Doctor Who?

So, like every doomed relationship in the history of the world, I've gone back to a website that occasionally makes me angry to give other shows another shot - because not only are the recappers different and therefore deserve a chance, I at times encounter a whole new community of posters. For the most part, I've enjoyed the Glee fandom because it's usually more carefree, being a comedy show, and at least one of the recappers - it's split between two who alternate weeks - isn't a whining, venom-spitting asshole. The other is. But I can deal.

My other new obsession is Doctor Who. I haven't ventured into the forum because I'm catching up on the episodes via Netflix, but I've been reading the recaps after watching each episode. Why do I need a recap, you might ask? Because sometimes the recappers, who are all fairly smart, catch something I didn't. And vice versa, but I won't get into that here. The point of this post is really to talk about levels of intelligence.

The guy who recaps Doctor Who is quite obviously a super genius. Vast knowledge of religious literature, literary theory, linguistics, etc. Great, I love all of those things. The problem? His knowledge is overwhelming. He doesn't know how to hold back. There are three - five refereneces or allusions or angry tangents on every single page of the recap. What spurred me into this post was his complete inability to laugh at common physical humor. I'm the first person to roll my eyes at The Three Stooges and whatnot, but sometimes, sometimes, it's funny. I love Benny Hill. Ridiculously familiar sight gags are often funny, and I think it's because we don't feel any need to explain what we're supposed to be getting out of the gag. Mr. Bean doesn't do anything for me, but I don't use my "superiority" to humiliate others for laughing at "lowbrow," "common," "lazy" writing. Actually, sometimes "lowbrow" is far superior to "intellectual" writing.

My friend NGS bought me a book a few years ago because I had it on my wish list at Amazon. It was called The Origin of Stories and was vastly interesting. However, I struggled incredibly trying to read it. Why? The author couldn't just say what he needed to say. I would never shy away from three-dollar words with more than seven letters, but I also don't feel some kind of alpha-male-pissing-contest need to shove an "academic" word into every single sentence. It was a hard day's work weeding through the bullshit to get the heart of the story.

The Doctor Who recapper is intent on this phenomenon called "subtlety." Great - I love to connect the dots and consider it one of my strengths in life. I, like the recapper, hate to be hit over the head with explanation of what I'm supposed to be seeing/feeling/doing. Unlike the recapper, I don't see that happening in the show. If I did, I wouldn't be able to watch it. What I do see is intelligent writers who know how to marry every level of cognitive ability into an organically told story. I don't like to use the word intelligence here - again, the reason is a whole other entirely therapeutic post - but the fact is some people aren't able to see or interested in seeing the symbolism behind certain images/themes/repetitions. Should the authors care? Are they sacrificing artistic integrity by descending into the "lowbrow?" Are they perpetuating the dumbing-down of society by not making the audience work to understand allegory?

I don't care whether the answer to those questions is yes or no. I laughed when an alien was trying to run away from The Doctor, kept teleporting itself out of the situation, but The Doctor just kept teleporting it back because he has the ability to reverse teleportation devices (just go with it). It was just plain a funny sight gag. Now switch to reading the recap. Basically, it made me feel as though I didn't deserve to be considered intelligent because I laughed at something meant for the lower classes. I mean, the recapper was seriously appalled by this so-called "humor." It's the same in every recap whenever there is any kind of toilet humor. I HATE farting jokes, but even I was slightly amused at the episode where aliens who were compressed into suits of human skin kept farting because the gasses used in the compression needed to be released. Did I love it in every scene? No. But I appreciated the ability of the writers to insert as much comedy as they often do into a series which could, without it, be incredibly heavy-handed. I mean, in one episode (a powerful one, I'll give you), atomic-sized bacteria bring a little boy back from the dead and basically "heal" the whole human race in Blitz-torn London. Sorry, but I need humor there. I need dark and at times "lowbrow" humor to make it through something so heavy. Not that I don't hold horrific, true-to-life stories of that time period, like This Way for the Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen in the highest esteem.

I think I often bristle at this recapper because he just seems so sure that his opinion and his level of intelligence are better than Joe Average's. Is he right? Maybe. But even though I know quite a bit about literary theory I don't sit watching television or reading a novel trying to apply literary theory to every fucking scene. The recapper once noted that he used to just let his story tell itself from the inside out - he used different language, more literary and academic, but he used to let his stories revel in their own cleverness. He's too mature and learned for that anymore. Why? I get the feeling he writes stories that try so hard to do everything literary theory thinks is brilliant. You KNOW how I feel about that.

I mean, the scene he became a permanent pearl-clutcher about went something like this: The Doctor + three go to confront aliens. Each are posted at a door. One of The Doctor's companions is just Bubba Nobody who used to be another main character's boyfriend but who isn't "clever" enough for the adventures in time. He's just an earthling along for this particular mission because he happens to live in that time period and has a connection to the characters. He's a bumbling idiot - at times, I will admit, to a frustrating degree. In this scene he gets his foot caught in a mop bucket and therefore isn't where he needs to be and the alien gets away (sort of). But - BUT - isn't that necessary because later he's going to be exactly where he needs to be and no one is expecting that out of him? Doesn't that make him complex, that he's not completely reliable and therefore not perfect? Do we want everyone to be a Mary Sue with perfect timing and always ready with the right solution? No. Characters need flaws. Writers need flaws. I think, I swear, I've talked about this before.

But anyway, another long, boring, angry post where I sound just like those recappers. Who's critiquing the critics? Infinite mirrors to the face of God.

Why do I keep going back? For the nuggets where I see something I didn't see before. For the tasty nut in the elephant poo. For the chance to bitch about the literati. Should I begin capitalizing that? I guess I feel like they're my Dalek race, genetically bred to kill anything different or inferior. If you don't get that reference, I won't judge you. It's just from a stupid British TV show, anyway.