip forward to the current topics . . .
  Elizabeth wrote:
>Meanwhile, while his relationships with men get more
>verbal attention, his actual scenes of affectionate 
>behaviour have (with one exception so far) been with

       As you said in another portion of your post (snipped for space), that's probably a strategic move on their part; they probably figure a mainstream audience ha a lot more tolerence for someone male *talking* about having boyfriends than with someone, er, demonstrating that affection onscreen.
>> While I
>> myself am boringly straight, 
>Being straight isn't boring. Really. 

       Heh.  It is to hear some people say it.  Not that I mind; when people run down "vanilla" in my hearing, my usual response is, "there's regular vanilla, and then there's double-rich French vanilla with little dark seed-sprinkles in it -- guess which *I* like."  That tends to quiet people down a bit.  ;)  :)
>> I have no problem with
>> the idea that others *aren't,* and have lots of gay
>> and bi friends. 
>Hoping you count me as one of them.

       Yep.  Hoping one of these days to meet up with you and other folks from this list and put names to faces, though we really are from all over, aren't we?  :)
>Moreover, and I have *never* seen this mentioned in
>the BBC publicity, all the other Torchwood employees 
>are bisexual too, or implied to be. And they aren't
>swashbuckling 51st century time-travellers, they're
>just current-day humans, and not even particuarly
>unusual except that they have an unusual job. The show
>doesn't make a big deal of their orientation, either,
>though we do get some glimpses of their sexual
>attitudes. Without any stereotyping.
>It's all very cool. At least from my point of view.

        It *is* cool -- I think it's important to have the sense that there's more to people than their orientation; that said, I'd almost hope that they'd have a few "balancing" characters that are either completely gay or hetero.  While the "everyone is *really* bisexual at heart and if they say they aren't they're just repressing it" theory seems rather popular anymore, based on what I know about myself and some of my friends, I honestly believe it is possible to be fully identified at one end of the spectrum or the other.
       But, that's a relatively small nit to pick, really.  I'd say more important at this point is getting more people to think outside the box, as it were.  ;)
>> It's great to think of all those little minds being
>> offered the image of a heroic main character who
>> doesn't necessarily fit into a standardized gender
>> box.
>Exactly. Who, in fact, sees gender boxes as absurd
>artificial concepts.

       Yeah, I think that's a nice touch.  Very much suits the character.
>> Sadly, in the US, DW is watched more by
>> fannish adults than families per se...
>When is it shown? The BBC makes a big thing of the
>'watershed', meaning the moment each evening when the
>kids are packed off to bed and television changes to
>fully adult fare - I think it's 9 pm. 
       In the US, the time varies depending on your time zone.  Sci Fi shows DW at 8pm EST, repeating 11pm or midnight EST (timing of the second showing varies a bit) -- which means it runs at 5pm PST and 8 - 9pm PST (my time).  
  >Does the 'watershed' concept exist in the US? I get
>the impression it's more of a 'different Networks show
>different things' concept, and that there's much less
>expectation that content varies according to the time
>of day or night. It might be part of the general
>social conservatism in US television.

       It definitely *used* to be the case that more adult content would be shown later at night, but with the advent of cable/satellite networks that run off of a single feed for all the time zones in the US, that seems to have broken down quite a bit.  The idea of more adult stuff running later at night might still apply with newtwork stations, though (I'm not sure, I have satellite and tend not to watch a whole lot of network TC anymore).  I know NBC runs "Heroes" at 9pm, for example, while Sci Fi would run it earlier (7pm EST, or 4pm PST).
>> I have to say I think
>> the US could stand to be a bit more Betan in a lot
>> of ways . . . So, subvert the dominant paradigm! 
>Ah, here we have a kind of subversion I can get
>behind. Yes! More of that, please!

>In a similar vein: when "Heroes" was being advertised
>last summer, I read several PR pieces about it saying
>there would be several gay characters. That was a
>reason to watch, in my opinion, though not the only
>reason. Having watched as far as the present, it now
>appears that there are no gay characters after all,
>and the one character who was implied to be gay, Zack,
>is, in fact, perfectly straight.

       Huh?  Maybe I missed something, but I thought Zack *was* gay.  That was certainly my take-home message, anyway.
>I like the show anyway but I am disappointed. This
>seems a lack of moral courage or something. I wonder
>why they did this - because of the show's popularity? 
>Its large mainstream audience? The producers became
>cowardly? What?

       No clue, there -- maybe there will be some characters showing up later on who are gay?  The story arcs are really still getting going.
       BTW, heard the news that list fave Christopher Eccleston will have a part in "Heroes" starting in Jan.?  Buzz is he'll be playing a character with the power of invisibility, who ends up being something of a hero-mentor to Peter.  Hope *that* info is proven correct, I'd love to see CE some more,and that part sounds perfect for him . . .
>> Heh. Really wondering what'll happen if the
>> current Jack meets up with the Tenth Doctor 
>Not 'if', when. Jack will be in series 3 "Doctor

       Oh, yeah, I know Jack will be there for sure, but from which point in his personal timeline -- will it be the Jack from "now" (the Jack in "Torchwood") or will it be an earlier Jack?   I know there've been hints about finally clearing up what happened during Jack's "missing time," and it would have been possible for him to have met the Doctor during those two years and then not recognized him when they met up later in "The Empty Child", thanks to Jack's amnesia.  Personally, I really hope it'll be the "current" Jack, since I'm dying to know how the heck he got off that space station and back to the 21st century, among other unresolved plot issues.
       Hope that makes sense -- talking about time travel plots can get very confusing, in terms of tenses . . .
>Those episodes are being written by Steve Moffatt, who
>wrote the first Captain Jack story in series 1.

       Yessssss!  Cool.  I think Moffat writes great scripts.
>He is actually quite different in Torchwood from what
>he was like in Doctor Who, and I don't mean out of
>character, I mean character development and change.
>It's good stuff. But surprising at first. 

       Yeah, I bet Jack's changed quite a bit in "Torchwood" -- I can see where he would have gotten rather grimmer by then . . . Getting left behind in "The Parting of the Ways" *can't* have been psychologically good for the lad, among other things . . .
       Anyway, gotta move on, here . . . :)
                -- Ruth

"Y'know, when you're a kid, they tell you it's all grow up, get a job, get married, get a house, have a kid, and that's it.  No.  The truth is, the world is so much stranger than that.  It's so much darker, and so much madder . . . and so much *better.*"  Elton, "Love and Monsters."
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list