Right On, RTD

[jjpor]

Whatever you think of RTD's tenure in charge of Who, I think his heart's basically in the right place; disturbing news about SJA as well:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7952655.stm

As he says, they give money to rubbish films nobody watches, so why not kids' TV - I think of the multitude of great shows they used to have when I were a nipper, and compare it to the dross kids today are subjected to (a couple of gems like SJA aside). I did wonder though...we all love Lis Sladen, but more important than education and food?

[clocketpatch]

Mar 20, 2009 20:35:23 GMT jjpor said:

I did wonder though...we all love Lis Sladen, but more important than education and food?

well, she replaces education you see, and then we'll drink the Ban tie-in products enabled by the extra funding...



I think he actually means that children are more important to the country's future than 'etc. etc.' but it did come out a bit odd. I agree that the state of funding for children's programming is awful; I mean, kids have taste too (sometimes) and if they don't like it (or if there parents are too bored to sit through it) they end up watching football, and soap operas, and CSI, and SEX!SEX!SEX! music videos.

I'm pretty sure lack of funding is what cancelled Ghost Writers, which was like, my favourite program ever as a kid. Grrr.... KEEP AWAY FROM SARAH-JANE!

[jjpor]

Mar 21, 2009 3:28:25 GMT clocketpatch said:

I think he actually means that children are more important to the country's future than 'etc. etc.' but it did come out a bit odd. I agree that the state of funding for children's programming is awful; I mean, kids have taste too (sometimes) and if they don't like it (or if there parents are too bored to sit through it) they end up watching football, and soap operas, and CSI, and SEX!SEX!SEX! music videos.

I sort of worked out that that was what he must mean, but it was phrased a little oddly (and I never pass up the opportunity for a funny line where RTD is concerned!).

So, basically, what you're saying is that Lis Sladen and SJA are the only things standing between us and the complete moral and social breakdown of human civilisation? I'd go along with that... ;D

[magnusgreel]

Yes, RTD's right. Now I'm going to go off on a tangent and/or rant...

My frustration with the revival of the idea of Dr Who as a children's program has been building over the last couple of days or so. There was a thread on a new Red Dwarf board that lit the fuse for me I think. I am taking into account the fact that children's programming must mean something very different in the UK than it does here. In the US, it means shows that little thought needs to be put into, because kids just aren't very bright (supposedly). I'm guessing that there's more of a sense of children as being actual humans with souls and brains who will actually grow up someday.

Still, science-fiction isn't childish. I didn't like much children's programming even when I was a child. Why is a spinoff from one of my favorite SF series with one of my favorite characters a children's show?
Why is Dr Who itself supposed to be one again now, after we supposedly all outgrew that notion?

[merrythemad]

HEY! I disagree, my littles watch plenty of US made kid shows that have thought put into them. "Backyardigans", "Diego" and "Little Einsteins" high among them. In fact, thanks to "Little Einsteins" my littles rock out to "Ode to Joy" among a few other less noteworthy classical bits.

And, I like the UK as much as the next person, provided the next person got stuck in Liverpool as the Underground shuts down (who knew?) and also had to take a cab back from "Les Mis" again because of the bleeding Underground shutting down, mind the gap, my bum! Mind the schedule, you American dolt! Ha haha, but, seriously, I DO love England, it's lovely if a bit cold. However, the kids shows I disapprove of tend to come out of England. "Teletubbies" and "Boo Bah" (sp?) high among them.

As far as Sci-Fi being childish, well, I think that's a soulless notion. Sci-Fi is adventure and hope and acceptance (by and large) and I think we relegate those things to children because as adults we have forgotten what it takes to believe in such things ourselves.

Conversely, at my age, I grew up on sci-fi. My favourite cartoons as a little girl were ALL sci-fi. "Space Ghost", "He-Man", "Transformers" the list goes on. Also, I am only five months older than Episode Four of "Star Wars" meaning I saw the next two in theatres in their original run. Point being, a smart kid can handle sci-fi and a smart parent knows what their child can handle.

I'm an adult, grown on sci-fi in a world that was full of school shootings, drive-by shootings, gang wars, and The War on Drugs. And I still believe, in hope and adventure and acceptance.

[jjpor]

Teletubbies...I'm not sure I understand it, but I know I don't like it...I've long entertained the notion that it's part of some insidious government mind control project or something. No wonder the Master enjoys it.

I'd agree, I don't think Doctor Who is a children's show, even though it has long been labelled as such; from the point of view of BBC beancounters, I don't think they regard the new series as such, because it isn't produced or aired as part of their children's programming. It is, in fact, more or less their flagship at the moment and is treated as a special case along the lines of such things as Only Fools and Horses and Eastenders, I'd say. In the wider sense, I think one of its strengths is the fact that it can be enjoyed by people of all ages; it's a throwback to the age (at least here in the UK) when the whole family used to gather round the telly, before things started being tailor-made for niche demographics.

SJA is, technically speaking, a kids' show because it's made and marketed by Childrens' BBC, but it obviously has wider appeal, often coming closer, for me, to recapturing the particular magic of oldschool Who than the new series manages. And you can see from the continuity references and other little touches that the production team are well aware that their audience is not exclusively made up of kids.

But yeah, the notion that anything SF is "kids' stuff", apart from being dead wrong, is keenly felt I think even by some fans, even if they don't admit it. I mean, the reaction of JNT and co to the later Baker stories, leading to Season 18 and ultimately to the eventual death of Who in the eighties (McCoy's late rally notwithstanding) was, I guess (not being old enough to know for sure) partly fuelled by a feeling in some sections of fandom that the show had become "silly" and "childish", and not wanting to be perceived as fans of something regarded as such. I could be wrong. I detect it in the so-called "mundane" movement in science fiction literature in the past few years, a desire to be seen as writing "grown up" SF without such "adolescent" (and the "mundane" writers use that precise word) trappings as aliens and spaceships. I sort of shake my head at this sort of thing. It's discussed, along with other matters in this article here (featuring Whodom's very own Paul Cornell):

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7948058.stm

Okay, the debate there is about "hard" versus "soft" SF, which I think is a bit of a false debate really. I think good SF is good SF if it's well-written, regardless of how "hard" the science is. Obviously, to be science fiction rather than fantasy, it should provide scientific explanations for things and when it mentions science directly it should get it right, but I also shake my head at some schools of SF who fetishise technology and technical detail at the expense of, you know, decent stories and characters and things. As always, there's a balance that is sometimes difficult to strike.

What does this have to do with the price of fish? Well, I'd just go along with what Merry says, and what some of the writers in the article say, in that the best SF, even if it's set on the other side of the galaxy ten thousand years from now, addresses the world today, the human condition or what have you. Doctor Who does this, very subtly, among the monsters and the plots and all of the rest of it; it provides a certain way of looking at the world, a tolerant, humanistic world view that questions authority and celebrates the individual and tells people to respect others and think for themselves. And it is distinctive to Who, something that's evolved during the life of the show and become inseperably wrapped up in the character of the Doctor, and it's still there in NuWho, even if we sometimes groan at the storytelling choices of RTD et al. It's heart's in the right place, is what I'm saying. And as I've said before in other threads, children (and adults for that matter) could do a lot worse than to internalise some of that stuff.

Hmm, looking back at that essay I've spewed out all over the boards, I don't know whether it's on-topic or not, but still...

[Stripes]

I did not read the article. I do want to see a couple of things though. Because I do not want to do homework.

If America only gets Teletubbies from Britain, you have a very biases opinion of british children shows. In Canada we have loads of British (and Australian) kid shows. I like many of the shows that Britain produces.

Canadian children shows are VERY different from American. Canada makes ALOT of children shows (part of our media law) and if it isn't Canadian, we are making many of the American shows (also, a good percent of all foreigner shows are dubbed in Canada). Canadian shows tend to have a diversity of characters and many topics we tackle are not brought up in Americans children shows.
One cartoon I can think of call Braceface about a preteen has a gay character in it. That show wasn't allowed to air in America until recently if I am correct.
Apprently it was relseaed in USA same time as Canada.

Our humor is different too. Hannah Montana have alot of fart jokes, the kids love it. In Canada we tend to have more er smarter jokes. Not so much now a days but back in the day.

I was going somewhere with this but now I forgot.

[clocketpatch]

Newton, remember also that in Canada we have Yamroll

which is... really, really bad.

[Stripes]

Mar 23, 2009 2:32:35 GMT clocketpatch said:

Newton, remember also that in Canada we have Yamroll

which is... really, really bad.

I am not saying that all of Canadian TV is good. I am saying it is different from American and often better.

[jjpor]

My. That looks...interesting...

[merrythemad]

*reads, opens mouth, closes mouth. walks away.*

[Stripes]

I .... well... um... ah forget it.

Postman Pat people, Postman Pat.

[jjpor]

And his black and white cat!

Now that's the kind of thing kids should be watching. And Bagpuss and Mr Ben and Paddington Bear and the Wombles (which was narrated by Donna's granddad!), all those blasts from the past. Okay, most of them are as mental as anything (and moreover are probably also on the Master's list of favourites), but they never did me any harm, as you can tell from the perfectly reasonable and well-balanced persona I present before you today.

[magnusgreel]

Mar 22, 2009 11:53:39 GMT merrythemad said:

As far as Sci-Fi being childish, well, I think that's a soulless notion. Sci-Fi is adventure and hope and acceptance (by and large) and I think we relegate those things to children because as adults we have forgotten what it takes to believe in such things ourselves.

I like this. It's a version of what I'd like to say myself, except that there are big differences in what I'd say too. I can't do much thinking, reading, or explaining right now, so I'll just say: A sense of adventure is extremely important, in fact Four comes out and says so to Borusa in Invasion of Time. That scene was almost a sort of mission statement for the entire series. Referring to a program like this as a children's program (besides being just plain wrong in the first place... the future, aliens, spaceships are for children? I'll sic Ray Bradbury on 'em...) only relegates intelligent imagination and a free spirit to the early years of life. It covertly says, this is just something fun and diverting to waste some time on, but when you grow up your life will just consist of grumbling over taxes and lawn mowing just like everybody else.

It's an entirely different subject that I consider sci-fi and science fiction to be two very different things.

[Stripes]

Mar 24, 2009 19:11:37 GMT jjpor said:

And his black and white cat!

Now that's the kind of thing kids should be watching. And Bagpuss and Mr Ben and Paddington Bear and the Wombles (which was narrated by Donna's granddad!), all those blasts from the past. Okay, most of them are as mental as anything (and moreover are probably also on the Master's list of favourites), but they never did me any harm, as you can tell from the perfectly reasonable and well-balanced persona I present before you today.

If you want weird youtube Yo Gabba Gabba. NOW THAT IS MESSED UP.

[clocketpatch]

The Clangers