Dorian Thompson wrote:
I didn't "theorize ahead of the facts." I expressed a subjective opinion about one particular fictional character on a fictional show.
A show you have never watched
. How is that not judging in advance of the facts?
I didn't ask "what the hell is wrong with you?" for liking a show.
This isn't about whether you like the show, because you've never seen the show. You can't like or dislike something you haven't actually tried. Lots of people who thought they'd hate Elementary
sight unseen have discovered that they liked it when they actually saw it.
No, not all male/female interactions on screen have tension, but when only one iconic character in an iconic pairing is changed to the different gender, generally writers will fall prey to that temptation.
"Generally?" It sounds to me like you're basing that assumption on a single example, Starbuck. That doesn't prove a general rule. Although it's not as if the original Starbuck was "iconic." The original BSG was an ambitious flop with a very limited cult following. So I'm not sure there actually are
any examples of what you're claiming here.
And even if there are, it doesn't prove that's what they're going to do in this
particular case. And even if they do go that way, that doesn't prove they won't actually make it work. People thought the basic idea of the show wouldn't work at all, but it's a hit and has won over many Sherlockians. So even something that sounds like a bad idea on paper can be made to work.