Comments on: Whoydensday: The Sarah Jane Adventures

By: Beppie

Beppie — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:23:58 +0000

Yeah, Sunless Nick, I probably should have included Mr. Smith in the “FAIL” list– my boyfriend finds that one really disturbing too. It’s another example of one of Sarah Jane’s instruments of power being hidden behind a veneer of patriarchal convention– in this case, a husband or, as you say, Doctor-subsitute (meaning that the whole pining-for-the-Doctor thing resonates whenever Mr Smith is invoked, even if it isn’t referenced directly).

By: SunlessNick

SunlessNick — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:03:34 +0000

I’m not keen on the computer being called Mr Smith; it seems a bit off, like a Doctor-substitute.

Sarah Jane feels more like a gruff mentor than a nurturer to me, and I like that.

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:10:46 +0000

QoT, I do love the line, “Get away from her you bitch”.

By: QoT

QoT — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:27:36 +0000

@Fine: In defense of Ripley in Aliens, at least the whole Newt plotline is in-character (Ripley overcoming issues re: own daughter dying of old age before she got home), Ripley isn’t the only crew member who bonds with Newt (and the other main female doesn’t bond with Newt at all) AND it all builds up to the most kickass depiction of warring maternal instinct in sci fi (that I can think of at the moment) – in fact, the entire violent-protective-maternal-instinct trope is part of the reason I love that film so darn much.

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:13:41 +0000

Could Jack be shagging both the tea-boy and the tea-lady at the same time? Whoo-hoo!

By: Beppie

Beppie — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:02:12 +0000

Absolutely, Fine. I do think we’re mostly in agreement here (it’s actually one of my post-thesis dreams to write a paper titled “Jack’s Shagging the Tea-boy, while Sarah Jane is Minding the Kids”)– but I do think that Sarah Jane is still a pretty awesome feminist character, and SJA is still woman-friendly and well worth watching.

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 02:43:47 +0000

Yes, but as you say, it still lumps women and childre together. You never see the Doctor or Captain Jack hanging out with kids. But it’s such a strong trope in sci-fi, that when you have a main woman character, she’s motivated by a child. Look at Sarah Connor and even Ripley in the sequal where she rescues a kid.

By: Beppie

Beppie — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 02:21:00 +0000

Fine said:
Why can’t she be a grumpy old child-hater?

Actually, she sort of is. ;) The children get involved pretty much against her will. Mind you, she develops strong relationships with all of them once they do get involved, but it’s very much a matter of getting to know them as people and forming relationships in a normal way, rather than “ZOMG, I love kids so much!” Mind you, as I said in the post itself, I DO think it’s problematic that it conforms, more broadly to a schema that lumps women in with children, particularly in opposition to Torchwood (and oh how I’d love to see a Torchwood with Sarah Jane in charge– Jack can be 2IC), but at the same time SJA does not make Sarah Jane out to be the “nurturing” type– in fact, she often seems uncomfortable and awkward in situations where people expect her to take on this role.

lilacsgirl said:
Personally, I liked the “sonic lipstick” (though I would have liked a sonic pen better) because of the way Sarah Jane uses it throughout the series. It’s coded female/harmless/frivolous, but she subverts that by making it a tool, and tricking people into letting her keep and use her weapon.

Yeah, I definitely see the merits in reading the sonic lipstick this way. It makes me happy that most of the “FAIL” points tend to have a pretty good counter-argument. :)

tigtog said:
It’s very much more targeted at kids moving into teen-hood, so that has to be kept in mind as far as some plotting and character interaction goes

Yeah, it’s true that you need to have a certain degree of plot exposition, etc, due to the younger audience, that you wouldn’t need in a show aimed at teens or adults, and by the same token the teen characters can’t interact quite as normal teenagers (although Luke is NOT a normal teenager, and he’s still learning the rules of social engagement, so it doesn’t matter so much with him). In general, I find that they get around this issue pretty well, but there were a few times I felt that they would have been able to make the same point just as clearly with stronger dialogue.

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 02:01:47 +0000

I haven’t seen it, but just reading this post, I feel pissed off that something with a woman in it has to be centred around chidren. Why can’t she be a grumpy old child-hater? Oh no, she’s a woman. She’s nurturing! I find that a lot more problematic than lipstick. It’s only lipstick, folks.

By: lilacsigil

lilacsigil — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:48:37 +0000

I love Sarah Jane Adventures! As for the “pining for the Doctor” thing, it was strongest in the first episode and has been mentioned only a few times since, fortunately. It’s so much more fun than Torchwood (and yes, I do like Torchwood) and I’ve certainly enjoyed it a lot more than the skeevy, lazy aspects of Doctor Who recently. Personally, I liked the “sonic lipstick” (though I would have liked a sonic pen better) because of the way Sarah Jane uses it throughout the series. It’s coded female/harmless/frivolous, but she subverts that by making it a tool, and tricking people into letting her keep and use her weapon. And I love that Sarah Jane has very human, complex reactions – it’s very rare that an adult on a kids show is portrayed this way. She sulks, gets angry, pretends not to care, holds grudges…and yet she’s still a good person and a heroine.