Not a fan of Clara

[Lakenheath 72]

The problem with Clara is that I can't describe her in one sentence to a person who doesn't know Doctor Who. She, like many things in Moffat's reign, is overly convoluted. The franchise succeeded when it was much simpler and when it wasn't indulging in its own past.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

The problem with Clara is that I can't describe her in one sentence to a person who doesn't know Doctor Who. She, like many things in Moffat's reign, is overly convoluted. The franchise succeeded when it was much simpler and when it wasn't indulging in its own past.

While I agree Moffat does often get convoluted not being able to describe a character in one sentence isn't necessarily a bad thing. Might even be a badge of honor.

Anyway, here's my go:

A young 21st Century London schoolteacher who has become entwined with the Doctor's present and past lives through her adventures with him.

 

[Stevil2001]

Honestly the "impossible girl" stuff is so irrelevant to S8 Clara that if I was trying to explain Clara to someone trying to watch an episode from "The Day of the Doctor" onwards, I wouldn't even bring it up. She's a bossy schoolteacher who lives on Earth but goes on adventures with the Doctor.

 

[Timewalker]

It should not be necessary to have a transcript or closed-captioning to understand what the hell the character is saying. She talks too fast.

She talks about that here; it's certainly something she was aware of two years ago yet no-one involved seems to think it's a major problem. It doesn't bother me too much but I can understand why some might have an issue with it.

Well, they may not think it's a problem. But I think it's a problem. I know other people who think it's a problem. The stories are already not worth watching more than once, so it's really annoying to only be able to understand half of what she's mumbling; maybe they might actually write intelligent dialogue for her occasionally and I'm not getting it because she's yakking so fast that it's just an aural blur.

And I'm not American, so there's no need to get snarky. After all, if I start talking about Gian Gomeshi, I don't expect that everyone here is up on Canadian current events and would know what that's about (formerly-popular CBC host accused of multiple sexual assaults, sometimes involving CBC interns, dating back many years).

If someone mentioned a "Gian Gomeshi scandal" on a thread about a Canadian show without further elaboration, I'd assume it was a Canadian thing I don't know about, and open a new window to Google or Wikipedia.

So did you run right over and look it up? There's certainly a lot more to it than the brief description I gave here.

No? I don't blame you if you didn't, since not everything people come across online is that important that they need to look it up Right Now. That's why I prefer to just ask people to explain, since A) I'm busy on a lot more sites than TrekBBS; and B) Looking it up doesn't necessarily tell me why the poster him/herself felt the need to mention it or has an interest in the issue.

Considering how miserably stupid most of the stories are now, I'd prefer to remember Romana as she was in Warrior's Gate - going off on her own with K-9 to do her part to make the universe a better place instead of wasting her life on Gallifrey.

It costs extra for me to see Doctor Who, since the Space Channel isn't part of my basic tier of channels. So this past season left me feeling pretty cheated, since it wasn't worth the money. So unless Clara gets permanently off the show, I'm not forking over yet more money for a show with a companion I can't stand and which has some of the dumbest stories I've seen since nuTrek.

I think you're right. I wouldn't want to have Romana's character ruined by bringing her back during a crap year of Who. I'm not even sure she could save the show for me. The past two series have left me feeling rather deflated. Maybe Doctor Who just isn't for me anymore, and I think I'm coming to accept that. I was into Doctor Who before Star Trek. Because I started to dislike the show, it brought me out of the Whoniverse bubble and got me watching other sci-fi. I guess I should thank everyone involved in current Doctor Who for my love of Star Trek. I'm not being sarcastic either.

Well, thankfully there are decades' worth of stories pre-nuWho, as well as episode novelizations, original novels, and fanfiction. I get emails from Amazon every so often to tell me of sales on Doctor Who videos; the only ones that interest me are the few Classic Who stories I don't already have. Other than the 50th anniversary special, I haven't bought a single one of the nuWho videos. They're just not worth it to me.

I used to be a member of a Doctor Who fan site. At least on that site, many people had an intense love for her character and would usually end up siding with her over the Doctor (which is understandable in some cases but not every time). I remember the few times I expressed my distaste for Clara, I was jumped on by multiple people. I wasn't rude about it either. I'd just say what bothered me about her and get a bunch of, "you don't HAVE to like her" (no shit, but I'd sure like to actually enjoy the current companion on what was my favorite show) and "you're a sexist" if I brought up her being bossy or throwing a tantrum when she didn't get her way.

That's unfortunate. I got the same sort of reaction here when I expressed my dislike for the nuTrek movies and certain characters in them.

Yes it can get that much worse

That's why I want to know if Clara is going to really leave (no "pretend/change my mind" leave) before paying for the Space Channel later this year. If she's only in one or two stories, I'll take a chance on the new companion. If she's staying on through the season, I'll wait a year or two for Netflix. Or maybe I'll catch it on Daily Motion, if I remember in time. But I'm not paying more extra cable fees if she's going to be there the whole time yakkingamileaminute and the stories are just Whovianized fairy tales with the occasional Dalek or Cyberman thrown in.

 

[DWF]

I much perfer Clara over Amy, but I do think that the problem with Clara and most of the modern companions is that there's almost noo explaination for why they continue to travel with the Dcotor. Plus last season Clara did most of the work leaving the new Doctor with little to do, when in reality he should be the driving force on the show. But that's Moffat's philosophy that the companion is more important than the Doctor.

 

[Photoman15]

I much perfer Clara over Amy, but I do think that the problem with Clara and most of the modern companions is that there's almost noo explaination for why they continue to travel with the Dcotor. Plus last season Clara did most of the work leaving the new Doctor with little to do, when in reality he should be the driving force on the show. But that's Moffat's philosophy that the companion is more important than the Doctor.

And that's why Moffat's time should end.

And I would take Amy who was committed to traveling with her Raggedy Man over Clara ("please drop me off home and pick me up next week when the audience comes back") .

 

[K'Toska]

Timewalker,
Before this most recent series aired, I spent a lot of time watching classic Who because I needed my fix. When series 8 finally did air, I found that I vastly preferred watching the classic serials to watching it and that all my excitement was basically for naught. I've resigned (not necessarily in a bad way - I really do enjoy them) myself to watching those serials until Clara is gone. I don't want a new story for her, I don't want them to write her differently, I just want her gone. They keep trying to write her differently, and it never works out. The Doctor seems like more of a background fixture than anything else lately.

As for nuTrek, I just watched both movies for the first time last night. Don't even get me started... lol.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

Ace was the first companion where her past life played a role in the stories. However, the Doctor was central to the stories, as a friend and mentor to his young companion. I think this is the most realistic relationship attainable for both the Doctor and the companion.

The franchise pushed the Doctor to the side with the first new episode, "Rose". The episode began with the life experienced by a pre-Doctor Rose. I haven't seen or re-seen all the episodes with Rose; however, I feel that her character is developing in the episodes I have seen.

One of the biggest issues with Doctor Who has been in its treatment of women. There is a consistent thread throughout the classic and new Doctor Who where it is shown that the ultimate achievement of a woman is to be the wife of a husband. It doesn't help the franchise where the showrunner has difficulty with creating believable woman characters.

Moffat is quoted as saying,

"There’s this issue you’re not allowed to discuss: that women are needy. Men can go for longer, more happily, without women. That’s the truth. We don’t, as little boys, play at being married – we try to avoid it for as long as possible. Meanwhile women are out there hunting for husbands.”

“River Song? Amy Pond? Hardly weak women. It’s the exact opposite. You could accuse me of having a fetish for powerful, sexy women who like cheating people. That would be fair.”

http://www.hollywood.com/celebrities/steven-moffat-sexist-quotes-60232421

http://www.varsity.co.uk/features/6007/

How is a woman strong when she is emotionally abusing men? I don't associate strength with abuse.

Moffat is quoted as well saying,

"There’s no need for character development, or chat, it’s straight into: ‘There’s something wrong here, let’s look into this deep, dark hole.’"

http://www.scotsman.com/news/time-lad-scores-with-sex-and-daleks-1-1394833

The last showrunner who had issues with character development was JNT. I really hope that Doctor Who doesn't end under Moffat's tenure. I would like to see a new showrunner who understands character development is vital to storytelling.

 

[K'Toska]

Yeah I don't know what planet Moffat lives on. Some women are needy. Some men are needy. Every relationship I've been in, with the exception of my current one with my husband, it has been the man who was pushing to be more serious, to get married, etc. when I wasn't ready for it or into the idea. I'm not saying that anecdotal evidence counts for much but I know many other women in the same boat. I also never played at being married when I was a child. I do respect marriage, and it means a lot to me, but I think he's relying more on stereotypes than anything else.

On the other side of it, in an attempt to beat said stereotypes - he portrays other women as callous and emotionally manipulative. That, in itself, is another stereotype attributed to women we deem "powerful." Maybe he should've taken a few cues from how Captain Janeway was portrayed. Her character, to me, is a breath of fresh air. Her behavior mimics what I've seen from the most influential women in my life - strong but kind and strict (when it is necessary) but understanding. Moffat keeps missing the mark. I do love a lot of his stories, and I enjoyed River Song (because even though she joked that she was a psychopath, she cared deeply for the Doctor - she stayed strong for him). He's just not so great at character development, especially when it comes to women. With RTD, we saw the female companions grow into themselves. We saw Rose survive without the Doctor (and imo, she was better for it). We saw Martha stand up for herself and decide she wasn't going to be treated as "second best," and then we even saw that she could hold her own without the Doctor. We saw Donna start to appreciate herself and how important she truly was to others. I can't think of any development like that in Amy or Clara. If anyone else can, I'd be interested to read what they think.

 

[sidious618]

Sadly, Moffat has a history of saying really stupid shit about women in interviews.

 

[The Wormhole]

^^Moffat just has a history of saying stupid shit in general. Hey, I'm not trying to jump on some kind of anti-Moffat bandwagon or anything, but I think we can all find a Moffat quote or two and wonder "WTF is he on about?"

 

[sidious618]

Yeah, he seems to be a bit of a dick. I love what he's done with the show, but I have a feeling he'd be a pain to work with.

 

[K'Toska]

Is it really any wonder that more women don't work on Doctor Who with him saying shit like that? haha

 

[Starkers]

Yeah all those women who just hate Moffat, who can't wait to get away from him, who've slagged him off in public.

Alex Kingston, Michelle Gomez, Karen Gillan, Jenna Coleman, Neve McIntosh, Catrin Stewart, and lets not forget Gina Belman who had such an issue with Moffat during Coupling that she had to work with him again on Jekyll just to remind herself how awful he was. If Rachel Talalay comes back for more directing duties I guess we can assume it's the same reason.

I think it's pretty clear that Moffat can be an arse at times, but this whole sexism thing I never get.

And like RTD was any different, I will always argue he was far worse. Take a look at his depiction of any maternal figure, the mothers of Rose Martha and Donna are all shrewish harridans. And as for the development of his female characters, let's see where they ended up and how much they'd grown shall we?

Rose: After losing her father and the man she loves a woman can only be happy if she gets a carbon copy replacement, no moving on, no dealing with it, fake Dad and fake Doctor and everything will be hunky dory. What a terrible lesson to teach kids?

Donna: remember kids, it doesn't matter if you've grown as a person, in the end the only thing you really need to be happy is a big lottery win!

Martha, who ends up married to Mickey...I dunno, I suspect because RTD didn't have time for two scenes so he just decided to stick them both in the same one.

Give me Amy and Rory any day of the week...

 

[Lakenheath 72]

I believe, from reading history, that individuals will act and think in ways that others perceive are against their own interests. I think we forget that when there was a movement for women's suffrage, that the suffragists themselves were outnumbered by those who weren't in the fight for whatever reason. Some of those not in the fight were actively opposed to women's suffrage. Women's suffrage became a reality after women occupied positions normally held by men and proved themselves vital at the homefront in the First World War.

I believe from reading Moffat's words on women that Clara is written as a projection of what the showrunner believes a women to be. How can Clara become a believable character when she is already an illusion, a stereotype, of what a woman is? Amy and River were created before Moffat had complete control of Doctor Who, so these characters had the chance of having believable characteristics.

 

[Starkers]

Don't be ridiculous. Moffat created Amy and River, and the one occasion we saw River before he took charge was in a two parter he wrote (and as we all know, Moffat's scripts were some of those that RTD never tampered with). And given River was a complete mystery in the library two parter even if he hadn't initially created her he could have taken her character in any direction he wanted.

Talk about twisting the facts to prove a point. Ludicrous!

 

[Relayer1]

One thing I've disliked in almost all of the NuWho seasons was the companions.

Rose was a bad working clss stereotype and Billy Piper's annoying.

Donna was just a horrible character, and I can't stand Catherine Tate. In anything. At all.

Martha was actually O.K. but rather...unremarkable.

I don't mind Clara, but I loathed Danny Pink.

Give me Amy (and Rory too) - Karen Gillan was fantastic...

 

[K'Toska]

Starkers, whoa, cool your jets. Notice how I ended what I said with "haha" as it was mostly a joke. I was, however, referring to the lack of female writers in Doctor Who, which has become a big issue amongst Who fans as of late from what I've seen on various Who sites. It certainly doesn't help that Helen Raynor received a lot of criticism for the two-parters she wrote under RTD. I thought those stories were good (some bad parts too, but ehh, not enough for me to completely dismiss them) so I'm not sure what the problem is. Moffat has even brought up how they specifically tried to look for female writers to fix that issue but had no luck. I find that hard to believe but what matters more to me is that the writing is good regardless of whomever does it.

At the same time, Moffat *does* make sexist comments. Do I think that makes him a sexist? No. People make jokes like that all the time, and we can't assume that every sexist joke means that someone actually thinks that men or women are inferior to their gender. What I take issue with is that many of his portrayals of main female characters have them appearing bossy and manipulative - which to me, as a woman, is one of the worst stereotypes attributed to my gender. Yes, it can sometimes be true, but on the flipside, sometimes it isn't. It would be nice to see more of that "sometimes it isn't" angle to his female characters. If he doesn't think character development is important, fine, but character development is what I love most in fiction.

As I stated previously though, I love River Song. She is one of my favorite characters and I think he found a good balance there. Please don't come at me as if I think everything RTD did was brilliant and everything Moffat has done is crap. Many of my favorite episodes were written by the latter. I also said I used to dislike Amy Pond, but she grew a bit on me, especially once she stopped cuckolding Rory (bless his heart). That didn't, however, stop her from being bossy and manipulative to both. I had the same reaction with Rose based on her treatment of Mickey but it seemed that she grew past acting like that.

As for your comments about RTD's companions:
Rose - Have you ever lost someone dear to you, like a father you'd never had the chance to grow up with? Are you really claiming that it's horrible that Rose got that chance with a father who was apparently pretty much the same as her real father but whose ideas had made him money? You don't think she has anything to gain from that kind of insight? As for the carbon copy Doctor, that was the worst part of that episode. It reeked of fan service. There was even backlash from fans because it was so blatant. It doesn't, however, change the fact that up until then, Rose was doing her own thing in a parallel universe, using the skills she learned with the Doctor to "save the day."

Donna - What? Donna was raised in an environment where money was extremely important and was the standard upon which she was judged. We know that because, well, we actually saw her mother and the way she acted. We also saw Donna start to appreciate herself more and more for what she was. I would've preferred if she hadn't met with such a tragic end, but not everyone has a happy ending.

Martha & Mickey - I have no issue with the two of them getting together. Both had traveled with the Doctor, and it's got to be hard to hold a relationship with someone who can't relate to experiences like that. They had also been screwed over time and time again and deserved a happy ending.

As stated in the title of the thread, my main issue is Clara. And you know what? I am sick and tired of attempted romances between the Doctor and his companions. RTD was certainly guilty of that, and so is Moffat. I thought we'd be done with it after Donna, but no, Amy Pond starts right in with it. Then there's all this weirdness between the Doctor and Clara with him thinking he was her boyfriend for a while and then saying he would stop. Well, it didn't stop. The "romance" between Danny Pink and her seemed so forced and then we have the Doctor trying to assert his dominance over Danny and Danny responding in kind. It was so ridiculous.

 

[Iamnotspock]

Alex Kingston, Michelle Gomez, Karen Gillan, Jenna Coleman, Neve McIntosh, Catrin Stewart, and lets not forget Gina Belman...

...are/were being paid a handsome sum to do a job in an unstable industry. If actors (I am one) had the freedom to bite the hands that feed us to that extent, much less crap would make it to the screen.

I think it's pretty clear that Moffat can be an arse at times, but this whole sexism thing I never get.

It's hard to know where to start, but just to be going on with;

"The original Sir Arthur Conan Doyle stories had a huge female following, which I have never forgotten, and that's because the Victorian ladies liked the way Sherlock looked. So I thought, 'Use this massively exciting, rather handsome man who could see right through your heart and have no interest.' Of course, he's going to be a sex god; I think we pitched that character right. I think our female fanbase think that they'll be the one to melt that glacier. They're all wrong. Nothing will melt that glacier."

So, Victorian women couldn't have liked the Holmes stories because of the plot construction or the vivid characterisation, but could only have liked the character of Sherlock Holmes because of the way he looked on the printed page?

Then there's turning Irene "River" Adler - the woman who beat, i.e. defeated Sherlock Holmes - into a lesbian dominatrix (and thus making the line about her "beating" him crushingly literal) whose every other line was an innuendo, and having her walk around naked for no discernible reason. Have you noticed how the Doctor seems to feel the need to ask Rory's permission to hug Amy? Oh, and just WATCH THIS.

In the above skit, Rory causes the TARDIS to materialise inside itself after being distracted by the view up Amy's skirt. Hilarious hijinks ensue, involving Amy flirting with/admiring herself (obviously a favourite fetish because Moffat repeats it with Clara twice), and the scene ends with the Doctor, rather than telling Rory to grow up and get a grip, telling Amy to "put some trousers on". I can't even...

Because that thinking is never a dangerous path to start down.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

Okay, I was wrong about AP and RS.

There are plenty of articles on Moffat's views on women, some arguing for and some arguing him being sexist. The Bechdel Test was applied to the lead female characters by a group of university students.

http://rebeccaamoore.com/2014/05/29/university-study-on-sexism-in-bbcs-doctor-who-infographic/

River Song and Amy Pond flopped the test, while Donna Noble passed the test.

Doctor Who has a history of depicting males who aren't as virile as the Doctor and females who need a male to complete themselves.

I was reading a review of "Kill the Moon". In that episode, the Doctor says, "It's your moon, womankind. It's your choice."

The astronaut, Lundvik, wants to use the nukes she brought to the Moon to kill the “parasite” so that its birth pangs do not destroy Earth. Clara’s not sure what the best thing is to do and wants to talk about their options. Courtney is all “Oh please don’t kill the little baby.” And the Doctor refuses to give any advice or help at all — even though he later all but admits that he knew that everything was going to be okay and Earth wasn’t going to be destroyed — because “It’s your Moon, womankind, it’s your choice"

Note: Not humankind. The Doctor does not say “It’s your Moon, humankind.” He very specifically says “womankind.” These two women and one girl, they’re not human, not really. At best, they are a subset of humanity, an offshoot, perhaps. And he also doesn’t say “It’s your decision” or “It’s up to you.” He uses a word that is very loaded when it comes to abortion: choice. (And while abortion is not generally a contentious issue in the U.K. the way it is in the U.S. [except in Northern Ireland], British MRAs are just as opposed to women’s autonomy when it comes to abortion as those in the U.S. are.)

http://www.flickfilosopher.com/2014/10/doctor-blogging-kill-moon.html

Using Chrissie's transcript site, I did a search for womankind. It is only said in this episode.

I think it can be argued that Clara's character wouldn't be such an issue, if the characterization, writing, and story telling were better. I think it can be argued further that her character wouldn't be such an issue, if there wasn't a gradual erosion of rights gained by women in the past century. As the series eight episodes were being premiered, there were numerous incidents of sexism and misogyny against women in popular culture. Take, for example, the Gamergate controversy.