Torchwood after the SDCC panel

[eumelia]

During the San Diego Comic Con Torchwood Panel (available in seven parts) lots of things came up.

It was interesting to hear the Panellists' (Russel T. Davies, John Barrowman, Euros Lynn and Julie Gardner) opinions on the characters and the epic itself, it's always nice to hear creator and performer insights into characters. What a lovely touchy-squishy medium.

A few *squeeee* worthy moments were this kiss, that actually happened elsewhere but, c'mon, you gotta see it!

OMG! Those three men are freakin' huge!
Tennant and Barrowman are so cute.
The biggest fangrrl in the hall is Barrowman. I love it :D

In addition, during the panel, one of the questions pertained to John Barrowman's costumes and his clothing in the parts that he plays. In his answer he mentioned that one of his dreams would be to play Captain America!
My jaw dropped.
Never has there ever been a better actor to play Captain America.
Ever.
Seriously, look at those jaw lines.

Perfect match!

And moving on to some of the more serious content in conjunction of Fandom reaction of the past two weeks.

RTD's response to what would be considered the internet fan response and it really put things in perspective for me.

Personally, I don't care what RTD thinks about the fans, fandom or even his own creation.

He has a vision, as Julie Gardner said, and it their jobs as storytellers to execute those visions to the best of their ability, in the way that matches how they see character, plot and world they built (and consequently destroyed).

As fans, we feel propitiatory towards the characters. We love them, we know them, we read how others love them and think about them.
Those are interpretations.
That is meta.
That is how the characters, story, world relates to us, the readers, the viewers and that is no less important than those who created them, with one big difference.
We do not get a say in how the vision plays out.

We do not get a say in what should have happened.
Nor should we.
Art is not a democracy.
Art is a tricky piece of the modern market.

We are not the Patrons of Yonder Years (or the real Art Patrons and Matrons of today), the majority of us do not have enough money to be that.
We spend our money on the stuff that we like, enjoy and then create a community around that.
It's fun, I dunno who I'd be if it weren't for other obsessive geeks like me.

We are lucky that the creators chose to take more feedback from us than ratings. That kind of closeness should not be taken lightly or derided.

Not too long ago, Neil Gaiman wrote a post in his blog about entitlement issues regarding writer George R.R. Martin's accessibility to his fans:

George R.R. Martin is not your bitch.

This is a useful thing to know, perhaps a useful thing to point out when you find yourself thinking that possibly George is, indeed, your bitch, and should be out there typing what you want to read right now.

People are not machines. Writers and artists aren't machines.

You're complaining about George doing other things than writing the books you want to read as if your buying the first book in the series was a contract with him: that you would pay over your ten dollars, and George for his part would spend every waking hour until the series was done, writing the rest of the books for you.

No such contract existed. You were paying your ten dollars for the book you were reading, and I assume that you enjoyed it because you want to know what happens next.

He goes on and this is of course applicable to any writer, musician, actor and any other artist who chooses to interact with the people who consume the work.

We do not get a say. They, the people who provide us with entertainment, are not under any obligation to make feel all squishy inside and make our self-worth issues the centre of their universe.

That's my opinion as a fan who has interacted with the people who created things I love.

I'm feeling very bitter towards fandom who makes the likes of me look bad and actually have this bullshit be a part of the way we are perceived.

That is all.

Comments

Regarding that post of Gaiman's ...

[http://users.livejournal.com/_yggdrasil/]

Re: Regarding that post of Gaiman's ...

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Hell YES!

:D

Re: Regarding that post of Gaiman's ...

[dkellergrl.livejournal.com]

I love that jpeg. Can I "borrow" it from you?

Re: Regarding that post of Gaiman's ...

[http://users.livejournal.com/_yggdrasil/]

No need to ask, I found it via Google :)

[dkellergrl.livejournal.com]

As fans, we feel propitiatory towards the characters. We love them, we know them, we read how others love them and think about them.
Those are interpretations.
That is meta.
That is how the characters, story, world relates to us, the readers, the viewers and that is no less important than those who created them, with one big difference.
We do not get a say in how the vision plays out.

We do not get a say in what should have happened.
Nor should we.

WORD. I'm one of the most opinionated broads (I love that word to describe myself), when it comes to voicing my own thoughts and opinions about things, especially things about entertainment, but until I get up the nerve AND financial means to create, write and produce a fictionalized television program, that can generate over 6 to 7 millions viewers EACH and EVERY time that program is aired, I know that the people that are ABLE to do those things, will not and should not take my point of view in what THEY CREATE and WRITE and PRODUCE.

I'm not that important and that's okay with me.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

"Broad" is a good word, I wish it was used more often...

[wickhouse2005.livejournal.com]

I don't think that many people are saying that RTD didn't have the "right" to write the story that he wrote. They are mostly saying it wasn't the Torchwood that they had loved. Maybe there was to much of a disconnect between what they expected and what they got.

Also, RTD doesn't owe the fans anything, but the fans also don't owe him anything. It is each person's choice in how they accept his vision, and if they want to see anymore of it.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

I agree it's the individual's choice on how to accept an artists' vision, but I just find it a bitter pill to people feel, slighted I guess, or entitled about the 'verse.

You can criticise all you want, but what went down in James Moran's blog and fan reaction to RTD's interviews were not what I consider legitimate discussion even if we are pissed off.

[silver_sun]

You're right we don't get a say in what's written, and that's probably just as well because you can't please all of the people all of the time.

So while they, the writers, are under no obligation to provide the audience with what they wish to see, we, the viewers, are similarly under no obligation to like what they've written purely because they've taken the time to write it. If we are no longer enjoying what is being shown then we have every right to stop watching/reading.

They are allowed to write what they like as they should. Fans equally have the right express their own opinion about a show/book/film - that opinion maybe that it was the best ever thing they've seen/heard or that it was worse piece of derivative rubbish that they've ever sat through. Both points of view are equally valid and neither group should be told that their opinion doesn't count, even if that opinion isn't the majority one.

Things get reviewed, get critiqued, get given star or dot ratings in TV guides. And sometimes those reviews aren't positive - whether they listen to these opinions and what they take from it is up to them. Writers, whether professional or amateur, should expect to recieve both positive and negative feedback about their work. To only ever expect praise/positive reviews is a level of self entitlement equal to that of fans who think that a show should be written just for them.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

I didn't write anything about positive or negative reactions to what the writers wrote.
Any reaction is fine, imo.

But I think the way to go is not to attack ad hominem or go about believing that the creators are some how in our debt because we really, really like the stuff.

If you don't like the content, write that critique, Julie Gardner said that discussion was something they liked, no author or any other artists expects everyone to like every single thing created. But attacking the creator himself is, imo, lazy critiquing. RTD didn't say anything, not in his interviews, nor on the panel anything that was bad regarding the fans, he was being snarky regarding some fan reaction and you know what... so were other fans.

[silver_sun]

It depends on what you mean by attacking the creator - I know people who think that suggesting the writing wasn't perfect is an attack, or that mentioning/refering back to other things written by the creator in a review in a less than positive light is an attack.

Yes there should be things that are off limits for a critique, they include things like the writer's private life or mental state.

Anything relating to structure, plot, pacing, continuity storyline and it's relation to other published fictional work by the same writer is all fair game in my opinion.

And if the conclusion is that the writer produces great beginings to their stories, but is usually awful at providing a sensible endings, or that their writing style is formulaic, or that they use surprise endings so much that nobody is surprised by that fact that it is a surprise ending any more, then so be it. These are not attacks on the writer.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Anything relating to structure, plot, pacing, continuity storyline and it's relation to other published fictional work by the same writer is all fair game in my opinion.
Yes, well, that's kind of a given.
My problem isn't that fans are angry, it's that fans get off believing they (we) have a say in any of the above. That we should expect the writers and creators to write for our benefit. They don't and I don't think that that's a bad thing.

[silver_sun]

Anything relating to structure, plot, pacing, continuity storyline and it's relation to other published fictional work by the same writer is all fair game in my opinion.
Yes, well, that's kind of a given.

You'd be surprised at how many people think it isn't. I've seen more posts in the last few days telling people that they have no right to an opinion and if they didn't like Children of Earth they are immature fanbrats and need to grow up and get a life, than I've seen attacks on the writers.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I think Cons should have workshops explaining the difference between the author and the author's work to obsessive fans.