Outside the Government: Reset

(16 comments)

It’s… still February 13th, 2008. Torchwood has rejiggered its schedule slightly, showing next week’s Torchwood a week early on BBC Three immediately following the BBC Two broadcast. This has an interesting effect, as it moves the first airing of the show away from its main airing. Torchwood is still treated as a BBC Two show. But it now has a “for the fans” transmission a week early. It, in effect, makes Torchwood the opposite of event television.

Which is funny, because Reset is, in practice, an event episode. First and foremost, of course, is its ending, which features the shock death of Owen Harper. Although the contours of this are questionable since, again, once this goes out on BBC Two it’s immediately resolved by “Dead Man Walking” showing on BBC Three. (This seems to have basically worked, in fact - 849k of the 3.8m people who watched Adam tuned into Reset on BBC Three. The next week, one million of Reset’s 3.2m viewers went for Dead Man Walking. The total ratings, however, remained about level, making this a curious experiment.) But the other big event is that this is the first of three Torchwood episodes in which Martha Jones makes a guest appearance.

Bringing Martha Jones back is tricky business, to say the least. She has to be brought back, of course. The world of the new series forces that on you. Because companions never really leave and we get them bound into their home lives, returning them to their home lives isn’t a departure. This isn’t a complaint, though it does force a sort of ludicrous escalation of stakes on companion departure episodes as writers try to find bold new ways of stranding someone so that the Doctor can never see them again. The move towards companions who have lives outside the TARDIS is, on balance, a good thing, in that it allows companions who are more than just plot functions. Even the classic series had basically moved to that by the end, with Ace’s disconnection from her life on Earth becoming a factor of Ace actively wanting to get away fro her life, as opposed to just an incidental and unacknowledged fact.

This really is important. Because plot-wise, the companion’s job is fairly straightforward. They’re supposed to act in a particular way within the narrative. In that regard they’re fairly interchangeable. Most basic plots would work with any companion. Nothing about what Jo Grant does is that noticeably different from what Mel or Rose or even Romana would do in a similar situation. Yes, the flavor of it would change - the dialogue changes, and some of the mechanisms by which characters accomplish things change, but the basic shape they fill in a plot is the same. Which leads to a sort of diminishing returns - all you can do with them is switch the iconography around. A knife-wielding savage! A bossy Australian stewardess! Bonnie Langford!

By giving companions lives outside the TARDIS you get the ability to do different sorts of stories - ones in which who the companions are matters. Army of Ghosts/Doomsday plays out the way it does entirely because it’s Rose Tyler in the TARDIS. The story would have an entirely different shape with Martha. This is an improvement - it widens the toolbox of what Doctor Who can do, while not taking away the ability to do anything. But it means that Martha, the one companion who voluntarily departed and is still alive and on a planet the Doctor routinely visits during the time she’s alive, something trickier. You have to come up with a post-Doctor life for Martha.

The problem, ironically, is that everything we’ve just said about how filling in a companion’s backstory and tying them to home is an improvement is rubbish for Martha, who is actually designed entirely in terms of her function on the TARDIS. Martha is not-Rose. This is ultimately handled very well within Doctor Who, with the fact that the Doctor and series defined her as Rose’s replacement being held up and consciously critiqued, thus clearing the way for future companions to be themselves. But it means that Martha has no function as such outside the context of Season Three.

So what we have here is a muddle. The one companion who doesn’t make any sense outside of the TARDIS is the one who has to appear post-TARDIS. And that’s what Reset is stuck handling. And so we see Martha Jones revert to a fairly generic professional woman. She’s a capable Doctor. That’s all there is to her. Even the portion of the story that tries to give her more status than that ultimately falters. Jack builds her up as super-capable, and justifiably so given her single-handed defeat of the Master. And yet in the end she’s captured, tied up, has her bodily autonomy violated, and requires rescue from a man. Literally any Doctor Who companion to have been left on Earth would have been capable of this plot. The only reason to pick Freema Agyeman over Jackie Lane is that Agyeman, at twenty-eight, fits Torchwood’s “young and sexy” aesthetic.

But Martha’s presence in the narrative causes a pile of headaches for Torchwood itself. Every character other than Jack shuts down this episode, becoming good only for some comedy bits. Gwen and Ianto get lovely scenes with Martha, but they get them as guest stars in the Martha Jones show. The problem is the same one that plagued Cyberwoman; Torchwood is the junior show in terms of Doctor Who, and so when Doctor Who shows up on Torchwood it crowds it out.

So what we get in Reset is a neutered Martha Jones who nevertheless overshadows everything about Torchwood except its main character. So much so that the only way Torchwood can reassert itself as a series is to do a sudden character death at the end of the episode. We’ll deal with the largely puzzling fallout of Owen’s non-death over the next few episodes, but at least in terms of this episode what jumps out is the degree to which the episode would be unsatisfying without it. It’s only the fact that the show pulls a huge and series-changing plot twist out in the final moments that makes Reset have any substance. Take away Owen’s death and you have an episode of Torchwood in which the entire team is marginalized in favor a guest star from another show.

And yet it works better and is more interesting than most of what we’ve had this season. But the reason here is terribly depressing. It’s not that Reset is any more interesting than what’s come before on Torchwood. It feels as though it was assembled by committee. Torchwood hasn’t done a miracle drug story yet. And it’s not done alien parasites yet. So check those two boxes off and go. Get a semi-big name guest star as the villain (that guy from The O.C. will do perfectly) and you’re off to the races.

The actual story here is as banal as what’s come before. There’s nothing new here - skepticism of miracle cures and condemnation of shoddy medical ethics are ancient tropes. There’s no insights offered here. Indeed, the story is mostly a bunch of unconsidered moral hedges. In the end it’s not even a story about miracle cures and medical ethics - it’s a banal utilitarianism vs Kantianism debate. Is it acceptable to kill people to save more people? The answer, of course, is that it depends on whether it’s the hero doing it or the villain. When it’s Jack sacrificing Tommy it’s OK. When it’s Dr. Copley sacrificing test subjects it’s not. This is the sort of stuff Lawrence Miles was savaging back in Interference, pointing out that television ethics are really just aesthetics.

And there really isn’t any reason this has to be true. If you can’t find moral obscenities in the medical industry, you’re just not looking. Tregenna pulled off something much more effective last week with Meat by actually paralleling things that happen in the food industry. But here we get a fake moral debate. One gets the sense that somewhere along the line it came from a real image - probably the disastrous trial of TGN1412 that took place in London in 2006, in which six subjects were administered a drug and had severe reactions, including one whose head swelled massively. But there’s no sense of detail to this beyond “man, sometimes experimental drugs do horrible things.” And there are, frankly, just so many better reasons to critique the medical industry. Something that weds a pantomime moral dilemma to one particular moment of horror is just flaccid. I mean, I’m not going to derail this post with a lengthy exploration of the many horrors of the medical industry, but surely something less cartoonish than a drug company that has its own hitman to cover up the death toll of its clinical trials is possible. Something with at least a little bite?

And this is the real problem. There’s no content. There’s no impact. This is just empty recitations of televisual imitations of moral dilemmas, carefully insulated from the possibility that they might matter. The only thing that makes it work is… Martha Jones. Because Freema Agyeman is pretty and charismatic, and fun to watch. It works because there’s a satisfying double act on the screen between her and Jack, and watching a good double act in a pacey action-adventure plot is fun. But ultimately, the story runs smack into the problem that it’s only interesting because it’s a spin-off of Doctor Who. If you take the connection to Doctor Who away, everything falls away and this becomes merely baseline-competent action-adventure with a fun double act in the lead. Which is watchable, certainly. It serves a purpose and is credibly entertaining. That’s enough, certainly. But it still doesn’t make it interesting.

Comments

Spacewarp 4 years, 1 month ago

By well into the second season it became plain that one of the problems Torchwood suffers from is that it's essentially a Doctor-lite episode extended into a series. It's all about how badly people do when the Doctor isn't there. Except unlike "Love & Monsters" or "Turn Left", it doesn't all get cosily wrapped up by next week, when the Doctor comes back from his hols.

Someone dies in Torchwood, they're stll dead next week. Two cast members start shagging, they're still shagging next week. This kind of continuity in an ongoing drama series is what makes that series great, but not in Doctor Who, where although we do like the arcs that have become the mainstay since 2005, we still prefer a modicum of Reset button at the end of each Who story, a clearing of the palate so to speak.

I think this is because when the Doctor arrives on Planet Zog we want him to give his full attention to the plight of the Zoggites, not to be still agonizing about the fact that the Companion got married/left/died last week. Although in certain cases (The Snowmen) the Doctor's damage from the previous story serves as part of the plot, mostly we start each week with a clean slate.

As Phil points out without Torchwood being a spinoff, most of it would be just a formulaic and unremarkable action-adventure-SF-horror series, and you do kind of get the feeling that Torchwood would really like it's audience to forget the Doctor Who connection and just start treating it on it's own merits...except that it can't quite pluck up the courage to drop the connection itself. [George McFly] What if we never mention the Doctor again, and nobody tunes in? I don't think I could take that kind of rejection. [/George McFly]

I wonder if the gap between Series 2 and Children of Earth actually helped Torchwood in this regard? Apart from Gwen's speech about the Doctor being ashamed of us, there's a feeling that Torchwood had finally outgrown its parent series and could stand confidently on its own.

In fact not casting Freema might have served to "cut the cord" even earlier. They only need someone with medical skills to be Owen when Owen's dead, and who also happens to be female for the peril-monkey scenes. It doesn't have to have been Martha Jones.

Would the story have been better served if this had happened? It's interesting to speculate what Phil's post this week would have been like. Perhaps he'd be saying "essential to the plot as she was, the female doctor role could equally have been played by Freema Agyeman as Martha Jones, allowing Torchwood to take another nod to its parent show, and pleasing fans in the process."

Link | Reply

Alex Antonijevic 4 years, 1 month ago

I always thought it was interesting that Torchwood basically gets a Cyberwoman and Martha Jones, while Sarah Jane Adventures gets K9, The Brigadier, Jo Grant, 10th and 11th Doctors, Slitheen, Judoon, Sontarans...

As far as The Doctor goes, all Torchwood can do is name drop him from time to time.

Link | Reply

Amsel von Spreckelsen 4 years, 1 month ago

For people in Britain I think the impact of having Alan Dale on the show was much bigger than if he had just been that guy off the O.C., because what he really is and always will be to many is Jim Robinson from Neighbours, which was a giant part of the childhoods of the age-group BBC3 was aimed at at the time. I think that that informed at least to some extent the pantomime nature of the episode - ex Neighbours stars are a staple of the Christmas panto season - and certainly influenced the expectations of viewers. I mean, it doesn't exactly excuse the wonky moralising on a show that has shown it can do better, but when you've got Jim Robinson playing a pantomime villain for me at least the episode is working on an entirely different logic.

Link | Reply

Spacewarp 4 years, 1 month ago

I still can't figure out why SJA works better than Torchwood, seeing as they fundamentally start from the same base - Doctor Who Spinoff. As you point out there's huge points of comparison - Sarah Jane=Jack, Clyde/Luke/Maria/Rani=Torchwood Team, SJ's Attic=The Hub, plus various guest starts.

The differences though. SJA is quite happy to remain connected to the parent show, and due to its audience, relies on the connection.

Also like Doctor Who, SJA does reset to default after each story, with very little in the way of arc, and fairly minimal in-show continuity. Along with the fact that the cast of SJA are far nicer than the cast of Torchwood (with happier lives), this probably helps maintain the optimistic air of SJA. When Torchwood carries its misery forward from each story to the next it's not surprising how pessimistic it is.

Link | Reply

jane 4 years, 1 month ago

Not being a fan of Neighbors or the OC, I saw Alan Dale's presence in the context of LOST. Given that the show ends with Owen's death, and through that death becomes a meditation on death itself, I thought it rather apt.

Link | Reply

Theonlyspiral 4 years, 1 month ago

"The only reason to pick Freema Agyeman over Jackie Lane is that Agyeman, at twenty-eight, fits Torchwood’s “young and sexy” aesthetic."

I would watch the hell out of that show. Seriously.

Link | Reply

Theonlyspiral 4 years, 1 month ago

Will there be a Pancaking this week if we don't have a waffling? If only to discuss Ender's Game and the monstrosity that is it's author.

Link | Reply

Philip Sandifer 4 years, 1 month ago

I try not to think about Ender's Game much anymore, due to not being a thirteen-year-old boy anymore.

Link | Reply

peeeeeeet 4 years, 1 month ago

what he really is and always will be to many is Jim Robinson from Neighbours

Yes, absolutely. It's hard for Brits in their latish 20s not to have had a Pavlovian response when he appeared. Here's what I had to say at the time:

Jim Robinson From Neighbours to appear in Torchwood

BBC bosses confirmed that actor Jim Robinson From Neighbours will appear in the new series of Torchwood, ending weeks of speculation that this might be the first drama series in the history of television not to feature the prolific actor.

Robinson will appear in four episodes of the Cardiff based saga, which follows the turbulent lives of a coven of bisexual Pterodactyl rapists.

[...]

Russell T Davies confirmed that Robinson would play a character called "The Big Raider". BBC Wales Head of Drama Julie Gardner commented, "you just can't tear Russell away from that anagram generating website."

Torchwood's debut series was watched by a record 40 million viewers, and never rated lower than 96% audience appreciation, and anyone who says otherwise cannot get a girlfriend.

Link | Reply

elvwood 4 years, 1 month ago

I remember almost nothing about Reset other than Owen's "death" - I'd even forgotten that Martha was in it! And that's probably all I have to say.

Link | Reply

Theonlyspiral 4 years, 1 month ago

It seems to impress itself on people in a strange way. It catches adolescents at the right time and they are fans forever. It confuses me completely.

Link | Reply

Triturus 4 years, 1 month ago

From the sound of things I should be relieved that I didn't read it as an adolescent. Because everything I've read about the book and about Card makes me determined to dislike it. But then start thinking that I shouldn't condemn a work of fiction just because of the views of the author. Then I remember that we're not talking about Wagner here, we're just talking about some hack SF writer; and there are loads of those that I haven't read yet, most of whose politics I don't find objectionable. So Ender's Game goes to the bottom of a very long reading list.

Link | Reply

Ross 4 years, 1 month ago

I suspect it's because the one thing the Doctor can't do is grow up. He can come down off his cloud and play with the children once a season fine, but he can't ever walk into the world of Real Proper Grown Ups With Sex and Stuff.

Link | Reply

T. Hartwell 4 years, 1 month ago

I still think Speaker is a phenomenally good book, albeit completely in spite of Card himself.

Someone linked to an interview with Card the last time this was brought up, which I think made a good point that Card didn't exactly write the books he thought he wrote.

Link | Reply

elvwood 4 years, 1 month ago

I first read Ender's Game/Speaker for the Dead as a forthysomething-year-old, and fortunately didn't know anything about Card as it would have put me off (I try to separate the artist from the art, but generally can't manage it if I know too much about the artist beforehand). I think T. Hartwell has it right, that the books don't necessarily say what Card thinks they do. Certainly I'm in no hurry to watch the film, as I can't see it getting past glorying in the surface gloss of violence.

Link | Reply

David Thiel 4 years, 1 month ago

I also read Ender's Game as a fortysomething, and honestly, I found the end quite moving. I didn't read any of the follow-ups, simply because the story seemed quite self-contained. This, of course, was before I knew of Card as anything other than an author who occasionally wrote rather douchey articles on the Interwebs. Nowadays, I can't see myself reading any of his stuff...I know too much about him.

Link | Reply

New Comment

required

required (not published)

optional

Recent Posts

Archive

Tags

Authors

Feeds

RSS / Atom