Dept. of Media Skiffy

[kaffy_r]

Good, Challenging, and Confusing

It's about time, and inhuman personages of great but fluctuating powers, battling against incomprehensible dangers that are, again, largely time-connected, and about the results on humans caught in the wash of the battles, even when they are sometimes the cause of the battles.

Nope. Not Doctor Who.

It's "Sapphire and Steel." Which is why I titled this post as I did. Because that's what I think anyone could reasonably call "Sapphire and Steel", the British ITV show from the 1970s to which the redoubtable thisbluespirit  introduced me a couple of years ago.

It's mysterious, incomprehensible, funny, brilliant, ridiculous (a deadly pillow! An evil round patch of light!) and unexpectedly terrifying (you'll believe a pillow is deadly! And that a round patch of light is evil!) It's got Joanna Lumley and David McCallum and, from time to time (see whut I did thar), the wonderful David Collings. It's very slow, but it's slow for a reason. And so many of its shots are beautifully composed to take advantage of the slowness ....

... ahem. Yes. I rather like it.

And you should watch it. Or at least I think you should give it try.

And why do I bring this up? Because today, at the end of an afternoon spent attempting to introduce a fannish friend who is not into televised skiffy to some various aspects of same (it's a long-term project spearheaded by another friend, and entered into willingly but bemusedly by the first person), as we were clearing up, the spear-header and I were talking about favorite series, and I happened to mention S&S. Oh, the friend says, I have that collection. It turns out she was less impressed by it than I was, and she handed the entire collection to me.

*cue pictures of kaffy_r  dancing quietly in her head*

Having seen S&S only on YouTube, to be able to have my own actual collection? Well, the whole "dancing in her head bit" is quite true.

As for the rest of the afternoon, well it was good, challenging and confusing as well. The person to whom we were introducing skiffical television liked, as far as I could see, the first episode of the revived DW, "Rose" or at least was positively amused and curious about it. The person was, again as far as I could see, equally amused by "Once More With Feeling" from Buffy.

But, in what came as a surprise to me, the person seemed to be almost insulted by the first episode of Firefly, for reasons that I truly, deeply disagree with, and which appear to point to a them having a sincerely different way of viewing skiffy, SF/fantasy, or indeed the world, than I have. I shall have to think on that deeply, because I'd personally predicted that the person would like Firefly and be completely contemptuous of DW. And thus do humans continue to confound, confuse and challenge me.

Still, the person did not immediately declare that the crash course in introduction to TV skiffy was over and done with. More afternoons are therefore possible in future. I look forward to it.

(Still. Rearing back because Firefly has wooden kitchen tables on space ships, or because shipping containers in the far future look like ... shipping containers ... well, as I said, I must think on that deeply.) And you know I still love you, right?)

Comments

[kerravonsen]

It's mysterious, incomprehensible, funny, brilliant, ridiculous (a deadly pillow! An evil round patch of light!) and unexpectedly terrifying (you'll believe a pillow is deadly! And that a round patch of light is evil!)

I think the round patch of light worked better than the pillow, IMHO.
But yes, S&S was awesome. I think they cranked up the Atmospheric to eleven. Have you listened to the Big Finish audioplays? They are really really good.

Rearing back because Firefly has wooden kitchen tables on space ships, or because shipping containers in the far future look like ... shipping containers ... well, as I said, I must think on that deeply.

Yes, it does require a rethink, doesn't it? Perhaps they think that The Future Must Be Shiny. I wonder how the person would react to the DW episode "Gridlock", especially if seen back-to-back with "New Earth".

[kaffy_r]

Audio plays for S&S? This is intriguing!

I wonder how the person would react to the DW episode "Gridlock", especially if seen back-to-back with "New Earth".

At this point, I'm inclined to believe they would accept the DW stuff. I mean, they liked "Rose", with living plastic and time travel, for heaven's sake, whilst railing against Firefly because it didn't make scientific sense. It may be beyond my ability to get them past whatever overly narrow, rigid and illogical definitions of science fiction they believe in, in order to enjoy the story. And ultimately it's their decision as to what they enjoy. I'd rather they acknowledge that it's a difference in taste, rather than an issue of differing semantics over genre categorization, but I suspect I'd lose that fight.

[kerravonsen]

Audio plays for S&S? This is intriguing!

Yes! Big Finish - whom you may be aware of as the creator of lots of Doctor Who audio plays - also did three seasons of Sapphire & Steel. They did not, alas, manage to get the original cast to do this, but... David Warner!

I mean, they liked "Rose", with living plastic and time travel, for heaven's sake, whilst railing against Firefly because it didn't make scientific sense.

Hmmm. Possibly this is an example of -- but I can never think of a consistent term for it, so today I'll be calling it the "charity level". This is where an episode starts off with a certain amount of "charity" in the mind of the viewer, and as the episode goes on, the charity level either increases (as the viewer enjoys themselves more) or decreases (as the viewer is not enjoying themselves). If the "charity level" is high enough, things that would normally irritate the viewer (such as scientific inaccuracy) are forgiven because the viewer is having so much fun. If the charity level drops, however, more and more irritants are not forgiven.

I find that this theory explains why the same person can rail against scientific inaccuracy for one program while happily overlooking it with another.

Mind you, I think this is the kind of situation where I would be inclined to interrogate that person in order to grasp what their understanding of the genre is, and quite possibly end up frustrated because that person has insufficient self-awareness to figure out why they're reacting that way.

[kaffy_r]

I like your idea of a "charity level," and that may be exactly what my friend was working with.

Mind you, I think this is the kind of situation where I would be inclined to interrogate that person in order to grasp what their understanding of the genre is

This person is definitely a life long fan of literary SF, and a long time member of traditional SF fandom. I probably will chat with them about this, but I doubt I'll be able to bridge the gap. My friend and I are probably ultimately willing to live and let live with each other's genre idiosyncrasies.

[shanghaied]

I think one of the awesomest things about Firefly was the message that we went to the stars, (realistically) didn't get very far, and hey presto, the only alien monsters out there were us - a message gorgeously reinforced in Serenity.

My own favourite science fiction films tend to the more scientifically plausible-ish ones, e.g. Strange Days or I Am Legend or 28 Days Later. But I am willing to put up with bad science - sometimes ridiculously bad science - for the sake of beautifully made, beautifully acted films such as Sunshine. In films and telly, I do, however, unreservedly love a lot of sci-fi, science fantasy, and plain old space opera. And come on, Firefly IS space opera. Or more precisely, horse opera set in space :D

[kaffy_r]

But I am willing to put up with bad science - sometimes ridiculously bad science - for the sake of beautifully made, beautifully acted films such as Sunshine.

Indeed. I'm even more apt to take this attitude because I often don't catch what may or may not be completely implausible science and because I tend to agree with the SF writer and critic Damon Knight.

He grew up in fandom in the 30s and 40s before becoming a pro, and was thus privy to fannish fights over what did, and did not, constitute "true" science fiction. Perhaps irritated by that kind of pilpul-ish hyperfocus, perhaps irritated by his fannish friends - and perhaps aware that the term "science fiction" had been an arbitrarily coined term for a sub-genre of literature that began with no pretentions towards being scientifically accurate - he stated "Science fiction is what I point to when I say science fiction."

And yes, Firefly is that grandest of western horse-burners-cum-space opera. Heh.

[shanghaied]

Since I know pretty much nothing about fandom history (or fandom in the Now, apart from what you tell me here), I shall respond with the most appropriate thing I can think of. So here... ~puts on Benjamin J Grimm voice~ IT'S FILKIN' TIME! I'm sure you'll recognise the original song...

Thought Miranda only was a fairy tale
Meant for shiny folk but not for me
Alliance came and got me
It was all serene
Thought I'd found the answer to my dreams

Then I snorted Pax
Now I am a Reaver
Without a trace
Of sane in my mind
I want blood - ooh, I am a Reaver
Mad as a seizure til I die

I thought rape was more than just a givin' thing
Now, the more I rape, the more I eat
What's the use of mercy, hey hey hey
I can chew your brain! Hey, hey, hey
Give you all a universe of pain

Cause I snorted Pax
And now I'm a Reaver
When I attack
I doubt you'll be fine
I love blood - ooh, I am a Reaver
Sick as a fever, say bye-bye!

Yeah, I'm out in Space
I am a Reaver
I cut my face
It's cannibal time
I am a Reaver, yeah yeah yeah yeah
I'm a Reaver...

~ducks and runs away~

;

[kaffy_r]

*slow clap*

Wait! Come back! Neil Diamond would be proud!

[shanghaied]

By which I imagine you mean 'Neil Diamond would sue' :P

[kaffy_r]

*grins like a mad grinning thing*

[shanghaied]

~grins back at you~

BTW we just got back from seeing GotG. I never thought 'Vin Diesel out-acted the entire rest of the cast' was a sentence I'd ever hear myself say, but there you go. My DB, who is noticeably less discriminating than I am about films, said that he had expected a lightweight but well-made piece of first-rate froth but what he got was a fatally flawed, poorly thought-out piece of third-rate meh. I think he's too kind, but I will say that the tree and - to a lesser extent - the raccoon were a win; they were actual characters with believable emotions and a surprisingly touching relationship. Go figure.

[kaffy_r]

So; not one to put on your Netflix queue. Heh. We do agree on the surprising sweetness of Groot's relationship with Rocket.

[shanghaied]

What is this Netflix of which you speak, Earthling? (Seriously, I assume it's some sort of internet-based film rental? ~goes to wiki it~ Oh dear dogs, no. Streaming? Eww! Also, apparently there is nothing of that ilk down here, so iz moot.)

I think it's a bit sad that they could get one thing - tree and raccoon relationship - so right and fall down so badly on the rest. Was painful to see Lee Pace so constrained by weak directing - compare Eccleston's turn as Malekith in Thor 2, not exactly a demanding role but he was encouraged to imbue it with true menace and he succeeded. Gillan was simply awful, and since we've seen her display acting chops on NuWho, I'm blaming the director. And has it ever been established that Glenn Close can act at all? Because here she was nothing so much as distilled essence of that horror my DB once made me sit through, namely the infamous Star Wars Holiday Special. (Saldana was quite competent, but I prefer her as Fauxhura...)

Ooh, speaking of NuWho, I just found out that the opening episode will have Strax and Vastra. That's a carrot I will suffer the Moffat fanfic-cum-budget-offenses-to-the-senses for :D

[a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com]

YAY!!! S&S collection of one's own!! Seriously need to see that sometime...

*Grins* Glad they enjoyed DW and OMWF from BtVS...but...insulted over Firefly?

Oh!! I know what it was! The realism. Everyone likes their scifi startrekky and FF definitely is...not. The ships are functional and homey and...not pretty. And the worlds are poineer worlds. I can understand her 'Bzuh?!' though I adore Firefly like burning! OMFG...

World never stops turning Badger.

That only matters to the people on the Rim.

*SQUISHES*

[kaffy_r]

S&S may be the strangest skiffy series I've ever liked. It's strange like some of the best anime is, I guess. Heh.

World never stops turning Badger./That only matters to the people on the Rim.

Those are such great lines, aren't they?

I need to talk to the person more about what bothered them, because I could be wrong about what seemed to be bothering them, but it did seem to bend in the direction you suggest. On the other hand, the person said that their belief probably gets suspended in different ways than mine, and that makes as much sense as anything.

[flowsoffire.livejournal.com]

Yay for the collection! Sounds brilliant :D

Converting people to shows you love is so much fun! :) But indeed, sometimes they don't react at all as expected. And I guess the realism could really make some people feel weird, to the point of not being able to get into the story… We all react differently, indeed…

[kaffy_r]

Yay for the collection! Sounds brilliant :D

Oh, it's definitely brilliant; skewed, but brilliant. If you want to try it, start with the multi-episode story arc called "Assignment One" on YouTube. Stick with it past the slowness and the occasionally bad child actor, and I think you'll find it at least interesting.

When it comes to my friend and their reaction to Firefly, I shall just have to see how they react to the next episode. Heh.

[flowsoffire.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the heads up :) I'm terribly bad at finding time to watch *anything* (and mostly sticking to classic!Who when I do manage…), but I'll remember that if I ever get the occasion :)

Indeed, you'll see with time…

[thisbluespirit]

Oh, how lovely! *\0/* Enjoy your new-found ownership of S&S! Just watch out for clocks doing weird things and stuff vanishing inexplicably. (This happened to me. Although actually, I blame my parents. They watched some of it with me and then found temporal problems all over my house.)

Introducing people to new shows is always fun yet nervewracking - there's no guarantees for what people might like, only educated guesses. (About the preferences - both Rose and Buffy have real world/contemporary settings adn I've often found that of the people I know who dislike sf/fantasy, it's things that are a completely imagined worlds that are often the biggest problems for them - it's not real, therefore it doesn't matter, they can't suspend their disbelief or it's just 'silly'. But if you have relatable characters on a recognisable backdrop, sometimes they're won over.) It's always interesting, though: we each bring a unique reading to a text and that can be frustrating, baffling and saddening, but it's also really exciting, too. :-)

[kaffy_r]

(This happened to me. Although actually, I blame my parents. They watched some of it with me and then found temporal problems all over my house.)

Oh, dear ... *looks about her to make sure everything is in the same time period as she is*

My friend appears to be reacting in the "why would they have wooden tables on a space ship, and why would things in the far future look so much like today" problems, as well as, I think, possible issues with projectile weapons being used on said space ship. But I'll eventually find out, or at least I hope I will.

[thisbluespirit]

:-)

I had this clock that had stopped months before and it suddenly started working again at odd moments, so I'd come down and the time would have changed, but the clock was still stopped... :lol:


Ah, well, I've never watched Firefly, but I can see why that juxtaposition would throw someone. It sounds weird to me and I've watched a lot of odd things in my time (as anyone on my flist knows well by now.)

[kaffy_r]

It's not actually too weird; the idea that, once space travel becomes extremely common, with gravity on the ships, etc., life would continue, and wouldn't necessarily be all shiny and Star Trek-y.

So, when you transport anything from place to place, a metal shipping container is pretty much going to look like a shipping container in any age. And there's no reason not to put a wooden table on a space ship, as long as it's nailed to the floor, so to speak.

On frontier worlds, where people got dropped with very little to start with, the resulting societies would work with what they had around them - that might be wood or stone, and wouldn't necessarily look like what we think of as "futuristic." Wood and stone have been used for millenia, houses and buildings have looked much the same.

Ultimately the reality is that we don't know what the future will look like, but chances are it's going to look a lot more like what we have than we think, and a lot less like extruded future plastic than we once thought. Heh.

Oh, and if you get the chance to watch Firefly (only one season long, so not much of a time burden), you might like it. It's witty, and well-acted, and can break your heart a little bit, too.

[thisbluespirit]

I'm afraid I watched Serenity a while ago and I didn't like it at all, so I don't really ever plan to see Firefly. You never know, though. Someone might bully me into it one day!

And I just meant the wooden table specifically sounded weird. A colony might be at any stage of development, or even have regressed; that's part of the fun of imagining them. (Ships, planes, cars, trains today all tend to have custom furniture out of similar material, though, probably space-saving, tougher, less flammable, so I'd expect similar from a space ship unless it was a really huge one.)

[kaffy_r]

You never know, though. Someone might bully me into it one day!

Heh. Not me - I'm the first person to understand that some things just aren't everyone's cup of tea. I couldn't watch Merlin for a variety of reasons, and won't ever watch Breaking Bad, although folks I respect watched both and loved them. The idea of bullying someone into watching a show ... eeurgh!

The table makes sense in-world, because the folks who bought the ship essentially bought a hulk and had to retrofit it. Their living quarters are patched together with things they could beg, borrow or steal, and the kitchen area is the one area that they specifically made as homey as possible, probably because the rest of the ship is pretty bare and grim. As a psychological move to keep one's sanity in deep space, it makes sense. And if the rickety old ship goes to pieces, one wooden table wouldn't make a difference one way or another.

[thisbluespirit]

I know! Indeed. I didn't mean nasty bullying, just the nice sort. Like, if someone lent it to me, I'd probably give in because of curiosity, but I'm not going to go out and buy it any time soon. Funnily enough, those are two shows I didn't watch and in the latter case definitely won't be watching, or at least not in the near future. And I'm quite sure most people I know wouldn't really want to watch many of my old TV shows I've suddenly fallen inexplicably in love with, either. :-)

I'm really not getting at anything; I remember their ship being a complete hodge-podge & that was fine with me. It just literally sounded like an odd juxtaposition in a solitary sentence, that's all. /o\

I think it might even have been watching it so soon after I saw Blake's 7 first, because it really does cover a lot of the same themes, and I was newly and utterly in love with a cracky, tacky, awesome thing of snark and crappy SFX and a villain with the most amazing taste in fashion, and it couldn't compare. No Michelin Men walked on set at the most inappropriate moment - how's a girl supposed to deal with proper effects and things? ;-D

[apostle-of-eris.livejournal.com]

(*laugh*)
I certainly have every hope of continuing the remedial media class, but you seem very substantially less science/tech oriented than me. Firefly is science fantasy, a la Star Wars, not science fiction. There are too many things which are physically nonsensical.
ymmv, ianal, park and lock it, LS/MFT

[kaffy_r]

I think we're dealing with semantics, though; in my head, it's impossible to completely compartmentalize science fiction and fantasy, or space opera, or spec fic-based media, etc. etc. in the same way I once thought it could be compartmentalized. As I've grown older, I've decided that "skiffy", far from being a mansion with different rooms into which you can separate sub-sub-genres, is more like a humongous evening salon held in one great ballroom; where there are comfortable couches and chairs scattered around; people tend to congregate in one area to talk about one thing, but the conversations spill over and mix into conversations in other areas.

It's a discussion I've had often with BB.

The best thing to do with live media is to call it "skiffy" and focus on the story, the plot, the characterization, the direction, and the imagery.

ETA: LS/MFT? LMAO! *goes in search of Jack Benny*

[sallymn.livejournal.com]

I saw a bit of it and didn't understand a word... one of these days I'll get to see more :)

[kaffy_r]

You saw a bit of S&S? Depending on what assignment you got dropped into, I can understand lack of understanding, as it were. But in my very, very humble opinion, it's worth trying. Heh.

[thisbluespirit]

I saw a bit of it and didn't understand a word..

You know what its entry in The Guiness Book of Classic British TV says? "There are many methods of holding a television audience: interesting characters, intriguing plots, sparkling dialogue, stunning direction. Total lack of explanation is not generally regarded to be one of those methods..." :-D

Never expect to understand it. Whether you'll like it if you see it, I don't know but some of the unusual films you describe sound an awful lot like S&S to me, and the reasons I like it.

Offers you smirking Element gifs, because I know you don't mind pretty anyway & I don't think Kaffyr could object. ♥



*scarpers out of other people's threads and journals*

[kaffy_r]

OOOOOOOoooo! Pretty GIFs! May I gank them, with credit?

And I understood the show, I really did!

mostly ....

[thisbluespirit]

Well, I just stole them from somebody else. I had to go and look them up again, and it was viro_blizzard on Tumblr. They are very pretty, aren't they?

And :lol: I didn't! But I loved pondering the mystery.

[kaffy_r]

I admit, my understanding was sort of Zen. I understood all I needed to, I guess. Heh. And thanks for going to the trouble of checking to you could let me know who to credit; that's service above and beyond!

[thisbluespirit]

Heh, Zen understanding is a very good way of putting it! I understood it that way too. :-D

[clocketpatch]

After being won over to Blake's 7 (I will insist on the apostrophe) by lost_spook last fall I decided to go for broke and watch the OTHER show she's been steadfasting making positive noises of the "you should really watch this" variety about for the past several years.

While I didn't fall into a lovely New Fandom like with B7 (partially because... I'm not sure that fandom exists like that for S&S?), I did very much enjoy it and was happily scared out of my wits by the Train episode. Good stuff that I plan on re-watching at some point in the future.

Your friend's dislike of the first episode of Firefly confuses me. I recall not being especially fond of the first episode myself (I haven't seen it for ages so I couldn't tell you specifically what it was I didn't like) but I did like the rest of the show just fine. And the gritty juxtaposition of ordinary, just-a-bit-battered objects making do next to flashy future space tech was one of the things that sold it to me.

[kaffy_r]

There's sort of a tiny S&S fandom, with at least one tiny community over on Dreamwidth (I think), and I enjoy dropping by it occasionally, but there's definitely not quite the vigorous fandom that other shows enjoy. Still, it's good to know that you enjoyed it. And yes, the story with the train (Assignment Two, I think, if it's the one in the train station) was pretty dark and terrifying, as well as a bit horrifying. That was the one where it turned from a children's show - which it was, no fooling, supposed to have been started as - into an adult fantasy.

Your friend's dislike of the first episode of Firefly confuses me.

I direct you to apostle_of_eris's comment, above, and my response. I think we're dealing with perception and semantics here. I'm much less fussed about it today than I was, but it still croggles me a little.

oh, for crying out loud

[(Anonymous)]

I am still resisting itemizing in lengthy detail, but
Firefly's physics is completely bogus.
Firefly's engineering is completely bogus.
Firefly's biology is completely bogus.
Firefly's economics is completely bogus.
Firefly's psychology and social dynamics are completely bogus.
etc.
It's really cheesy pre-Stanley Weinbaum 1930's space opera.
I'm interested in science fiction, not stuff with a thin coat of science fiction paint.

Re: oh, for crying out loud

[kaffy_r]

Is that you? :)

Heh. Well, if it is you - I'm impressed that you decided all that, on the strength of one episode, whilst deciding that Doctor Who - whose first modern episode featured living plastic turned on by a radio-ey signal bounced off a Ferris Wheel by a lump of sentient something, defeated by a humanoid alien who breaks the laws of physics to travel in time in a box that's bigger on the inside fit your definition of science fiction at least enough to enjoy.

I'm interested in science fiction, not stuff with a thin coat of science fiction paint.

I don't think there's much out there in live media that fits your rather stringent bill. And, when you think about it, the percentage of written skiffy that fits your parameters is small as well, although there may well be numerous titles.

Anything that takes us out in space with drive of any sort that gets us between stars within one human lifetime is out because the physics are iffy.

Anything that does it on a space ship with gravity is out because artificial gravity is largely impossible, without faking it via centripetal force.

Any aliens may well be out because how can we realistically predict what we don't know exists. We'll have to "make it up" and that's not scientific.

Economy? Well, for heavens sake, economy is bogus going in, and going out, so that parameter is either irrelevant from the git-go or all imagined economies have at least enough going for them to work. So let's just back away from economic claims.

Psychology and social dynamics? Again ... back away slowly. Or acknowledge that things you read and maybe loved or respected, (I'm thinking "Left Hand of Darkness" for one) were unscientific and therefore unworthy of having the designation of science fiction.

It was Damon Knight, I think - please correct me if I'm wrong on this one - that said "science fiction is what I point to when I say 'science fiction.'"