September 29th, 2007

feels safe there, tardis console

Doctor Who pairing meme

(from everywhere)

OTP ship: Ian/Barbara. Not that I ever fic it or anything. But they're both awesome individually and together they are just exponentially awesome. And their humanising influence is entirely responsible for the Doctor becoming a proper Good Guy. I got a lovely Ian/Babs fic for the otp_indomitable ficathon from bulky_monster. (Runner up in this category: Nyssa/Tegan)

Canon ship: Doctor/Master. Especially after the end of S3, but it's always been there. (Runners up: Ian/Barbara, Fitz/Trix)

"If this happens I'll stab my eyes out with a fork" ship: This category kind of has to be a current one, doesn't it? Or if old-school at least one that might happen in Big Finish. Collapse ) (Runner up: canon Doctor/Rose reunion)

"You are one sick bastard" ship: My kinky/borderline abusive take on Doctor/TARDIS.

"I dabble a little" ship: Mickey/Jake. Because Mickey is great and deserves it. (Runners up: every ship ever, pretty much.)

"It's like a car crash" ship: post-Time-War Doctor/Romana. Entirely a creation of fandom, but who cares?

"Makes no canon sense but why the hell not" ship: This is a bad category for me, I always always always try to have some sort of plausibility going on in the background. Luckily with near-omnipotent time travellers in the 'verse this is quite easy to achieve. So I'm just going to say something silly like Barbara/Lexa.

"Everyone else loves it but I just don't feel it" 'Ship: I'm going to have to say Doctor/Rose here, aren't I? The crucial member of "everyone else" is of course RTD.

"When all is said and done" 'Ship: Hmm, I would say Seven/Ace except I don't ship them because (my inner ten year old insists) that would be Wrong. Oh, OK, I'll be honest: it's Ten/Martha, because it's the first time I ever found myself invested in what would happen to a Who ship rather than just enjoying it as a bit of a fun.

ETA: Help! What's that comm with the long-form Who fic ficathon? If the deadline is nice and far away I might sign up for it to kick my three-years-in-the-making Turlough kink thing into gear.
ditko, dormammu vs eternity

Stan Lee on that Jonathan Ross Steve Ditko thing

So I finally got round to watching my tape of Jonathan Ross In Search Of Steve Ditko off of BBC4. I enjoyed it overall, though some bits felt a bit patronising (and it's not as though I know that much about comics, it's only two years since I first picked up Watchmen and got my socks blown off by it) and Wossy could have done what he did at the very end without seeming quite so smug that at least he'd got what he wanted. And it needed more Doctor Strange. Obv. Everything needs more Doctor Strange. (Though it was really cool that they had cat yronwode on there. I had no idea she pronounced it "Ironwood", though, that was a big shock.)

But anyway, I've been thinking about the Stan Lee interview. Or rather, I should be scrupulous and say "the clips from what was probably a much longer interview that were shown". There's an entertaining bit where Ross essentially tricks him into saying he created Spidey and then he tries to backtrack, but then he starts giving it all this stuff about how Ditko was being unreasonable, because he'd said he "considered" Ditko to be the co-creator, why wasn't that good enough for him, etc. etc.?

Now, the thing is, the one thing that everyone knows about Steve Ditko if they've heard of him at all is that he's an Objectivist{*}. And of course in the Objectivist worldview what people consider is of no consequence at all. The whole point of Ayn Rand's nonsense is the idea that nothing is subjective, everything is objective, and so in Ditko's view (which he would naturally identify as the true, correct, only view) there is some sort of standard out there somewhere for "being a co-creator" that he either meets in the case of Spider-Man or doesn't, and that's the only important question. What anyone else considers is irrelevant.

And if I can figure that out at n removes from the situation (where n is a very large number indeed, and always assuming that I am right in my reading of Ditko's response to the "consider" thing), whereas Smilin' Stan worked closely with him for quite a long time, I can't help but wonder: is Stan Lee just very clueless, or was he deliberately trying to wind his former colleague up with that wording? (Or, the third alternative, were there some Marvel lawyers who advised against actually saying outright that Ditko was the co-creator in case it led to "where's my money, honey?" shenanigans?)

{*} It's very odd how there are some people whose belief in some daft philosophy that I find repugnant affects my appreciation of their work (there is a musician I can't listen to since discovering he's a Scientologist, for example, but I won't name him in case the knowledge has the same effect on someone else out there) and others where it doesn't bother me at all (Ditko, most Scientologist actors outside of films they've made to try and promote Scientology). Some day I will work out a way of rationalising some sort of consistency out of it.
Liz Shaw

(no subject)

Apparently I cannot buy pseudoephedrine in actual useful decongesting amounts because I might be an evil Backstreet Chemist going to turn it into crystal meth, or something.

You learn something new every day.

Unfortunately knowledge does not unbung my head, dammit.