{"title":"Mental illness media and the paradox of ‘productivity’ in Elementary and Limitless","authors":"Sean Brayton","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.3.283_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.3.283_1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44415591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Conference Report","authors":"Caitlin Shaw","doi":"10.1386/jptv.6.3.405_7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jptv.6.3.405_7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41737114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Special issue: The politics and law of Doctor Who","authors":"D. Nicol","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.149_2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.149_2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47678257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book Reviews","authors":"B. Jones, Beth Johnson","doi":"10.1386/jptv.6.2.271_5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jptv.6.2.271_5","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45160584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What is the dominant political ideology of Doctor Who (1963-89; 1996; 2005-)? Scholars and viewers have variously claimed the programme represents political positions ranging from far right to far left, or have denied it is political at all. In this article we offer a structural analysis that partially explains this diversity of response. Analysing three classic era Doctor Who serials with different political flavours, all of which feature political regime change as a narrative element, we identify two narrative devices that function to obscure any political ideologies present. The first, which we call the ‘science-beats-tyranny’ template, foregrounds the problem of a tyrannical regime rather than exploring any political alternatives to it. It circumvents the need for political debate by deposing the tyrant with a scientific fix. The second, which we call the ‘ethics illusion’, uses heuristic logic to effect the appearance of an ethical plot resolution, while skipping over the political details of the new regime replacing the tyrant. We argue that these devices create ambiguity about a serial’s political commitments and also direct viewer attention to generic rhetoric about freedom from tyranny, rather than any more specific political ideology.
{"title":"Knowledge, power and the ethics illusion: Explaining diverse viewer interpretations of the politics in classic era Doctor Who","authors":"Vanessa de Kauwe, Lindy A. Orthia","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.151_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.151_1","url":null,"abstract":"What is the dominant political ideology of Doctor Who (1963-89; 1996; 2005-)? Scholars and viewers have variously claimed the programme represents political positions ranging from far right to far left, or have denied it is political at all. In this article we offer a structural analysis that partially explains this diversity of response. Analysing three classic era Doctor Who serials with different political flavours, all of which feature political regime change as a narrative element, we identify two narrative devices that function to obscure any political ideologies present. The first, which we call the ‘science-beats-tyranny’ template, foregrounds the problem of a tyrannical regime rather than exploring any political alternatives to it. It circumvents the need for political debate by deposing the tyrant with a scientific fix. The second, which we call the ‘ethics illusion’, uses heuristic logic to effect the appearance of an ethical plot resolution, while skipping over the political details of the new regime replacing the tyrant. We argue that these devices create ambiguity about a serial’s political commitments and also direct viewer attention to generic rhetoric about freedom from tyranny, rather than any more specific political ideology.","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42585023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is a curious parallel that unquestionably the most successful science fiction television series to emerge from the UK and the US both began in the 1960s, endured lengthy hiatuses, oscillated between mainstream and cult appreciation, and both currently revel in their crossmedia commercial appeal. Doctor Who (1963-89, 2005-present) and Star Trek (1966-9), through their lengthy broadcast histories, might be used to chart any number of cultural shifts in their host communities. Far from being abstruse and introspective creations of geeky fandoms, both have been central to the popular culture of their respective societies – Matt Hills noted that ‘for much of its cultural life Doctor Who has actually occupied the mainstream of British television programming’ (Hills 2010: 98); John Tulloch’s and Henry Jenkins’ examination of science fiction audiences make it clear that in creating Star Trek Gene Roddenberry evinced a ‘desire to reach a mass viewership and a desire to address the burning social issues of the day’ (Jenkins and Tulloch 1995: 7). Popular television in general has always been a prime site for the exploration of pressing social concerns (Williams 1974: 58), and science fiction is also often politically engaged: Hassler and Wilcox point out that ‘[p]olitical science often addresses many of the same questions as those raised in science fiction...the role of the state...the nature of the just society’ (Hassler and Wilcox 1997: 1). Doctor Who and Star Trek are both notable for openly or covertly addressing the distinctive social and political problems faced by their respective societies. Star Trek returned to the question of the Vietnam War’s legitimacy multiple times (Franklin 2000: 131-50), ‘and other episodes were commentaries on race relations, feminism, and the hippies of the 1960s’ (Reagin 2013: 2). Under Russell T. Davies’ revival Doctor Who continually referenced the ‘war on terror’ (Charles 2008), but the ‘classic’ serial also engaged with contemporary British politics: the Sylvester McCoy series were openly anti-Thatcherite (O’Day 2010: 271-8), while in the 1970s under producer Barry Letts many Doctor Who serials dealt with environmental issues and their politics (Orthia 2011: 26-30). The disparate political engagements present in Doctor Who are generally anti-authoritarian, and the Doctor ‘has consistently ... [the] liberal-populist role in criticising “sectionalist” forces of “Left” and “Right”, and in rebuking the “official” and the powerful’ (Tulloch and Alvarado 1983: 52). This pragmatic politics, however, was not available to Star Trek, which ‘was created as a style of social commentary, intent on criticising America in the late 1960s during a period of extreme social and political turmoil’, and therefore wrestling with the contradictions between the philosophical absolutes of American exceptionalism and ‘manifest destiny’ (Geraghty 2007: 72).
{"title":"Worlds turned back to front: The politics of the mirror universe in Doctor Who and Star Trek","authors":"Aidan Byrne, Mark A. Jones","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.257_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.257_1","url":null,"abstract":"It is a curious parallel that unquestionably the most successful science fiction television series to emerge from the UK and the US both began in the 1960s, endured lengthy hiatuses, oscillated between mainstream and cult appreciation, and both currently revel in their crossmedia commercial appeal. Doctor Who (1963-89, 2005-present) and Star Trek (1966-9), through their lengthy broadcast histories, might be used to chart any number of cultural shifts in their host communities. Far from being abstruse and introspective creations of geeky fandoms, both have been central to the popular culture of their respective societies – Matt Hills noted that ‘for much of its cultural life Doctor Who has actually occupied the mainstream of British television programming’ (Hills 2010: 98); John Tulloch’s and Henry Jenkins’ examination of science fiction audiences make it clear that in creating Star Trek Gene Roddenberry evinced a ‘desire to reach a mass viewership and a desire to address the burning social issues of the day’ (Jenkins and Tulloch 1995: 7). Popular television in general has always been a prime site for the exploration of pressing social concerns (Williams 1974: 58), and science fiction is also often politically engaged: Hassler and Wilcox point out that ‘[p]olitical science often addresses many of the same questions as those raised in science fiction...the role of the state...the nature of the just society’ (Hassler and Wilcox 1997: 1). Doctor Who and Star Trek are both notable for openly or covertly addressing the distinctive social and political problems faced by their respective societies. Star Trek returned to the question of the Vietnam War’s legitimacy multiple times (Franklin 2000: 131-50), ‘and other episodes were commentaries on race relations, feminism, and the hippies of the 1960s’ (Reagin 2013: 2). Under Russell T. Davies’ revival Doctor Who continually referenced the ‘war on terror’ (Charles 2008), but the ‘classic’ serial also engaged with contemporary British politics: the Sylvester McCoy series were openly anti-Thatcherite (O’Day 2010: 271-8), while in the 1970s under producer Barry Letts many Doctor Who serials dealt with environmental issues and their politics (Orthia 2011: 26-30). The disparate political engagements present in Doctor Who are generally anti-authoritarian, and the Doctor ‘has consistently ... [the] liberal-populist role in criticising “sectionalist” forces of “Left” and “Right”, and in rebuking the “official” and the powerful’ (Tulloch and Alvarado 1983: 52). This pragmatic politics, however, was not available to Star Trek, which ‘was created as a style of social commentary, intent on criticising America in the late 1960s during a period of extreme social and political turmoil’, and therefore wrestling with the contradictions between the philosophical absolutes of American exceptionalism and ‘manifest destiny’ (Geraghty 2007: 72).","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48361019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"How is popular television ‘political’?: From the texts of Steven Moffat’s Doctor Who to brand/fan politics","authors":"M. Hills","doi":"10.1386/jptv.6.2.167_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jptv.6.2.167_1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44311353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the presentation of the organized Church in British science fiction show Doctor Who (1963–89, 1996, 2005–present), its implications for debates on the place of religion on British television and the political roles the series imagines for the Church. From 2010, the Church was shown to survive as an important political force into the fifty-first century, having evolved into a paramilitary body. Over subsequent series, splinter groups were portrayed as dangerous militarized sectarians, until the Church’s final appearance as a galactic peace-keeping force with theological trappings in 2013. This article argues that Doctor Who presents a variety of images of the Church reflecting both hopes and fears about its role in the public sphere: from radicalized apocalyptic cults to a stabilizing force, demonstrating an imaginative interpretation of ideas found in contemporary political theology. In an era in which the volume of directly religious programming continues to decline, this article argues that theological reflection can be found, albeit unintentionally, within popular drama.
{"title":"Plugging into the Papal Mainframe: The political role of the Church in Steven Moffat’s Doctor Who","authors":"Andrew Crome","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.213_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.213_1","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the presentation of the organized Church in British science fiction show Doctor Who (1963–89, 1996, 2005–present), its implications for debates on the place of religion on British television and the political roles the series imagines for the Church. From 2010, the Church was shown to survive as an important political force into the fifty-first century, having evolved into a paramilitary body. Over subsequent series, splinter groups were portrayed as dangerous militarized sectarians, until the Church’s final appearance as a galactic peace-keeping force with theological trappings in 2013. This article argues that Doctor Who presents a variety of images of the Church reflecting both hopes and fears about its role in the public sphere: from radicalized apocalyptic cults to a stabilizing force, demonstrating an imaginative interpretation of ideas found in contemporary political theology. In an era in which the volume of directly religious programming continues to decline, this article argues that theological reflection can be found, albeit unintentionally, within popular drama.","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42343340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"That awkward ‘Moment’: Doctor Who and weapons of mass destruction","authors":"C. Jones","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.183_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.183_1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47049098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article argues that while long-running science fiction series Doctor Who (1963-89; 1996; 2005-) has started to address a lack of diversity in its casting, there are still significant imbalances. Characters appearing in single episodes are more likely to be colourblind cast than recurring and major characters, particularly the title character. This is problematic for the BBC as a public service broadcaster but is also indicative of larger inequalities in the television industry. Examining various examples of actors cast in Doctor Who, including Pearl Mackie who plays companion Bill Potts, the article argues that while steady progress is being made – in the series and in the industry – colourblind casting often comes into tension with commercial interests and more risk-averse decision-making.
{"title":"Doctor Who and the politics of casting","authors":"L. Jowett","doi":"10.1386/JPTV.6.2.241_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/JPTV.6.2.241_1","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that while long-running science fiction series Doctor Who (1963-89; 1996; 2005-) has started to address a lack of diversity in its casting, there are still significant imbalances. Characters appearing in single episodes are more likely to be colourblind cast than recurring and major characters, particularly the title character. This is problematic for the BBC as a public service broadcaster but is also indicative of larger inequalities in the television industry. Examining various examples of actors cast in Doctor Who, including Pearl Mackie who plays companion Bill Potts, the article argues that while steady progress is being made – in the series and in the industry – colourblind casting often comes into tension with commercial interests and more risk-averse decision-making.","PeriodicalId":41739,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Popular Television","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49297324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：