topaz-eyes.livejournal.com ([identity profile] topaz-eyes.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] elisi 2011-06-03 06:10 pm (UTC)

If Moff undermines the impact of death in his writing, I think it's in order to focus on the demons and struggles he's really interested in, which are all psychological: loss of memory, loss of connection, loss of self, loss of the ability to accurately perceive reality, and the loss of agency and control and sense of meaning or purpose that can result from all of that.

We will definitely have to agree to disagree here. One can examine all of those themes without repeatedly "killing" the characters to do so. One death and resurrection of a character has meaning. After five "oh, he's dead/nope, not really!" events for the same character in 1.5 seasons, I'm feeling manipulated and cynical. With no emotional stakes for me, it's just about the intellectual puzzle.

It's like using the Daleks every year. "Dalek" was sublime. "Doomsday" was okay. People were rolling their eyes by S3. By S5 everyone was sick of them. Even though different themes were examined in each Dalek appearance, the Daleks themselves had worn out their welcome.

What's more upsetting about Eleven dying on the beach: that the Doctor died, or the feeling of disorientation and emotional whiplash and the inability to determine what's real or what any of it means?

But I don't feel any emotional whiplash. That's my point. I'm glad Moffat's approach works for you, I am. I wish it worked for me. Right now all I care about is whether my cracktastic River Song theory is correct.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting