![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccaelizabethOkay, there's other stuff in there, but I keep poking River's story a lot.
... despite choosing to focus on the one episode where she appears mostly as a very small baby. :eyeroll:
So: there must be meta around about River Song. And arguments. And wank.
And it has now become relevant to my degree to wade into that lot and see what people think of her and why they've got a problem with her.
... I'm probably going to regret this.
Anyone know where to find some good arguments about River?
Good in any sense you like, good as in convincing or good as in they've been rolling on for years now and show no signs of stopping.
I know what I think about her after reading all these theory books, but I'd like to see what other people think, and there's a weird shortage of academic essays about women in Doctor Who.
... if anyone knows any academic essays about women in Doctor Who, please to link those too, for they are very relevant.
Today I am not having a tantrum yet. Is good.
... #xfingers#
Now I must go and think of an introduction to explain why I am writing about these things that is not 'the Doctor told me to' because academic discourse doesn't think that's a proper good reason.
(I know proper good reasons but I've got to go line them up and write them down)
... despite choosing to focus on the one episode where she appears mostly as a very small baby. :eyeroll:
So: there must be meta around about River Song. And arguments. And wank.
And it has now become relevant to my degree to wade into that lot and see what people think of her and why they've got a problem with her.
... I'm probably going to regret this.
Anyone know where to find some good arguments about River?
Good in any sense you like, good as in convincing or good as in they've been rolling on for years now and show no signs of stopping.
I know what I think about her after reading all these theory books, but I'd like to see what other people think, and there's a weird shortage of academic essays about women in Doctor Who.
... if anyone knows any academic essays about women in Doctor Who, please to link those too, for they are very relevant.
Today I am not having a tantrum yet. Is good.
... #xfingers#
Now I must go and think of an introduction to explain why I am writing about these things that is not 'the Doctor told me to' because academic discourse doesn't think that's a proper good reason.
(I know proper good reasons but I've got to go line them up and write them down)
no subject
Date: 2013-02-19 06:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-02-23 04:35 am (UTC)1. She's a subversion of the fanfic "Mary Sue" type, or rather of the perception of characters as "Mary Sue," inasmuch as a) no one thinks of Moffat as having a feminine viewpoint and b) she is occasionally allowed in the story to be a great selfish horrible maniac.
2. She's a foil for the Doctor in her use of violence.
3. The 6th and 7th Doctors had a companion with big curly hair called Mel, whom the Doctor originally met out of order. River's birth name is Melody, she has big curly hair, and the Doctor is always meeting her out of order. This is an odd echo.
4. Casting an actress clearly older than the actor who plays the Doctor worked well for her first appearance, but over time that may limit the character's story potential. It becomes harder to portray a young River playing off an older Doctor.
5. Giving her regeneration gave them an out they didn't really take. The decision to have Mels become "River Song" and regenerate into Alex Kingston!River all at once in "Let's Kill Hitler" takes away some options for dealing with that.