newt5996
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,685 
Member is Online
|
Post by newt5996 on Jun 29, 2018 5:02:01 GMT
So I’ve been thinking of picking up Series 1 of the spin-off Gallifrey which I know is a more political drama series which I generally don’t mind when done well, so the question is how well are the political messages handled? Are they subtle in regard that without the political context the stories can be enjoyed or do they beat the listener over the head with them?
|
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jun 29, 2018 5:52:06 GMT
I remember the politics as largely being about the various court intrigues or occasionally interplanetary relations, rather than taking on any particular platforms - the big takeaway message I get is actually "Romana and Leela are good and trustworthy, and everyone else maybe not always quite so much". :-)
Maybe just me but it strikes me that the politics are nicely rounded by the alien nature of the concerns that are often at center stage (Transduction Barriers and such are not really anything I get beaten about the head with often, if anyone were), and that same thing also keeps the politics in the series interesting for me. I could probably care less for The West Wing but I adore The West Wing on Gallifrey - they have such interesting problems. :-)
Dunno if that helps any or makes it worse, but you might think about dipping a toe in and see what you think. That might well give you a good sense what you'll think of the range on the whole, it's rather consistent in form and quality as I recall it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 8:05:53 GMT
Yeah, they tend to be dealt with in the same way the original House of Cards handled its political topics. It's a framework to see characters sparking off at one another. They're not really interested in pushing any sort of message, just telling a good story. From memory, the politics actually take a bit of a backseat towards the middle end of the series when Pandora emerges and Darkel (the Inquisitor from Trial of a Time Lord) comes to the fore.
Gallifrey more than anything felt to me like a series about culture clash. It was more about the change that was occurring with the Time Lords and the rough transition period they were being fostered through. The politics were there in the same way they were for The Deadly Assassin. Yeah, the assassin has a stake in the presidency, but at its heart, it's a revenge story for the Doctor and the man behind the man pulling the strings.
|
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 29, 2018 21:07:02 GMT
I think the politics on Gallifrey are...okay at best.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 21:13:56 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 21:28:06 GMT
Yes, let's finally cut out the middle man and just have an absolute dog for Lord President. (I will stop, but I will not apologise.  ) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 21:52:04 GMT
I do think the political side of the audios gets a little over-stated. It's not the oft-quoted West Wing In Space some say. It's not got anywhere near as many allegories as you'd think hearing it was a political Who series. In fact by the time of the box-sets it's much more high concept adventure-scifi than political thriller or intrigue I'd say. At least the audios have shades of grey. One of the (quite a few) reasons I'm not keen on the TV Gallifrey stories is the predictable "A TRAITOR? ON THE HIGH COUNCIL? HOW CAN THIS BE?" repetitions. Goth, Hedin, Borusa, everyone bar Lynda Bellingham...why was there always a traitor?  |
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Jun 29, 2018 22:04:50 GMT
It tries to be a bit overly self-congratulatory in its cleverness at some point. “The constitution says X!” “Ahh, but subsection 12 says Y, therefore I won” “oh ho ho not so fast, subsection 18 says Z, so you lose after all!” (As we the audience have no clue about Gallifreyan legal documents).
It’s a great series that I love to bits, but there are times when its politics are a bit eyeroll-inducing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 22:44:41 GMT
I do think the political side of the audios gets a little over-stated. It's not the oft-quoted West Wing In Space some say. It's not got anywhere near as many allegories as you'd think hearing it was a political Who series. In fact by the time of the box-sets it's much more high concept adventure-scifi than political thriller or intrigue I'd say. At least the audios have shades of grey. One of the (quite a few) reasons I'm not keen on the TV Gallifrey stories is the predictable "A TRAITOR? ON THE HIGH COUNCIL? HOW CAN THIS BE?" repetitions. Goth, Hedin, Borusa, everyone bar Lynda Bellingham...why was there always a traitor? It's a bit odd, particularly given treachery seems such a natural pastime in Gallifreyan politicking. Has there ever been a President outside of Romana that hasn't abandoned the position and been deposed (the Doctor, twice), held it with woeful incompetence (one was a CIA puppet) or been killed in the role (I count at least three)? I'm a bit surprised that news of a new President after a while isn't met with a disapproving, but grudgingly accepted: " Hmmn..."I'm very fond of Gallifrey's depiction of Darkel because her character treated with enough respect that her motivations make sense. She embodies the old Gallifrey that wants to remain isolationist and protected, while Romana embodies the new that wants to stretch its legs and return to having an active role in the cosmos. Both sides are depicted as having legitimate ideologies at their core. Their methods towards achieving them are what's ultimately brought into question. |
|
)
