#dw he doesn't keep skeletons | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

roxannepolice · 1 month

Text

Masters, coyotes and reset buttons

Ok, so this has been going after me for a few months now and probably won't end up as coherent as I'd like it to, but this is also a warm up for finally fixing that stupid article that everyone tells me is good but has been halted by journal paperwork since 2020, so... As always, because there be salt, putting everything under a cut.

There's been this debate on whether the Master should be given a break from appearing for a while and, as always, it's usually taken somewhat hostile as an attack on the character or a particular actor (which. look if this was about acting skills BBC should have never moved from sir Derek Jacobi, period). And I would say the problem lies entirely elsewhere. Namely, circularity vs. linearity.

There has always been a mythical or commedia dell'arte element to the whole concept of regeneration, an archetypal thing in characters going by titles as names and having a certain set of characterisics and narrative functions that go along with those. Hell, commedia dell'arte even has a literal "Il Dottore" whose whole thing is embodying science and education - more often than not mockingly. When you employ Zeus rather than Poseidon in your story that's probably because there be weird sex rather than disproportionate fury. When you choose a paladin class in your rpg that's because you're going to have different skills and make different choices than if you were a rogue. Galahad and Lancelot will go on completely different journeys of nunnery/brothel and rescuing a prince from forced marriage even while they both seek the Holy Grail. When you want your children to have different properties you'll use your mantra to invoke four different gods.

The thing about archetypes, though, is that they are, literally, timeless. Or better yet, outside of time. But stories, narratives are, by nature, linear and timed. There's the beggining, the middle and the end. And of course, the whole fun is toying with the archetype, tweaking and reinterpreting them in specific contexts and stories. And DW has been doing a phenomenal job of it throughout its history, even if occasional nitpicks can be made. Classic Who was perhaps more circular and repeating in its storytelling and - sorry, posession by Marshall McLuhan - this makes sense in a medium where a story airs just a couple of times. There were arcs for each Doctor, though significantly more so for companions. NuWho became much more clear in this, but still mostly managed to keep a neat balance between the timelessness and timeliness.

Take the Saxon's story, which is what kickstarted me spilling here. Not to come off as a canon snob, but I think if he was an introduction to the character it may not be clear just how shocking him dying on the Valiant was. This is the character that was a skeleton, a gooey body snatching snake and a cat to go on living, and has been the Doctor's prisoner, in fact begging them to save them. Ten is 100% justified in his assumption that he'd never kill himself. His death introduced a major shift to their dynamic, especially when framed as fuelled by hatred. The finale in EoT is largely a return from this shift. No, the Doctor didn't only care for the Master because he wanted another Time Lord. No, the Master doesn't wholeheartedly hate the Doctor. They can and will always cooperate when there's a common enemy. As has been the case throughout all of Classic Who.

Enter Moffat era. Now, it's a bit of a cliche to say Moffat is a better episode writer than showrunner, but it being cliche does not make it incorrect. His poetic definitely works better when there's an ending, a specific goal in sight. In singular episodes this works like a charm. It worked terrifically in season 5. But later on there definitely came this element of "keep watching, because this is all heading somewhere, trust me". And all too often the answer was proving less interesting than the question. This was particularly clear in seasons 7-9, with return to Gallifrey being hyped up repeatedly, only to fianlly fall flat. And I guess Moffat realised that and decided to go for a soft reboot in season 10.

Which brings me to Missy and redemption arcs. Now, in our completely not puritan era there's way too much talk of whether characters deserve redemption, and what would account for a redemption, and how that differs between different legal systems, and too little appreciation that redemption narrative is as linear as they get. You get the starting point of sin and have a clear goal of that sin being repaid or undone. Sure, you can dig into that, and question that, and reinterpret that, and cynically cut that, but it always relies on that clear line. And it's obvious that Moffat was aware of how linear he wanted Missy, and indeed the Master in general, to be. The fucking text says that: "where we've always been going". The disagreement is only what that where is. Now, if the story was meant to be lieanr, then it really does make infinitelly more sense to view the events of EoT as a turning point in the thoschei relationship, but the story explicitly shuts that down. Nah, it was more infitely more important to have the initial sin embodied to be killed in the ultimate act of redemption. #symbolism

A slight tangent here. I know that the original plan for Delgado!Master was to have a redemption arc where he sarcifices himself for the Doctor, so I guess it can be argued this was indeed where the story was going all along. But things turned out how they did and people generally don't introduce Moriarty into their sherlockiana to have no actual screentime (literal or metaphorical), as was the original plan.

Aaaand then there's Spymaster. I've seen dozens of explanations of why he is the way he is, and whether that follows logically from Missy's story or not, and whether he might be before her, and whether he undoes her redemption, and blah blah, but the bitter truth is: Chibs hit the reset button. He hit it hard. No, we are not meant to keep in mind the events of s10 when we analyze the spydoc relationship. Again, a comparison to Moffat explicitly bringing up the events of EoT with Saxon, if only to brush them aside as meaningless for both parties. More importantly, if those were meant to affect Thirteen's hostile attitude towards the Master, then she shouldn't have been so shocked with his appearance. She might be surprised he regenerated, but like the whole reason for bitterness over being abandoned would go along with the expectation the Master did survive, that's why they left Twelve in the first place ffs. So, it would look like Chibnall tried to go back to a circular status quo after a linear redemption, and that's certainly what the writing thinks it's doing. Except now that the whole TTC can of worms has been opened, the relationship is deeply imbalanced. Imbalanced in a way that cannot be easily undone. Like, I know the fandom is trying to frame the Master's sense of inferiority as somehow mistaken and fanon!Thirteen certainly thinks so, but that's not what the text is saying. There is a misundertanding going on here, but a misunderstanding that goes on unresolved gets tiresome and frankly masochistic pretty fast. Either the Master should get to the point of understanding that the Doctor is not inherently superior to them because of past or magic of friendship and that they're Kenough, or accept the Doctor as their lord and saviour and martyred god who died so they may live and spend the rest of their days as a lapdog. Which, I understand the fandom may enjoy, but doesn't make for a very exciting story. So yes, there's definitely a linear narrative going on here. One that does need some time in a fridge and exposition of how the Doctor themself feels about their relationship before the character is brought back. Right now we are not in the The clown always gets up again, no matter how often he has been knocked down paradigm only No clowns were funny. That was the whole purpose of a clown. People laughed at clowns, but only out of nervousness. The point of clowns was that, after watching them, anything else that happened seemed enjoyable. It was nice to know there was someone worse off than you. Someone had to be the butt of the world.

Butbutbut, of course, what about Ainley!Master being brought back again and again seemlessly? That's just the thing - Ainley!Master existed in a completely different poetic. He was purely circular. He was the most circular of the Masters. He was as circular as you can get without actually being a cartoon coyote who only falls down when he realises he's midair. I'm not entirely ironic here - there is an inherent trickster element to the Master as a character! Perhaps more Goethe's Mephistopheles that Native Americans' Coyote, but between constanct scheming, shapeshifting and falling into the pits they've dug the elements are all there. And a trickster either endlessly travels between Olympus, Earth and Hades or gets killed by Heimdall.

And before a gotcha of me insanely hoping for a Saxon cameo either in the 60th anniversary or, that being off the table, somehow meeting Fourteen - yeah, in an anti-linear bubble. I've seen speculations that RTD wants to do another soft reboot, hence there's no knowing what Master will pop out of that tooth. As far as I wouldn't like it to be one of pre-Delgado Masters and for the record I wouldn't mind if it is Spymaster!, there's definitely something to the idea there's a soft reboot in The Giggle, with the Doctor "going home". Because you don't necessarily want to know what Odysseus' tax policies were once he reached Ithaka, but you do want to know that he's been a year on Circe's island.

#ok down to the article #doctor who #doctor who meta #dw meta #the master #the doctor #thoschei #philosophy in doctor who #have i come across as praising rtd in comparison to moffat and chibnall?#yeah maybe i generally think he did have the best grasp on what he was saying #tw: negativity #minor? yeah i'm critical

24 notes · View notes

dieselpvnk · 7 months

Note

yes i do kwanna know more about him actually please tell me about him

hello I went to sleep yesterday right after the reblog but now I am awake and can answer.

(pic for context)

HE'S MY FAVOURITE GUY I LOVE HIM SO BAD <- the most important thing to know about him. He also came to me in a dream. Yeah.

His name is Crowley btw. Overall an unpleasant guy, a little mean, a little too straightforward and blunt, but not like a BAD person. Very much a loner, only has one friend, but he doesn't mind really. Fascinated with everything unknown and macabre, Crowley's both full of morbid curiosity and a scaredy cat.

He's a writer and an alchemist, and also a little fucked up. Peeped the horrors™ and now chases them, and he was, in fact, successful, a little too much even, letting beings of chaos roam the world freely, now his primary objective is to fix that little problem before it's too late.

^ the first one of the horrors™, not really a horror, just a 6-10 year old he kinda adopted because he felt bad just leaving her be (that may or may not be a bad idea). Just a kid full of energy, optimism and love for the world. Her name is Critter. My oc names are just kinda like that, don't think too much about it.

^ a much scarier guy, Choronzon. Pretty much THE evil, a suave well-spoken thang that can and will bring chaos, torment and destruction, manifests as natural disasters like famines, droughts, etc, rather than directly affecting people. He doesn't REALLY have a body/physical form, on his own he's more like an amorphous blob, it needs some soft of wireframe to keep a consistent form, such as, someone else's skeleton, and that's exactly what he's using (they were dead beforehand dw). Except it doesn't have a head, so it needs to be substituted with some hollow object, can be pretty much anything, a pumpkin, a box, a different skull.

^ kitty :'] Crowley's only friend. Generally monotone, emotionless and suffers from resting bitch face. As you can see from the ref, she's a taxidermist, but her works are um. unconventional.

And finally, Crowley's sister, Chardonnay, they're not on good terms. Evil woman.

as a bonus, here's him, but small

#dieselask #oc #thats a lot of words

52 notes · View notes

bookwhimses · 1 year

Note

dirk.... tell me about the my fair lady au. also despair squid

treasured sibling......best sibling

The My Fair Lady AU was I think one of the many @gallantrejoinder and I talked about in the car during a long drive. It's technically a My Fair Lady production AU; Bart is a weird indie director who's done short films, stop-motion, random hit films widely praised by critics and audiences alike, and now she's suddenly turning her hand to theatre, which the internet is in melt-down over. It's not even a big original new production either, which is what people would expect, it's an off-off-off-Broadway production of My Fair Lady and as things develop it just keeps getting more buzz around it because Bart's casting seems very political and occasionally simply unhinged. She casts a relatively unknown black man who has only ever been cast as comedic side characters (Ken) as Higgins, which is a big deal. One of my notes is:

When asked about her political agenda Bart squints at the interviewer through her $3000 Yoko Ono sunglasses and is like "... he does his job good."

Then Bart casts a complete unknown, Farah, as Eliza, and it's Farah's DREAM role. Bart casts an actress from one of her creepy indie films (who is mostly unrecognisable because she did motion capture for a clown doll from space) as BOTH Mrs Higgins and Mrs Pearce despite the fact that the actress is younger than Ken. This decision is ridiculed everywhere online until opening night, when Mona is credited with "incredible chameleonic abilities" and Twitter critics start writing thinkpieces about the "genius direction creating intertexual discourse about Higgins's psyche".

This was another one where most of the cast get cameos, some as actors and some as crew or design. Dirk was going to an English guy they imported from the UK to play Freddy, which in itself caused internet uproar because the play is so English, if they were going to import one actor why ONLY a single supporting character. Amanda and Todd were stagehands and/or sound people. I'm fairly certain it was going to be a social media fic at least partially but the wip doc on my computer doesn't have stuff I'd thought I'd written, which likely means it's lurking somewhere on my phone or Google drive.

I opened "despair squid.docx" and I think I cannot explain things about it without spoiling key things about it, and it turned out to be more ramblings than actual wip. The title is a reference to a Red Dwarf episode which is relevant and the DW ep Amy's Choice is also referenced in the ramblings and is also relevant. I think it was something that I was playing with for a different wip, and then I copy-pasted into another doc and abandoned it there like a dino skeleton I could potentially resurrect later.

#dghda #wips #answers

6 notes · View notes