"You ain't Banksy."
"Or am I?"
Ok, that quite impressed me. It's not the greatest episode ever but it's solid, it works both mechanically and emotionally, and it manages to avoid being overly didactic and preachy as, for me, Vincent and the Doctor was, despite that music. (Well, aside from that song at the end, but we'll come to that). It may not be a particularly deep look at racism, and it may choose a somewhat blatant type of prejudice rather than something more challenging, but it's written by Malorie Blackman who is, I believe, a writer of novels for teenagers, perhaps with that audience in mind. To be fair, though, on that level, it works. It's time to recognise that, while Chibnall may not be on the same level s a writer as RTD or the Moff, his vision of the show- less clever, more kid-friendly- may be closer to what it needs rather than appealing to people like me who will, let's face it, always watch Doctor Who. Besides, I still enjoyed it.
It's impressive how this return to having four TARDISeers, evoking early Hartnell, helps the storytelling and works well with fifty minute contained episodes. It's also nice to see the characters interact- Ryan and Yas discussing racism, Graham and Ryan bonding a little but not quite there, Jodie Whittaker being absolutely the Doctor. It's also interesting, for the first time since The Time Meddler, to see a story entirely about a cat and mouse game changing the little things that can alter history. There's no physical threat here, just a threat to the timeline, but it's chilling that the time travelling antagonist is a racist from future where racism still exists. After all, here we are, sixty-three years after Rosa Parks refused to get off that bus, and racism is still there, Trump is president, and today's news is full of voter suppression in today's Georgia. Did Jim Crow ever really go away?
Still, we get a nice balance between showing racism in action in the Jim Crow Deep South and having the Doctor and gang put it into context with dialogue which nevertheless feels natural. It’s nicecto seecthevDoctor and Graham forced to be complicit at the end. And we get a celebrity historical cameo from Martin Luther King. And I'll admit I didn't recognise Vinette Robinson from Sherlock until Mrs Llamastrangler pointed her out.
It's interesting, on a more banal note, so see again that, while continuity is much more subtle under Chibnall and much friendlier to the casual viewer, he still cares about consistency; here we have mentions of Artron Energy, Stormcage (but not River Song) and a Vortex Manipulator. But ultimately this is a good episode but perhaps not a memorable one. And, while I'm no purist and don't object to a song being played over the closing titles, does it have to be such sub-X-Factor chart fodder?
Sigh. I liked it. I really did. It's just that I've become accustomed over the last several years to using a stronger word than "liked".
I remember some people didn't like how the 13th Doctor didn't seem to prepare Ryan or Yaz for bringing them to the 50s south of all things (did she really think bringing them there was a good idea?) It was in a way that makes you want to shake her and slap the writers. Tongue in cheek, yes. In character? Surely not. And also very unconsiderate.
ReplyDeleteYou be interested to know that some people felt that the racism was too much or tried to point out that Chibnall should have wrote more three dimensional characters (like Joan Redfren who might treat Martha with casual racism but had some "humanzing" qualites) but the simple fact is that many people were cold hardned racists who sometimes went as far as physical violence and even killing.
Interestingly, I have been re-reading various subjects and one can actually realize that the old saying “it was a different time” could sometimes fall flat; if others in the 60s were against others' racist views - why do people excuse the lack of criticism for 60s racism today with 'it was another generation/time'? Nope, there are people who endorse racism (or misogyny, or any other kind of discrimination) and people who don't, everywhere, in every period. And being always critical of it whenever it may appear ensures that the system doesn't uphold any kind of hate speech or discrimination as blatantly as it tends to happen when it becomes commonplace and normalized. I am not saying this applies to EVERYONE (racism, without excusing it, can be complex in itself, as we have things like "genteel racism" or "noble bigot" or "no more racist than the average person", in which the person might be insensitive or casually racist but not to the point of outright cruelty) but many people are so full of hate that they go to the point of violence and death. Perhaps the best example of this is that in recent years, more media attention has been paid to the fact the Dallas Police were corrupt back in the 20th century, especially in regards to race. The legacy of Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade and Dallas Police Captain Will Fritz (who was alleged to be a KKK member) continue to be associated with wrongful convictions and racial bias, particularly in relation to cases like that of Tommy Lee Walker, a Black man executed in 1956 whose case was later cited as being riddled with racial bias.
that’s why I don’t like when people try to act like this history of racism, police brutality/corruption, downplaying laws, etc. was such a long time ago, when it really wasn’t and continues to happen over and over again.
Strongly agree- it's nuanced, we should be realistic about casual racism in the past by those who weren't being actively racist- there's a distinction, past or present, between active bigotry and unconscious bias (to use a now-unfashionable term), although even the latter is something we should all try to avoid as far as we can.
ReplyDeleteEven as far back as the Atlantic slave trade, the fact that people in say, the 18th century (the likes of Benjamin Lay) could be strongly opposed to it means we really can't let his contemporaries off the hook, even if we do have to be mindful of context and accept that most ordinary consumers of sugar, cotton etc would possible fall into the same category as the Tenth Doctor asking Donna "Who makes your clothes?" in Planet of the Ood.