Spoilers Demons of the Punjab grade and discussion thread

[Locutus of Bored]

That's just it though these history lessons give rise to people lecturing each other like moral overlords. Who wants that in their entertainment? It's a TV show not a documentary.

So you'd prefer a time travel show that doesn't deal with history?

Doctor Who was originally intended to be educational entertainment. That's why two of the First Doctor's early companions were a science and history teacher. You can be thought-provoking and entertaining at the same time. The two aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

The whole point of good science fiction is to explore what it means to be human and to challenge our preconceptions through the lens of fantastical stories and settings, not to retreat from having a viewpoint or avoid doing anything that's considered potentially controversial.

Not that "racism is wrong" should be considered a controversial stance to anyone, but unfortunately it is to some people who don't like their established position of social dominance to ever be questioned.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Why can’t it be both? Why can’t it be both entertaining and offer something more thoughtful?

Do you really think there’s some moral legitimacy to racism and bigotry?

Maybe bigots SHOULD be lectured to.

I think one could argue a theme through this whole series is the dangers of othering. There are obvious ones like this and Rosa, but more subtle expressions like the muppet in tsuranga just looking for food and its destructiveness was incidental and unintended. Or the racers competing on a dead planet winning by sharing rather than beating each other.

 

[Guy Gardener]

These witnessing aliens were doing the job as the glass robots from the last Christmas Special, so you have to wonder if they get along, at the end of time, with their competing databases of everyone that has every lived, or if there is some conflict?

 

[Refuge]

So you'd prefer a time travel show that doesn't deal with history?

Doctor Who was originally intended to be educational entertainment. That's why two of the First Doctor's early companions were a science and history teacher. You can be thought-provoking and entertaining at the same time. The two aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

The whole point of good science fiction is to explore what it means to be human and to challenge our preconceptions through the lens of fantastical stories and settings, not to retreat from having a viewpoint or avoid doing anything that's considered potentially controversial.

Not that "racism is wrong" should be considered a controversial stance to anyone, but unfortunately it is to some people who don't like their established position of social dominance to ever be questioned.

I tend to prefer my science fiction to be both fictional and imaginative and when those concepts provide analogies for lesson and message, you do have depth. That being said this season of Doctor Who feels earthbound. Small universe and self-conscious. It's not like there hasn't been historical reference and reflection only half way through - complete with theme music to resonate and linger. The actual intent is admirable but I'm not sure how effective it is given those embracing it would anyway and those resistant are hardly going to have an epiphany because of a TV Show. Which brings it back to science fiction. It's entertainment and I want some.

 

[mos6507]

Isn't one of the big attractions of sci-fi supposed to be that it can speak to us about the human condition and bigger meaning than the escapism it appears to be?

Google "on the nose". The beauty of Star Trek used to be that you could comment on contemporary political issues indirectly through similar conflicts arising in alien races. It's possible to step back and see an issue from more of a neutral perspective when it's framed as alien races.

When you just sort of drop in on history and go "tsk tsk tsk, look at this man's inhumanity to man" it comes across as too direct, too obviously preachy.

Another good example from Star Trek is the episode where Picard is captured and tortured by the cardassians. You can draw connections between this and the torture of allied prisoners by the Japanese during WWII or waterboarding during the war on terror. It's the fact that it's NOT directly connected to any historical context that gives the viewer the neutrality, the intellectual space, to draw those connections.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Google "on the nose". The beauty of Star Trek used to be that you could comment on contemporary political issues indirectly through similar conflicts arising in alien races. It's possible to step back and see an issue from more of a neutral perspective when it's framed as alien races.

When you just sort of drop in on history and go "tsk tsk tsk, look at this man's inhumanity to man" it comes across as too direct, too obviously preachy.

Another good example from Star Trek is the episode where Picard is captured and tortured by the cardassians. You can draw connections between this and the torture of allied prisoners by the Japanese during WWII or waterboarding during the war on terror. It's the fact that it's NOT directly connected to any historical context that gives the viewer the neutrality, the intellectual space, to draw those connections.

I think about the context of the Star Trek episode you pictured. The late 60s in America... Was the episode really about race relations, or perhaps how stupid and childish racists arguments were?

But, that does spring to mind, Picard's torture CAN'T be about waterboarding... all that came out well after the show was gone from the airwaves.

Science fiction always speaks to what is happening at that moment... and at this moment in our history, where for some reason people are being told "there's fine people" on both sides...

One could also make the case that Rosa and Demons ARE speaking indirectly... both times aren't directly like the present. If Doctor Who wanted to speak directly, wouldn't it make more sense to set the story in modern day and talk about the Syrian refugees?

EDITED TO ADD:

One of the great TV sci fi stories of all time was DS9's Far Beyond the Stars... and that took on racism quite directly. Albeit, indirectly for the specific context it was aired.

 

[Mr Awe]

I know some people complain about the lack of a villain in the episode, but the villain is in plain sight. It's hatred without reason causing people to tear their own families apart and causing suffering for generations to come..

Of course, most everyone sees that. That point is that when history is the villain and history can't be changed, there's very little for the Doctor to do other than observe.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Of course, most everyone sees that. That point is that when history is the villain and history can't be changed, there's very little for the Doctor to do other than observe.

We're supposed to learn from it so it never happens again. But unfortunately, that doesn't happen. Just look at the rise of fascism and racism in the US, UK, Europe and all over the world. We're very much in danger of some of history's worst acts being repeated.

 

[Turtletrekker]

And Doctor Who has always been “virtue signaling.” (Ugh, what an Orwellian turn of phrase. I need to wash out my mouth)

"Virtue signaling", along with "social justice warrior", have always sounded to me like phrases made up by assholes trying to belittle and shame people who call them out for being assholes. YMMV.

 

[Awesome Possum]

"Virtue signaling", along with "social justice warrior", have always sounded to me like phrases made up by assholes trying to belittle and shame people who call them out for being assholes. YMMV.

It really shows that they truly believe that people have empathy of other races or some minority group to look good. Like it's an act and a selfish one at that since it's just to score points. They must be miserable assholes who just can't wrap their minds around why others react so negatively towards them.

 

[matthunter]

Google "on the nose". The beauty of Star Trek used to be that you could comment on contemporary political issues indirectly through similar conflicts arising in alien races. It's possible to step back and see an issue from more of a neutral perspective when it's framed as alien races.

When you just sort of drop in on history and go "tsk tsk tsk, look at this man's inhumanity to man" it comes across as too direct, too obviously preachy.

Another good example from Star Trek is the episode where Picard is captured and tortured by the cardassians. You can draw connections between this and the torture of allied prisoners by the Japanese during WWII or waterboarding during the war on terror. It's the fact that it's NOT directly connected to any historical context that gives the viewer the neutrality, the intellectual space, to draw those connections.

Yes, but this assumes people have the knowledge of history to make the connection in the first place. Sadly, we are not dealing with a generation that remembers internment, or segregation. A study this year found that two-thirds of millenials in the US had never heard of AUSCHWITZ, ffs!

 

[Refuge]

The beauty of Star Trek used to be that you could comment on contemporary political issues indirectly through similar conflicts arising in alien races. It's possible to step back and see an issue from more of a neutral perspective when it's framed as alien races.
When you just sort of drop in on history and go "tsk tsk tsk, look at this man's inhumanity to man" it comes across as too direct, too obviously preachy.

I must admit I find the preaching tiresome. I hope the writers can try some original ways of depicting their heavy handed messages or gasp write something entertaining. There doesn't seem to be much fun going on.

 

[mos6507]

Yes, but this assumes people have the knowledge of history to make the connection in the first place.

But remember that history by itself has no meaning. How history is interpreted is what gives it meaning. When you wrap history in story, you're pretty much forced to take a side. It risks stifling independent thinking. Remember when Clint Eastwood released two movies about Iwo Jima, Flags of Our Fathers on one end and Letters from Iwo Jima on the other? That was a brave thing he did. That sort of thing is rare these days. Even documentaries are clearly slanted, whether you're talking about Michael Moore on one end or Dinesh D'souza on the other.

 

[BritishSeaPower]

Isn't one of the big attractions of sci-fi supposed to be that it can speak to us about the human condition and bigger meaning than the escapism it appears to be?

::dalek voice:: Yes.

I tend to prefer my science fiction to be both fictional and imaginative and when those concepts provide analogies for lesson and message, you do have depth. That being said this season of Doctor Who feels earthbound. Small universe and self-conscious. It's not like there hasn't been historical reference and reflection only half way through - complete with theme music to resonate and linger. The actual intent is admirable but I'm not sure how effective it is given those embracing it would anyway and those resistant are hardly going to have an epiphany because of a TV Show. Which brings it back to science fiction. It's entertainment and I want some.

This is odd, as there will be at least 4 episodes on an alien world/setting this season. Something the first series of the reboot couldn't do. Conversely there are also three historicals, something each season has had one, maybe two of in decades!?

As a general note on Sci-Fi as metaphor or object lessons... While metaphors are good, they do have the possibility of being reductive. You shouldn't have to see Frank Gorshin in half-blackface against another actor with the paint on the other side to understand that racism is wrong. It works, it makes sense, but I'll tell you I've heard some odd reads of that over the years. As well, I know many sci-fi fans of color, the lgbtq+ community, etc. who balk at sci-fi shows still using metaphor over representation. Rather than have a frank conversation about racism (Rosa) or religious intolerance (Demons..., presumably an aspect of the upcoming Witchhunters) in historical context or with actors from those groups, sci-fi gravitates towards simple, sometimes non-controversial, stories about the subject. The Thals and Kaleds are a metaphor for intolerance... until you realize they all look like the same 10 British people. The X-Men are a great metaphor for civil rights, lgbtq+ rights, etc. up until the point that there are practical problems with how we react to someone who could create a nuclear explosion on their own volition and it ceases to work.

 

[Amaris]

I think one could argue a theme through this whole series is the dangers of othering. There are obvious ones like this and Rosa, but more subtle expressions like the muppet in tsuranga just looking for food and its destructiveness was incidental and unintended. Or the racers competing on a dead planet winning by sharing rather than beating each other.

That might be one of the reasons why I'm loving this season so far, the messages are about cooperation, sharing the win instead of dominating another, and making certain that history points to the future rather than the past. Well, that and I love Jodie as The Doctor. A little of this and that, then.

 

[Professor Zoom]

But remember that history by itself has no meaning. How history is interpreted is what gives it meaning. When you wrap history in story, you're pretty much forced to take a side. It risks stifling independent thinking. Remember when Clint Eastwood released two movies about Iwo Jima, Flags of Our Fathers on one end and Letters from Iwo Jima on the other? That was a brave thing he did. That sort of thing is rare these days. Even documentaries are clearly slanted, whether you're talking about Michael Moore on one end or Dinesh D'souza on the other.

All stories have a point of view, regardless if they are using history.

And, I’m a little confused, if your first point is true, then isn’t Eastwood guilty of what you are suggesting?

Not that I think it’s wrong or bad. Storytellers have points of view. They should have a point of view. Art isn’t a news show. Even a B movie is trying to say something. If anything, a storyteller should be free to think and create as they want, yes?

What’s great about what Eastwood did was tell a story that isn’t told in America. It’s a point of view that isn’t often shown in America. And I would certainly argue Demons of Punjab offered a point of view rarely seen in European households. Hindu on Muslim bigotry. The Partition. The silliness of line in the sand saying you don’t belong.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Google "on the nose". The beauty of Star Trek used to be that you could comment on contemporary political issues indirectly through similar conflicts arising in alien races. It's possible to step back and see an issue from more of a neutral perspective when it's framed as alien races.

When you just sort of drop in on history and go "tsk tsk tsk, look at this man's inhumanity to man" it comes across as too direct, too obviously preachy.

Give me a minute, I'm too busy laughing at the irony of claiming something is too "on the nose" by citing the heavy-handed in the extreme 'Let That Be Your Last Battlefield' as a counter-example, which is the most on the nose thing since wearing a Groucho disguise.

"You're black on one side and white on the other."
"I am black on the right side."
"I fail to see the significant difference."
"Lokai is white on the right side. All of his people are white on the right side."

Gee, I wonder what contemporary Earthbound issue they were alluding to? That's a mystery worthy of the Riddler right there (Oh, wait...). There was no one who didn't get the message they were going for loud and clear, and just in case there was, Chekov and Sulu helpfully had this discussion:

"There was persecution on Earth once. I remember reading about it in my history class."
"Yes, but it happened way back in the twentieth century. There's no such primitive thinking today."

 

[BritishSeaPower]

^ Except for noted "lovable" space-racist Dr. McCoy. ;-)

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Thijarian Witnesses. So, space Jehovah's Witnesses? Are they going to be knocking on people's doors now?

 

[Jayson1]

^ Except for noted "lovable" space-racist Dr. McCoy. ;-)

McCoy wasn't racist. He and Spock love each other. Their insults are just friendly banter. Maybe once in awhile they get angry like what happens with friends and family but the love never goes away.

Jason