Options
Is Fandom becoming more and more divided as time goes by?
poppycod
Posts: 1,267 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Is it me or is fandom beomcing more factionalised and divided?
Sure there were some divides over the shows resurrection in 2005 and some of the more dubious casting decisions for assistants.
However now it seems that there is so much dissent between fans of Dr Who these days and little in common.
Having spoken to literally hundreds of Who fans over the last few weeks in the real world there do seem to be factions forming. Certainly this bulletin board has become somewhat rum and 'heated' at times but we generally get on well with one another.
What do you think is responsible for the divisions in fandom?
Sure there were some divides over the shows resurrection in 2005 and some of the more dubious casting decisions for assistants.
However now it seems that there is so much dissent between fans of Dr Who these days and little in common.
Having spoken to literally hundreds of Who fans over the last few weeks in the real world there do seem to be factions forming. Certainly this bulletin board has become somewhat rum and 'heated' at times but we generally get on well with one another.
What do you think is responsible for the divisions in fandom?
0
Comments
In the past it might have been a few words about latest episode with the family or maybe the bloke in the pub.
Now everything is torn apart as people get somewhere to air their views and argue about them.
Most of these thoughts in the past would have stayed in people's heads
"The Sky at Night" fans have always been quite happy and harmonious.
Same can be said for other genre shows. Anyone remember the uproar when Paramount said they were going to make a new Star Trek show, but with some bald guy as the new Kirk, but with a different, French name?
Heck, on that last note, I remember a sci-fi magazine noting how Star Trek: The Next Generation was so derided by fans, yet ended up being the stick that was used to beat every other genre show to death with!
Overall TNG wa pretty good, but I would have preferred no Holodeck episodes, Wesley or Worf. This may sound like sacrilege. but I got sick of hearing the word "honour" repeated ad nauseum everytime Worf had a slight crisis in his life. Also, if you are going to make the Captain speak with an English accent and drink Earl Grey tea and sing gilbert and Sullivan operas might as well go the whole hog and make him English and not pay lip service to France by giving him a French name and a French vineyard backstory. Reasoning that English culture being accepted by the French unfortunately does not ring true.
I think there were always different fractions and people will always have had different opinions (comes with the territory - change is a stable part of the show). When you talk about 100s of Who fans - how were they divided? Did they not like the new show, compared to the previous 4 series, or do they not like New Who and do they prefer the classic series. What was the essence of the opinion of these 100's of people?
Really? Try asking a roomful of them to agree on whether Pluto is a planet or not...:D
It's apparent that a group of rabidly anti-RTD fans will defend anything SM does, continuing to trash RTD into the bargain and claiming that RTD fans are attacking SM. I have yet to see any examples of the latter - not least because SM has never been subject to the intensely personal vitriol that was aimed at RTD - but some people don't like the facts to get in the way of their prejudice.
There are a significant number of fans who are concerned by the story-telling we've seen in the last two episodes. It's certainly not what I expect from one of the best writers of the revived series. The hardcore SM fans happily and often quite coherently explain some of the less logical plot points but, with the greatest respect, the very fact that they have to go such lengths rather begs the question: isn't it the three executive producers' jobs to ensure that the plot is comprehensible?
I like both RTD's and SM's writing - indeed, SM had a much better strike rate until this series began. But, like others, I am disappointed by what we've seen the past two weeks. I also expect to allowed to air this opinion on an internet forum without being told I need to watch the episode more than once (which only a tiny minority of fans do) or, implicitly, that I am stupid.
It's this lack of tolerance that has rather soured the last two weeks. And given that some of it is coming from people are anything but tolerant about things they don't like, this is ironic, to say the least.
We all have different opinions - well, hallelujah to that.
I think its fans of the show and the format vs fans of David Tennant and/or Russell T. Davies.
People who don't appreciate the quality of the writing we've had so far, or appreciate that the show existed before RTD and Tennant, and will exist afterwards.
It was always going to be an issue, with Tennant fans in particular. Its not Who vs Who. Its Who fans vs Tennant fans. Bit different.
I like all the new Who stuff pretty much unconditionally, through RTD and the Moff et al. Only had the occasional beef with a couple of episodes here and there over the years. I don't think Moff has done anything bad at all with the new series. Thought both Eleventh Hour and Beast Below were stellar modern episodes, ditto Victory. It feels very much in safe hands so far, and thats before the series has had a chance to really develop significantly in any way.
Arguing back and forth with negativity (and reading it) isn't really my idea of Doctor Who discussion, so with that in mind, I'll see you on Saturday after the show at voting time.
I kind of agree, all three so far have managed to put together a nice blend of new and old Who. Certainly our Doctor, whose very old Who compared to the angst ridden 9 and 10.
We might only be three episodes in, but unless we have episodes as bad as Love & Monsters, Fear Her, Evolution of the Daleks / Daleks In Manhattan or The Doctor's Daughter, this so far has gone down as a good series.
That's a shame, because you seem to be one of the few people who truly likes both RTD and SM. I have to admit, I like both of them as well (no preference whatsoever). I haven't been on this particular forum before this series, but it seems (no offence intended) that a lot of RTD fans fall into the same trap as the anti-RTD brigade beforehand. There seem to be only a handful of people who can enjoy and appreciate both writers and their stories.
Hardly surprising though, given that they have writing styles which are fundamentally different from each other even though they may appear superficially similar. Davies seems far more concerned with character than plot, often to the point that the plot is totally sidelined or pared down in favour of the character moments. Moffat I think writes rather more substantial stories but doesn't seem so interested in the sentimentality which characterised a lot of Davies' stuff. Inevitably, one type of writing will appeal to one area of the audience more than another.
But as an 'Anybody but RTD' fan, i can understand some RTD fans putting the boot in after having people like me slagging RTD off for the last five years!
We dished it out and now we gotta take it.
And it doesn't help when Moffatt oversees one of the worst stories of the new series, after only 3 episodes as showrunner. :eek: easy pickings....
You see I don't entirely agree with this. RTD has done some brilliant characterisations, good plots and IMO has used emotion to a great effect (although towards the end it was a bit overused). The same applies to Moffat, he has written some very good characterisations, good stories and he has also used emotion to great effect (I'm sure he is going to overuse some of his stuff after 5 years). I sometimes think that people seem to nitpick one writer for one thing, whereas they are happy to selectively forget the same thing in another writer and vice versa.
As an example: Lots of people accuse RTD of overusing emotion, but still think that "The Girl in the Fireplace" is brilliant, because it's written by SM. That was pretty emotional and the doctor behaved like a human.
BTW to clarify, I don't have a problem with people stating that they don't like episodes or other things. I find it just a bit tedious that it always seems to go back to the writer, whereas a lot of people don't necessarily know who wrote which story IMO.
Sorry, but I just don't get this.
SM's scripts are full of character-based, emotional stuff: 'Everybody lives!' and the denouement of The Doctor Dances; the Doctor finding Madame de Pompadour has died; River Song being reunited with her team ... all of which could be accused of being sentimental (not by me, I would add).
They are both good writers. If you prefer one over the other, fine. But please don't try and pass off your opinion as fact when it isn't.
I look back at some of the posts i've made on other forums, and to be honest i quite ashamed of them.
RTD did the best he could. As a show-runner i concede now that he did a fantastic job, But his writting was just terrible in my opinion.... And i made it clear that i didn't like his episodes.
I would look stupid if i was to say 'Let's all love each other and forget about that time i called RTD a talentless w****r':p
The RTD fans are out for blood, and i don't blame them...
Maybe you should join the AA (Anti-RTD Anonymous:p). You just made the first step and realised that you had a problem, and you admitted it:D:D.
BTW (bit in bold) I now realise where the inspiration for the episode with the vampires came from;).
I definitely think that RTD was a good show runner, and more importantly (like SM) he cared about Dr Who.
Where are these RTD fans, then? Where are the equivalent of the attacks that were made on RTD?
SM isn't being personally rubbished. What he is being criticised for - quite rightly, in my view - is some sloppy, illogical plotting which certainly isn't his trademark and quite out of character. I'm not angry with SM. Just disappointed.
So you didn't like RTD's writing. Fine. But the viewing figures would indicate that you are in a small minority. His revival of DW was a massive success. SM has a lot to live up to. And I sincerely hope he will. But he's not doing that at the moment.
I like RTD and SM's writing. It doesn't have to be either/or - and, for the vast majority of casual viewers, it doesn't matter who has written an episode. And, for all fans, the survival of the show and its appeal to a mainstream audience should be more important than some personality-driven bitch-fest .
I don't think you are going to see anybody calling SM a w****r, talentless or not.
I think everyone is entitled to an opinion, it's how some react to someone who disagrees with them that causes problems. I have found a couple of my own viewpoints shredded to bits on here in the last few days. Though the argument presented may have been a valid one, it was the way it was put across that really annoyed me.