|
|

March 31, 2003 From Cult Times:
So,
unless something completely unexpected has happened between my writing
this month's column and your reading it, it currently looks as if we've
seen the last of Farscape. To borrow a phrase from another Sci-Fi classic,
this has made a lot of people unhappy, and has generally been regarded as
a bad move -but is it? And if it is, how has it been allowed to happen?
Certainly,
the inevitable Internet-based campaign to save it has given short shrift
to Sci-Fi's argument that the show 'failed to reach beyond its core
audience', and we might pause to reflect for a moment on what exactly that
might mean. The counter- argument might be that Sci-Fi—both the genre
and the channel—is built for 'core audiences', or in other words, people
who care about the television they watch and are prepared to make a
commitment to it. We might ask how else it would be possible to produce
and sell magazines about these shows, or indeed to devote a whole channel
to them. Farscape, perhaps, is only guilty of being a particularly Sci-Fi
sort of Sci-Fi show.
Grudgingly
though, I have to admit that my experience of this season has rather
justified the skeptics' view. Being a busy sort of chap, who works in
central London till the early evening and then (if not out being sociable)
spends an hour or so struggling with public trans- port to get home, I'm
quite likely to miss a show that airs at 6.45 pm on a Monday. (You'd think
that I'd know how to work a video recorder by now, but I really do find
them quite baffling.) Many of the episodes I saw in the early and middle
part of the season were therefore quite inexplicable, relying on knowledge
of previous episodes I'd either managed to miss or not understood in the
first place. Although it's all well and good for a series to have
character development and 'story arcs', rather than the notorious 'reset
button' beloved of the Star Trek series, there comes a point where it just
becomes off-putting to the casual (or, in my case, borderline incompetent)
viewer.
Who?
Where? What?
Alarmingly
though, as I discovered during a committed viewing of the final five or
six episodes, Farscape is quite difficult to follow even if you do manage
to watch it continuously. I feel sure this isn't because I'm I
particularly stupid (the video recorder thing notwithstanding), although
it's possible that years of being spoon-fed fairly populist television has
made me reluctant to put much effort into following complex plots. But to
some extent the writers of the show also have themselves to blame, for
adopting a general style that emphasizes exoticism at the expense of
exposition. To some extent, good Science Fiction relies on creating
complex, internally consistent but exotic new realities, and characters
who behave as if it all comes naturally to them.
When
Farscape started, John Crichton was a pretty typical example of the
Everyman character, whose everyday perspective allowed exotic concepts and
plot points to be explained and related to us in terms we understood. As
the series developed, though, Crichton's character and speech patterns
became more adapted to his environment (quite possibly he went a little
crazy), and the whole show became detached from its audience's reality. In
my defense, it's more than common for me to be able to follow complicated
plots in things like The West Wing or The Sopranos, so it's not that I
can't handle complexity. But Farscape, to emphasize its exoticism, made a
deliberate and successful attempt to be opaque and obscure as well as
complex, and ended up seeming pretty self-absorbed.
Can
They Do That???
Meanwhile,
like The X-Files, Farscape has spent its later years developing the
relationship between its two leads in tortuous (and torturous) ways,
delighting in putting two likeable characters through the mill both
individually and as a couple. Like Scully, Aeryn suffered the indignity of
horrific aliens threatening harm to, and theft of, her unborn child, in
scenes that were far too unpleasant to be really entertaining (I do wonder
whether, if women were in charge of these shows, they'd be quite so
willing to do these storylines). And like Mulder, by the end Crichton had
been through so many near-death experiences and moral dilemmas that he
showed signs of utter emotional exhaustion. In the midst of all this it
would clearly be difficult for Aeryn and Crichton to have a re- warding
relationship, even if Crichton hadn't been split in two at one stage and
then killed. (Aeryn's original death, by contrast, looked like a mere
hiccup.) But thankfully our heroes managed to reach a point, by the last
moments of the final episode, where they could contemplate settling down,
getting married and having a family.
For
those of us who invest more in such emotional character-based storylines
than in whether the Scarrans would get worm- hole technology and manage to
invade Earth, it was this moment that really seemed like a natural
conclusion to the show's final episode. Which is why, in what presumably
was a final attempt to be exotic, different and unexpected, it was a
particularly cruel move to kill the pair of them stone dead. After that,
perhaps the only thing that could hive been more self- indulgent, more
inexplicable to the casual viewer, and more perplexing to those of us who
really wanted to give the show a chance, was what came next: a caption
reading 'to be continued'. As if!
John
Binns
|