Reading, Listening, Watching

[purplecat]

Reading: What Jane Austen Ate and Charles Dickens Knew recommended a long time ago on primeval_denial as a source for Victorian details. It's an odd assortment of "stuff about Britain for Americans", random rather list-y facts, and some stuff I find genuinely interesting. I think I've warmed to it as its gone on, but I can't help a niggling doubt that its not really written by an expert and so some of its facts may be suspect.

Listening: I've quite enjoyed the first two of David Tennant's podcasts (with Whoopi Goldberg and Jodie Whittaker respectively). Twitter tells me that Jodie is wrong to refer to Doctor Who fans as Whovians. I admit it's not my favourite word but I had somehow thought it had nevertheless entered the lexicon. Apparently not. Or at least not if you are a Doctor Who fan on Twitter.

Watching: Comfort watched two episodes of Brooklyn 99 with G. who was stressed following teenage shenanigans. Given I'm not much of a fan of the sitcom as a genre, they were remarkable watchable.

Comments

[chamilet]

Hmmm. If not a Whovian, what am I?

[purplecat]

You are a Doctor Who Fan.

Back in the 1980s it was definitely considered a bit of vulgar Americanism in British fandom, and also as some kind of attempt to make the fandom more like Star Trek fandom, but it is a long time since I heard that kind of sentiment expressed.

Of course, I suppose, it may be fight worth resurrecting in the minds of some if it gives you another stick to beat Jodie Whittaker with.

[chamilet]

I LOVE Jodie Whitaker and if she wants me to be a Whovian, I'll gladly be a Whovian. I'm also a Trekkie. No problem with having such monikers, they're fun. Then again, I'm a vulgar American.

[purplecat]

Then again, I'm a vulgar American.

There is/was such a wealth of British classism, snobbery and probably some sexism (given the perception at the time that American fandom was "more female") in that attitude that someone could probably write a thesis on it.

[ffutures]

From what I remember of What... there are indeed some factual errors and simplifications. I used it a bit when I was writing Forgotten Futures but ended up finding better sources for most things. I still have a copy somewhere.

[purplecat]

It's something about the the wording - a lot of "one assumes" and "it would seem" that somehow suggests the author is not a total expert.

[daniel-saunders.livejournal.com]

I thought Whovian was widely adopted too, although I was aware it was initially only American fans who used it. My bugbears are the use of 'arc' to describe pre-2005 stories and the numbering of the Doctors with cardinal rather than ordinal numbers. I am ashamed to admit that both of these annoy me much more than they really should, especially the latter. I suppose it's all gatekeeping on my part and feeling that fandom has changed and I need to find a new role within it. (Sorry, looking back at what you actually wrote, I think I went off on a tangent there.)

[purplecat]

I'm not sure about arc. I think it can be useful as a way to described joined up story-telling but it needs to be done in a way that makes it clear the user doesn't think that it is an arc in the fashion of modern season-plotted-by-default telly.

I'm coming around to cardinal numbers having disliked them at first, though mostly because they allow more brevity of expression.