![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ravenYesterday afternoon, I went to the village and got rained on, and when I got in, I found Colleen in my bathroom drying off and it seemed as good as an opportunity as any to watch An Unearthly Child and squee about it. I downloaded the first part of it a few days ago and watched it in between bouts of revision, and I am reliably informed not to bother with the three other episodes (I did try to download part two, but for some reason I cannot fathom, it's upside-down.)
Anyway, we watched part one. It was the third time I'd seen it, and I love it. It's so dark and moody and cool, and the mystery that's set up is wonderful because of course, for the only time, we're not supposed to know the answers. I adore Susan; she might be an unearthly child but she's such a teenage girl, in that she gets embarrassed in front of her friends and seeing her teachers out of school is extremely unnerving for her, and, obviously, she probably thinks she has the most embarrassing parental figure ever.
One interesting thing to note about the episode is that like Rose, forty years later, it tells the story through the eyes of the companions, which is appropriate; the Doctor wouldn't be a no-name mystery if we saw things from his POV. I actually feel for Ian and Barbara, as they've got no idea at all what's going on, and for Susan, who wants to belong but doesn't. There's got to be a really good story in that - how Susan, in her time on Earth, settled down and made friends and had the "happiest five months of [her] life", despite the Doctor being tetchy and knowing him, getting cabin fever, in the background.
So, yes. Thoroughly enjoyed that. And while I'm reviewing decades-old Doctor Who episodes, I also watched The Caves of Androzani, and that was good, too. I was amazed at how complex and so-not-a-children's-programme the plot was; it involved arms dealers, drug-runners, a war artificially extended by corrupt politicians, monsters in magma, people being pushed down lift shafts, and a Phantom-of-the-Opera-style mutilated villain in self-imposed exile. Amazingly, all this is going on in the background of the main plot, which concerns Peri and a dying Doctor running around Androzani Minor looking for the milk of a queen bat to cure a disease called spectral toxaemia.
I did not make that up. Please don't think I did. In any case, the complexity works, but it's the end of the episode that stands out, naturally. Interestingly, it proves the Doctor has given his life for a companion more than once, and also proves that I am something of a basket case, as I didn't even know I liked Five until that moment. I liked it very much, but like so many others, am peeved that we are now stuck with Colin Baker over the summer.
And moving on from there, I'm now going to talk about The Time Traveller's Wife, because I've just finished it and it's going to stay with me for a while. I thought it was a wonderful novel, but probably one that you either love or hate. I loved it, loved the writing, the plot, the love story, everything. The basic plot of it concerns a married couple, Clare and Henry, who are unable to lead normal lives because Henry has a genetic condition that forces him to travel forwards and backwards in his own timeline. Stress brings on one of the jumps, but they're unpredictable and uncontrollable and his clothes stay behind him, which results in his getting arrested quite a lot of the time.
What bothers me about it, actually, it that it is a science fiction novel. It involves time-travel, time paradoxes, the killing-your-grandfather problem - it is science fiction, and you can see on the book's cover, in its reviews and blurb, that this aspect is being deliberately played down as if they're afraid to admit it. When we got our first deliveries of the book in the shop, I assumed "Time Traveller's Wife" was a metaphor for something, and only bought the book when I was told it wasn't. I don't know what they're afraid of in calling it sf.
What's being played up is the love story, which informs every aspect of the novel, and that, against all expectations, is wonderful too. It's old-fashioned and romantic but it's got an edge to it because of Henry's time-travelling, and all in all, it's a wonderful book.
There are certain things I like in particular. The idea of Clare knowing Henry's adult self before Henry knows his own adult self is particularly brilliant. I also like that Henry gets to guide Clare growing up, and then when she meets him in real time, she guides him from being a self-destructive druggie into the man she knows.
There was one bit of the book that chilled me; the point where Henry talks about his fear of materialising into the part of the Newberry known as the Cage. It happens, of course, and it scared me. Literal chills. Good writing, I think.
And killing Henry off at the end. Huh. I think it could have had more of an effect if we didn't know so much about it beforehand, and after his death the story just sort of peters out. That bothers me a bit, because it stops it from being as perfect as it could have been (and it's so close) but I do recommend it.
I still have three Target novelisations to read. More reviews forthcoming, I'm afraid.
Anyway, we watched part one. It was the third time I'd seen it, and I love it. It's so dark and moody and cool, and the mystery that's set up is wonderful because of course, for the only time, we're not supposed to know the answers. I adore Susan; she might be an unearthly child but she's such a teenage girl, in that she gets embarrassed in front of her friends and seeing her teachers out of school is extremely unnerving for her, and, obviously, she probably thinks she has the most embarrassing parental figure ever.
One interesting thing to note about the episode is that like Rose, forty years later, it tells the story through the eyes of the companions, which is appropriate; the Doctor wouldn't be a no-name mystery if we saw things from his POV. I actually feel for Ian and Barbara, as they've got no idea at all what's going on, and for Susan, who wants to belong but doesn't. There's got to be a really good story in that - how Susan, in her time on Earth, settled down and made friends and had the "happiest five months of [her] life", despite the Doctor being tetchy and knowing him, getting cabin fever, in the background.
So, yes. Thoroughly enjoyed that. And while I'm reviewing decades-old Doctor Who episodes, I also watched The Caves of Androzani, and that was good, too. I was amazed at how complex and so-not-a-children's-programme the plot was; it involved arms dealers, drug-runners, a war artificially extended by corrupt politicians, monsters in magma, people being pushed down lift shafts, and a Phantom-of-the-Opera-style mutilated villain in self-imposed exile. Amazingly, all this is going on in the background of the main plot, which concerns Peri and a dying Doctor running around Androzani Minor looking for the milk of a queen bat to cure a disease called spectral toxaemia.
I did not make that up. Please don't think I did. In any case, the complexity works, but it's the end of the episode that stands out, naturally. Interestingly, it proves the Doctor has given his life for a companion more than once, and also proves that I am something of a basket case, as I didn't even know I liked Five until that moment. I liked it very much, but like so many others, am peeved that we are now stuck with Colin Baker over the summer.
And moving on from there, I'm now going to talk about The Time Traveller's Wife, because I've just finished it and it's going to stay with me for a while. I thought it was a wonderful novel, but probably one that you either love or hate. I loved it, loved the writing, the plot, the love story, everything. The basic plot of it concerns a married couple, Clare and Henry, who are unable to lead normal lives because Henry has a genetic condition that forces him to travel forwards and backwards in his own timeline. Stress brings on one of the jumps, but they're unpredictable and uncontrollable and his clothes stay behind him, which results in his getting arrested quite a lot of the time.
What bothers me about it, actually, it that it is a science fiction novel. It involves time-travel, time paradoxes, the killing-your-grandfather problem - it is science fiction, and you can see on the book's cover, in its reviews and blurb, that this aspect is being deliberately played down as if they're afraid to admit it. When we got our first deliveries of the book in the shop, I assumed "Time Traveller's Wife" was a metaphor for something, and only bought the book when I was told it wasn't. I don't know what they're afraid of in calling it sf.
What's being played up is the love story, which informs every aspect of the novel, and that, against all expectations, is wonderful too. It's old-fashioned and romantic but it's got an edge to it because of Henry's time-travelling, and all in all, it's a wonderful book.
There are certain things I like in particular. The idea of Clare knowing Henry's adult self before Henry knows his own adult self is particularly brilliant. I also like that Henry gets to guide Clare growing up, and then when she meets him in real time, she guides him from being a self-destructive druggie into the man she knows.
There was one bit of the book that chilled me; the point where Henry talks about his fear of materialising into the part of the Newberry known as the Cage. It happens, of course, and it scared me. Literal chills. Good writing, I think.
And killing Henry off at the end. Huh. I think it could have had more of an effect if we didn't know so much about it beforehand, and after his death the story just sort of peters out. That bothers me a bit, because it stops it from being as perfect as it could have been (and it's so close) but I do recommend it.
I still have three Target novelisations to read. More reviews forthcoming, I'm afraid.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2005-07-05 11:43 pm (UTC)Seriously. Fantastic episode to go out on.
As for UC, yes. Just yes. When I saw it I went "ooooh" even though being about 15 at the time I was more into my kidhood crush's stories...
xx
no subject
on 2005-07-06 11:42 am (UTC)no subject
on 2005-07-06 05:49 pm (UTC)xx
no subject
on 2005-07-06 07:51 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2005-07-06 08:37 pm (UTC)xx
no subject
on 2005-07-05 11:44 pm (UTC)people being pushed down lift shafts
I think I actually gasped when that happened. I totally wasn't expecting it...
no subject
on 2005-07-06 11:47 am (UTC)That was when I started thinking this is not a kids' programme. It never has been, really.
no subject
on 2005-07-06 01:04 am (UTC)SF has never been the literary world's most respected field, and it makes me sad. It's like people assume you can't have a meaningful book that also contains aliens/time travel/whatever.
...have you read The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0449912558/qid=1120611465/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-9745558-0956916)? Whoooo. It's in the class of Time-Traveler's Wife in the way that it's very, very good and people try to play down the SF aspect to get others to take it more seriously; as seriously as it really deserves being taken.
no subject
on 2005-07-06 11:50 am (UTC)I've never heard of The Sparrow, no. Thanks for the rec, I'll be sure to look out for it.
no subject
on 2005-07-06 08:29 am (UTC)I enjoyed it, though it gave me the usual time-travel-logistics headache, especially when I started discussing closed-loop and open-loop time travel stories on b.org.
no subject
on 2005-07-06 11:55 am (UTC)no subject
on 2005-07-06 01:06 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2005-07-06 09:51 am (UTC)There's a film due to come out next year, I think it is. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the juxtaposition of it. I just hope to God that they cast it well.
no subject
on 2005-07-06 11:52 am (UTC)Mmm... they wouldn't do Henry's death as it is in the book, surely? *thinks*
no subject
on 2005-07-07 05:08 pm (UTC)Which is a shame, because there are (it seems) a great many very good SF novels: The Left Hand of Darkness, by Ursula LeGuin, is one I'd recommend in particular. One of the main themes of the book is the importance (and effect) of gender to (and on) society. But it's done using a world whose people have no gender – something which, clearly, can only be done in SF.
I've not heard of The Time Traveller's Wife, though (except on your LJ, of course). I shall have to have a look at it at some point.