My Favorite versions of classic Christmas Songs.

 

I'll let the music speak for itself....

 

Kyrie To Moving in Stereo....God I'm so white.....

  

So I started out here..../\ /\

And Ended up here \/ \/

OMG!  What does it all mean!

P.S. Not looking for an answer here....Jeez! Lighten up!

Now that We've seen the 13th Doctor ( Jodie Whittaker)...

 

I'll say this up front...I'm no fan of Social Justice agendas.

Not because I don't believe in universal equality and fairness but rather because the so-called social justice "cause" is frequently more important than the people it's supposed to be serving.

Now I'm fairly certain I'm not a sexist.  Considering my upbringing that would be pretty much impossible but there is still some discomfort when I see blatant attacks on my gender.

I suppose that much like the LGBT community (forgive me if I missed a letter, I don't keep up with such things) it's necessary to be outrageous if you want somebody to pay attention.

So it is with the 13th Doctor.  In the 8 episodes I've watched of the new series I can say this...

It's not complete crap but it's definitely got an agenda.  Not in a subtle Star Trek kind of way but in a more overt in your face kind of way.

Most obviously and for no apparent reason other than they could,  the doctor is a woman now.  OK, we've known that for a year but the real question is:  Can the performance transcend the agenda.   Can we learn something without being hit over the head with it.

Apparently Chris Chibnall and the BBC don't think so.  While Chibnall is the show runner he's also taken on writing duties for many of the new episodes.

As such his "essence" is all over the show.

If a TV show has a script then I'm going to be paying close attention to the writing.  Plot, story flow and character development are all things I'm watching for.  Formulas become blatantly apparent and with Doctor Who it's obvious that the story must fit the agenda instead of the other way around which includes the choice of companions.

Speaking of which...

The Doctor's new companions are of course ethnically and culturally diverse thus satisfying the agenda.  A fact were repeatedly made aware of and supported by weak male characters who present as flawed and largely uninteresting.  The first in the guise of an elderly "Graham" still grieving over the loss of his wife in the first episode and Ryan a directionless young man with a condition that hinders his coordination.  Much time was spent in the first episode highlighting the fact that he couldn't ride a bicycle because of it regardless of the cheering section comprised of his Grandmother and Graham.  

Lest we forget the third companion, Yaz, a young and impatient female traffic enforcement officer for whom the world isn't moving fast enough.  Other than the Doctor, her character is the only one that seems to show any ambition or depth.  Depth for a social justice warrior that is...

Here's what I've seen so far:

In the episode entitled "Rosa" A pivotal event in American Civil Rights History attempted to be shoehorned into Doctor Who Canon.   It came close to being relevant up until I realized that instead of a thoughtful historical treatment we bore witness to a parade of stereotypes and agendas.  The message was pretty much, "White people bad."  

Almost every character in the episode that didn't identify as a minority of some type was treated as an antagonist.  From the brutish dullard who slaps Ryan for "touching his wife" to the waitress that refuses to serve "their kind."

It's ironic that the treatment of racism in the episode is so heavily dependent on a plot device that is itself a racist stereotype.  The historical event was less important than the agenda being pushed.  In the entire episode the only white character that didn't seem to have it in for the Doctor was Rosa Park's Husband, Raymond who might as well have been part of the furniture.  Virtually no effort was made to explore anything outside of the desired agenda.  

In the "The Tsuranga Conundrum" we're presented with a dilemma onboard a medical transport ship populated by largely clueless characters whose only purpose is to again push the agenda.  From a female General with "pilots heart" trying to save face by relying on meds to mask the condition to her obedient male android servicing her every need to her less obedient engineer brother who finds himself dismissed at every opportunity.

The threat in this episode is a small ship eating alien that was far more comical than threatening.  Overshadowed by an overtly feminist agenda that included a pregnant male patient giving birth and Graham and Ryan serving as hapless midwives.  Assuming this was a human (and nothing contradicted that assertion) the biological absurdity alone should have been enough to dismiss the premise but of course no explanation was offered.  I suppose this is the ultimate expression of "Gender neutrality."

So we've looked at just about everything but the new doctor as portrayed by Jodie Whittaker.  Bottom line, the writing isn't doing the character justice.

I've got no problem with a female time lord.  None whatsoever.  In fact when the "Master" regenerated into "Missy" for Peter Capaldi's 12th Doctor it was a brilliant turn.  We saw an evolution of the Doctor/Master relationship beyond simple adversary.  There was always a hint that there was a closer relationship between the 2 characters.  A relationship that went beyond the simple good versus evil dynamic.  Relationships are never that black and white.  With "Missy" that relationship could be fleshed out.  The gender change served a purpose.

With the 13th Doctor it's just gratuitous...

I'm not sure who coached Jodie Whittaker on her new role but it seems the instruction probably went something like, " Act like David Tennant with boobs and bad fashion sense."

That's pretty much it.  There's no depth here, nothing endearing, nothing interesting aside from gender and that gets old pretty quick.  The most interesting aspect of the character is its use as a vehicle for revisionist history of the franchise.  It's subtle but it's there.

When we're finally treated to the requisite "wardrobe change" scene found in every new Doctor at least as far back as Jon Pertwee, we find Whittaker's character in a clothing store changing room with varied articles of women's clothing flying through the air.  She utters the line, " It's been a long time since I've worn women's clothes."  

I'm sorry, I'm pretty familiar with Doctor Who Canon and never did I see William Hartnell in a dress.  Jon Pertwee wore ruffled sleeves but that was the extent of it.  So where is this OTHER female incarnation?  Apparently there will have to be one now to fit the agenda.

Jodie Whittaker's Doctor seems destined for a fate shared with Colin Baker's 6th Doctor.  That being poor writing and weak fan support.   Even a SJW agenda can't provide enough material to save this incarnation if things don't change fast.

I'm hopeful that things get better but for that to happen the agenda has to get out of the way.  It's stifling the writing and character development.  After 8 episodes I'm not feeling any better about the current run of the series.  

By comparison, by the time Id' gotten over Matt Smith spitting on the Tardis console somewhere around "Victory of the Daleks" I was pretty much onboard.  Considering he took over from my favorite ( current generation ) doctor ( 10th ) David Tennant, that means something.

As Sean Connery said in the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" 

Paradox

Here's a word for you....

Paradox.

I find myself constantly running into them.

Do less to get more....

"Overqualified" for a job that's a perfect fit....

Being "Too Nice"

We're encouraged to do the right thing but often punished for doing just that.  I've found that all too often being reliable, nice and accommodating had gotten me many pats on the back but little progress forward.

It's just not the world we live in.  You can be everyone's friend and confidant but ultimately end up the world's doormat.

That's fine if you're Mother Theresa and have a Nobel Prize waiting for you but the rest of us are unlikely to rise to such lofty heights of perceived selflessness.  Oh and by the way, even Mother Theresa had a strong sense of self-preservation.  She freely accepted medical care but denied any such relief to those dying in hospice.

There's a paradox, a life devoted to ending suffering...most of the time.

OK so she was human after all but for the rest of us unlikely to be elevated to posthumous sainthood what's the point?

For me it just seems natural to want to help but where to draw the line.  I have a problem with saying no to all but the most extreme conditions of self-preservation.

My reward for such contorted altruism is something I frequently have to make excuses for.

I'm no saint.  I'm not perfect but I do always try to understand the other side and in this world that seems to be an anathema.

Killer Instincts and assertiveness, regardless of who gets hurt, are the keys to success.
The other option is just a perversion of the "nice guy" in the guise of the "Yes Man" that acts as doormat in hopes of sneaking up the ranks.

That's just passive aggression.  I'm not about that.

So I suppose my societal fit is a bit off.  I only get pissed off when faced with the reality of my station as disposable because of it.  I know I'm not some unworthy scrap with an overheated sense of fairness.  I am, however, overly concerned with everyone else being happy.  I'm not self-aggrandizing here BTW,  It's something that has not served me.

So be it, I can't and won't be something I'm not.  The payoff isn't worth it.

I do have limits even if they seem generous but don't be surprised if I "push back" when you eventually run headlong into my lowest levels of self-preservation. Everybody does it, eventually.


I'm still a nice guy but I'm working on being less and less of a doormat.

The trick is not to become less and less human.  The definition of which is less than attractive for all those "winners" out there.