(no subject)

[dreamer_easy]

SPOILERS for Torchwood: Children of Earth

Although it's diminished, I'm still astonished by the amount of grief engendered in me by the death of a fictional character. Part of it, I think, was simply shock. It's almost funny thinking back to the bewildered comments I made at the time. As I've remarked, I don't think I've encountered a story like this since B7's Pressure Point; I simply could not make sense of it.

, I think making sense of it has been what made it possible to come to terms with it. Jon pointed me to crabbylioness's comparison with Greek tragedy and myth; there are parallels with Euripedes' Heracles, with the various plays in which the Eumenides appear, and also with the story of the Theseus and the Minotaur, and I hope to find more. I found my own familiar parallel in Gilgamesh. If the story has a moral comment to make, it's that sacrificing someone else's family is easy - in fact, it's no sacrifice at all.

It also helped to make a list of comforting thoughts, which I reproduce here:

Ianto died in Jack's arms. He died very bravely, facing it squarely, even making a little joke. He died fighting for his world (as he and we knew he eventually would) and for his family. The last thing he did, before he went into battle, was to look to his family's safety and tell them he loved them. (Contrast Jack on both points: surrounded by dead loved ones, unable to say "I love you".) Jack and Gwen spend the last episode fighting to save Ianto's niece and nephew. (And thanks to that hefty Torchwood paycheck, surely the Davies are set.)

As sorry as I am to lose SF TV's only same-sex relationship, as a childless aunty, I take some comfort in the image of a gay (?) man, with no children of his own, laying down his life in a fight to protect his sister's children, thousands of children from backgrounds like his, every child. Contrast the government types, whose only concern is to protect their own kids: other peoples' children are disposable.

Ianto didn't die in vain. His defiance (and the defiance he inspired in Jack) caused the 456 to lash out. In lashing out, murdering Ianto, a building full of innocent people, and poor bloody Clem, they gave their enemies a way to defeat them. Burn in hell, you slimy crackheads.

I think tencrush makes an excellent point when she says fans are mourning for a character we created in our own minds. The inconsistencies of S1 & 2 left a lot of room for, nay, begged for us to fill in the gaps. But of course, no two of us have quite come up with the same mental picture of the character (mine's going into a novel, oh yes, waste not want not); and our vision of the character and indeed of the series manifestly doesn't match that of its makers. It turns out that Torchwood is not The Jack And Ianto Show, and that we are not its "core audience". Our illusions have been very painfully shattered.

I'm horrified, but hardly surprised, that poor James Moran copped some ugly abuse from fan princesses; that's old hat. I am worried, though, that the small number of really nasty nutters are taking their cue from less insane fans who aren't harassing the showmakers, but are nonetheless blasting the Intersplat with blame and disgust. (I am cringing at the prospects of what might happen at Comic Con when fans once more have some degree of access to the writers.)

The grief and shock are understandable. I can't share the anger and resentment, though I think to some extent it's only natural: it was, after all, a hell of a blow. But why do fans feel they were "led on" or "betrayed"? Did we also create expectations in our minds, filling in the gap left by the omission of Ianto's fate from interviews and publicity? Precisely what were we promised that we didn't get?

Comments

[tencrush]

I will undoubtedly repeat this very wording later in muy own journal, because I'm still trying to formulate what has upset me so. On the Jack/Ianto front, we were promised a development and a deepening of the relationship that we didn't get, unless you count two guys who can't fucking talk to each other until one of them's dying a "deepening of the relationship", which I personally, don't.

But that's a minor point, and as you say Jack/Ianto isn't the FOCUS of this show, but what I WAS promised was a Torchwood Series Three that would be a massive event and hopefully, given enough viewers, give us a Torchwood Series Four. What I got was five episodes in which every single aspect of TORCHWOOD that gave me any pleasure or joy was systematically stripped away piece by piece. From the embossed SUV to the Hub to the pterodactyl and the weevils to the slutty crappy boss and his innuendo-laden relationship with the teaboy, hell, even his squicky UST with Gwen was forced out due to pregnancy. That's why I feel led on. I didn't expect him to do this to the show I loved.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I think that's a good point. The exact nature of their relationship was certainly explored, but it wasn't resolved, which is what I was expecting. In a way, it's analogous to killing Stephen: that future, that potential wasted, those questions left unanswered. I keep thinking of words like "ripped" and "torn away".

It's a hell of a long way from, say, the lolarity of Cyberwoman to the woe of COE. Hell, it's a long way from the first episode of COE to the last one. Bloody hell, it and we were stripped to the bone.

Could I also just add the irrelevant observation that ZOMFG JACK IS GORGEOUS IN THAT FIRST EPISODE. Hubba^2

[jamoche]

In the course of four episodes, counting the S2 finale, we've lost 3 of the 5 team members, plus the hub - so one thing we've lost is any idea that there will *be* an S4. I don't want the Jack and Ianto show, but I do want the Jack and Team show, and Team is pretty much gone.

Killing off Susie in the first episode, after all the buildup in the promo materials, worked in an "anyone can die" way, building up tension - killing off practically *everyone* sends the message "don't bother getting attached to anyone except Jack". It's one thing to worry that someone *might* die; it's another thing to know that they *will* - they're *all* redshirts, and why would anyone want to invest any emotional energy in a redshirt?

Maybe this really was a monster of the week show, not a character-based show - certainly the character inconsistencies are hard to work around; one finds it hard to see how Jack would forgive the Ianto of Cyberwoman, much less have a relationship with him - but the monsters aren't all that great.

[zanda-myrande.livejournal.com]

Precisely what were we promised that we didn't get?

Well, when you put it that way, nothing, really. What we got was exactly what we should have expected--what I was expecting, before three fairly decent episodes raised my hopes. But no, there were no promises.

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

It turns out that Torchwood is not The Jack And Ianto Show, and that we are not its "core audience"

...then who is, exactly? i think that's an important question to ask with coe: if not us - the loyal fans, who watched it because we like doctor who, then stuck with it because it was a big gorgeous silly cheeseburger of a show - then who?

coe was reportedly a massive ratings success, which meant it drew in more 'casual' viewers than ever (which i think inherently ties in with my observation that the less emotional investment you had in the show and its characters, the more you liked coe). but that ratings coup unfortunately came at the cost of the central characters, the central relationship; the entire setting and premise...basically, everything the loyal viewers held most dear. it's like joining a bank, and then three months later, suddenly watching them offer a special promotion for new members, but not existing ones: the righteous indignation and outrage stems from the (not entirely unfounded) feeling that your loyalty has been rewarded with a slap in the face.

tl;dr - i think the loyal fanbase feels betrayed by the writers for snubbing them in favor of a shinier, newer (and more temporary) audience. which, it has to be said, if the viewing figures are any indication? they totally did.

That's about the size, where you put your eyes

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I wonder what the Jack/Gwen shippers, who of course consider themselves the "core audience" (and Jack/Gwen the "central relationship") think of all this.

Re: That's about the size, where you put your eyes

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

from what i've seen - which admittedly isn't a lot - they're upset with jack for running away at the end. especially since gwen asked if he would stay 'for her?' and he didn't.

btw, congratulations, that song is now stuck in my head. what the hell was that from, sesame street? *feels old*

Re: That's about the size, where you put your eyes

[off_coloratura]

Yup.

Re: That's about the size, where you put your eyes

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

:D

*dances about*

[jblum.livejournal.com]

And once again we run into the fact that the actual "core" -- the audience on whose continued viewing a show depends, for it to continue to exist -- always consists 99% of non-fans. Six million people watch Doctor Who every single week (never mind the other millions who tune in occasionally), and only about sixty thousand of them even buy the DVDs. The rest of them clearly don't have our kind of fannish intensity; they stick with the show because they like the stories, or like the characters, and generally care enough... but they don't have the kind of full-on devotion which those of us who get deeply moved or heartbroken or enraged by the stories have.

This was true for Torchwood even in years one and two. The regular viewers far outnumbered the active fanbase... and if anything, like you said, they're less likely to get pissed off than us. They follow the show loyally, just like us, but wouldn't be feeling personally "snubbed" or "ditched" because the show changed. And the fact that we care more doesn't actually make our votes count more.

So I'd guess that the actual "core" audience of the show likes Jack and Ianto, and Rhys and Gwen... but isn't so deeply invested in them that they spend their spare moments mentally shopping for curtains for them. A given relationship is an element of the show's appeal, but it's not the only thing which keeps them coming back. It's like people who watch The Bill, and keep hanging around despite major cast turnover and the odd explosion / fire / whatever wiping out the police station. The characters give them loyalty, but they're also in it for the plots, and the one-liners, and the tear-jerking bits, and the other characters they're introduced to, and blah blah blah...

tl;dr myself. In short? We're not the core, and never were -- we're the fringe of the core.

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

i disagree with your numbers here - i think you'd be surprised how many people actually watched the show just because of the jack/ianto relationship. and i think i see the distinction you're trying to make between the hardcore and the casual fans, but again, i think you'd be surprised at how fuzzy the line between them is.

basically, i don't agree with a show rewarding casual interest over emotional investment. there's a reason it's called a fanbase...you need to have at least a certain number of fans who watch the show regularly and know the storylines in order for the show to have any lasting power. the fanbase is the foundation upon which you build your viewership. if you're going to end the show, otoh, then i can totally see the writers wanting to knock down the whole house of cards they've spent so long setting up...but NOT if they want to keep the show going.

as someone in another of kate's posts said: if team torchwood are all redshirts, then why on earth should we care about any of them?

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

Members of torchwoodcoffee: 2200. Members of torch_wood: 6800. jackxianto: 3800. jantolution: 1200. janto_recs: 900. Ratings for Children of Earth: over six million viewers for every episode. We're a drop in the bucket.

[qthewetsprocket.livejournal.com]

those are all very good livejournal stats. how about facebook, or myspace, or any of the hundreds of other fansites? and what about the jack/ianto fans who don't live online? (unbelievable as it may seem, they do actually exist, i assure you) :)

anyway, more to the point: i'm not remotely saying that a showrunner's job should be to always try and please the smallest vocal minority in their fanbase - it's impossible, for a start; and that way madness lies. but i do think that, if you want your show to have any lasting power, the concept of rewarding casual interest over emotional investment isn't a very good idea in the long run.

i don't think the show is doomed after this; especially if what rtd said about keeping jack as its central focus is true. but i do think that you need at least some emotional investment to stick with a show long-term, and if they want to keep recycling their main characters, it will be hard for them to maintain a solid, lasting, stable fanbase: again, if team torchwood are all redshirts, why on earth should we even bother?

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I'm all right; I'm emotionally invested in Jack. :)

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

It's impossible to get an accurate census of Jack/Ianto shippers, of course, but what I'm thinking about here are ballpark figures, just to give us some perspective. For the sake of argument, let me suggest that we're 1% or less of the viewers of COE.

This is an educated guess, based on some leaked UK sales figures for the Doctor Who DVDs: 60-80,000. (I'm assuming Torchwood DVDs sell about as well, which may be generous).

That means that for J/I shippers to make up 1% of the audience, almost every British Torchwood viewer who cares enough about the show to shell for a DVD would have to be a J/I shipper. That just can't be true: we're a subset of a subset of a subset.

Adding in international sales (if we had those numbers) could move these figures around a bit, of course. But since we both agree that the actual proportion of fans isn't really the point, the question becomes whether the ordinary viewers who make up the vast bulk of the audience find the show's high death rate off-putting. I think you have a good point there - I know we'll all be mentally walking on eggshells in S4, waiting for the characters to FALL LIKE FLIES, and uncertain whether it's safe to fall in love with them. Whether the casual viewer finds it thrilling, moving, disappointing, or just plain confusing, I'm not so sure.