Re: Was it Richard Nixon?redstaplerMay 1 2011, 13:25:17 UTC
I'm taking a Doylist bent on this one.
While I don't know where else it would have fit in the narrative, there was no reason to make this man's gay interracial relationship--the reason he left the service--into a "Nixon is a bigot" punchline.
Re: Was it Richard Nixon?sinboyMay 1 2011, 13:49:54 UTC
I'm not saying it's a punchline, so much as the sort of thing Nixon could reasonably be expected to act like. That he didn't just have the guy hauled off and thrown in jail is a sign that he might have been a bit moved.
On the other hand, I've always thought that hiding the race and gender of a character is a cheat that people who think themselves enlightened try to do to tell a story where a person is not revealed to be (Black, gay, Philippino, etc...) until the end is... not so much a sign of serious bigotry, but a sign of just not getting it, and letting the cultural imperative to make those groups invisible maintain power while trying to get liberal cred for fighting the trend.
It's something Heinlein did in the Starship Trooper's novels, so it's not new with Rowling. It sucks every time someone tries it.
Re: Was it Richard Nixon?redstaplerMay 1 2011, 13:55:19 UTC
My point is that it's mentioned early in the first episode that Canton left the FBI because he wanted to get married but wasn't allowed. There was a whole hell of a lot of screen time between then and then end of the second episode to give context to that that didn't involve a "Nixon is a bigot" gag.
We all know Nixon was a monster (hurr), there was no need to bring Canton's relationship into that.
not so much a sign of serious bigotry, but a sign of just not getting it, and letting the cultural imperative to make those groups invisible maintain power while trying to get liberal cred for fighting the trend.
In Moffat's defense, whilethose are some good points concerning Doctor Who, it is implied in his revamp of Sherlock Holmes that Sherlock himself may be gay, but is too married to the job to have any real interest in that direction.
I'd also bring up Moriarty, but I fear your head would explode. :D
Ugh yes all of this. I'm feeling now like... all of those things that I was saying that I wished Moffat would do (or do more)? Actually, no. Please don't. You try to do it and then this happens, so maybe just stick to your comfort zone after all. Please.
Also, you forgot the part where Nixon looks at the camera and boggle-eyes. THIS MANLY MAN IS GAY? HOW WACKY AND UNEXPECTED! ~laugh-track~
I'm also irked, but given that the episode is set less than a month after the Stonewall riots, I can't see Nixon reacting any more positively than he did.
On the gripping hand, Moffat could have confirmed Canton's orientation without making it a punchline. Hell, maybe we could have even met the boyfriend.
I was wondering about that guy, too. Again, on the one hand, cool! (The fact that's it's historically feasible: even cooler.) On the other hand, isn't he the agent who gets singled out for "letting" the Doctor sneak into the Oval Office?.
Also, the homeless guy who approaches and then flees the Littlest Time Lord? Black. *sigh* Oh, Moffat.
Comments 35
Reply
While I don't know where else it would have fit in the narrative, there was no reason to make this man's gay interracial relationship--the reason he left the service--into a "Nixon is a bigot" punchline.
Reply
On the other hand, I've always thought that hiding the race and gender of a character is a cheat that people who think themselves enlightened try to do to tell a story where a person is not revealed to be (Black, gay, Philippino, etc...) until the end is... not so much a sign of serious bigotry, but a sign of just not getting it, and letting the cultural imperative to make those groups invisible maintain power while trying to get liberal cred for fighting the trend.
It's something Heinlein did in the Starship Trooper's novels, so it's not new with Rowling. It sucks every time someone tries it.
Reply
We all know Nixon was a monster (hurr), there was no need to bring Canton's relationship into that.
not so much a sign of serious bigotry, but a sign of just not getting it, and letting the cultural imperative to make those groups invisible maintain power while trying to get liberal cred for fighting the trend.
Aaaaaaaand that's Moffat in a nutshell.
Reply
I'd also bring up Moriarty, but I fear your head would explode. :D
Reply
That's not relevant here.
Reply
Reply
Also, you forgot the part where Nixon looks at the camera and boggle-eyes. THIS MANLY MAN IS GAY? HOW WACKY AND UNEXPECTED! ~laugh-track~
Reply
With the legacy of the Whoniverse when it comes to diversity - THIS is the best they can do?
It hardly even counts as tokenism!
Reply
Reply
On the gripping hand, Moffat could have confirmed Canton's orientation without making it a punchline. Hell, maybe we could have even met the boyfriend.
Reply
And yes, it would have been nice to have met the boyfriend.
I'm just afraid Moffat's going to insist it was the black Secret Service agent we met in the first episode.
(Also, wtf, a black secret service agent in '67? Seriously?)
Wait, nevermind. There were black Secret Service agents as early as '59.
Wow. I was not expecting that.
Reply
Also, the homeless guy who approaches and then flees the Littlest Time Lord? Black. *sigh* Oh, Moffat.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment