Peter + Pan

We've been writing an awful lot about Amy and Eleven and Rory and River...but we haven't been giving good old Peter his dues here on the blog.

You look about 9

And you look about 14...

After spending my entire day pouring over the new Diamond Edition of Disney's Peter Pan, I've got more than just a thought or two on the Boy Who Won't Grow Up.

Don't Tell Me It's Not Canon

Okay. I know what some of you are thinking...DISNEY'S Peter Pan? Don't you mean BARRIE'S Peter Pan? 
Well, yes and no, and here's why.
Barrie's Peter is the original Peter; there's no denying which came first. HOWEVER we're living in a world now where Disney's Peter has become so universally recognized that you'll hardly meet a person who knew the tale before the animated film entered their life. This was actually brought to my attention by my Dad, who was sitting and watching Disney's Peter Pan with commentary with me. The film makers were talking about how, when Disney came to the story, it was a unique tale to adapt, because it had already been adapted so many times before. There was the play Peter Pan, the books Peter in Kensington Gardens and Peter and Wendy, the silent film and most recently (before the animation), the live action movie that brought Tinkerbell out of the flashlight and into the limelight, depicting her as a real person for the first time ever. 
Disney's audience would already be well-acquainted with the tales of Peter Pan, and perhaps most importantly, they knew him to be played as a girl.

Look how FRIENDLY the croc suddenly is!

"Interesting" my Dad said. "Now, it's basically the opposite...I mean, when Cathy Rigby played Peter in the 80s, it was like blasphemy to me!" (I'm paraphrasing here, but he did, in fact, use the word blasphemy).
That tradition lives on today, as people will almost always be introduced to DISNEY'S Peter before any others, and the age for that introduction is getting younger and younger with the creation of "Jake and the Neverland Pirates" and the "Pixie Hollow" franchise. Disney has almost entirely created a monopoly on Peter Pan in the popular imagination. At the very least, they have inarguably monopolized Peter in the American imagination.

Sometimes, perhaps because Peter and the Lost Boys were all played with American accents in the Disney film, even I forget that the tale is originally from a Scottish author, and steeped in British culture and history. That, of course, is factually incorrect, but culturally important, and this is where things come full circle. Because Disney's version of Peter Pan has become so well-known, he is now nearly as American as he is British (or Scottish, however you care to argue it) at this point. This is part of why the American audience latched on to Doctor Who with such a steely grip once Amy became Wendy and Eleven became Peter. THIS is why it took nearly 50 years for our country to fully embrace the series in the same mainstream way that England has embraced it in that same time span, and it's why it's fair to say that we connect to the story because it's part of our cultural history. Walt Disney made sure of that in 1953 by starting the first ever merchandising frenzy connected with an animated film (Second Star to the Right). Peter and his friends were on ads for everything from televisions to kid's shoes; and today you can get t-shirts, mugs, stuffed animals, notebooks, pretty much anything that you can imagine with your favorite character(s) from the movie on them. 

In short, we as Americans have embraced Peter so fully that, at this point, he's got dual citizenship. When we write about Peter in America, this is what we are talking about. The movie was released here sixty years ago to the day--that means almost three generations worth of little American tykes (and maybe even a Brit or two) have grown up knowing Walt's Peter before any other version of the classic "Eternal Child". Those three generations include a certain television show writer, born in 1961--well after Disney's version had exploded in popularity, both here and across the pond.

Steven Moffat, born 1961

Until next time,

--Jenisaur

Please Contribute to Our Kickstarter Campagin

Hi guys, Jen and I have been hard at work organizing notes and starting this paper for the ICFA! So again, thank you for tuning in; more updates will be coming in the future as we get closer and closer and things pick up again. Right now it's the tedious quiet stuff. Lots of notes. Lots of writing. Some of the information we've been finding is so amazing we can't wait to share it all with you.  We've been even starting concrete sections of the paper and our powerpoint presentation as well.

But we need your help!  We are both freelance writers and workers fresh out of school and are working our asses off to stay sharp and on our toes! Our Kickstarter drive  to help get us down to the conference in Florida could use your support and we have only 15 more days to reach our goal.

Contributors each receive a thank you gift according to the amount donated to our fund ranging from acknowledgement and thank you's in our presentation and here on our blog,  Doctor Who themed postcards from Orlando with personal doodles to bound copies of our final paper and to the most generous; all of the above plus conference journals bound and presented in the style of River’s diary with photos from the conference which features Neil Gaiman as guest of honor.  I would love it if everyone would take a look and consider help contributing to our project.

Why Losing Amy Pond Hurts

It's been a while! Hiatus shmaiatus I'm going to write something today that is incredibly important to our paper on why Amy Pond, or the loss of the Ponds in The Angels Take Manhattan was so incredibly painful and hard for many viewers. Certainly for me. It's been enough time I think for me to be able to write coherently about the subject (though don't play Amy's Theme and any of it's variations - oh wait I already am; true story Amy is sad because her themes are SAD). I know a lot of people didn't or don't like Amy, Jen certainly did not at first sight. The very first pictures of Matt Smith and Karen filming for series 5 I remember succinctly being the first to see them and showing Jen, Jen wanted nothing to do with her. Expletives were made (Matt Smith was also shouted at for his everything). But it came to pass that Amy won Jen over once the show launched (she waited an entire year before she watched it though, I was far ahead of her).

First, Amy Pond is unique in that we meet her as a child. This set up Moffat formerly explored in The Girl In The Fireplace. But it also sets up the very Peter Pan like set up of this mad figure appearing into her life.

 “She [Amy] is like Wendy in ‘Peter Pan’, she’s wearing a big silly nighty and a dressing gown and slippers. She returns to her childhood, on the night before her wedding, the night she’s supposed to grow up. She’s flown off with Peter Pan to have an amazing, mad adventure on a fairytale ship.”

—	Steven Moffat

 And this is a core element to our paper; that the explosion of the show's popularity, while simmering with the 10th Doctor came to full boil with the adaptation of the Peter Pan and intentional dark fairytale story of Amy Pond. Why was it so popular? Matt Smith's very "in" awkwardness and the 11th Doctor's attire and him being the youngest to ever play the Doctor certainly contributes, but the reason why people got SO attached to Amy Pond is that she is literally the Wendy that failed to go with Peter as a child, as we all fail to do (or pick your fantasy/sci-fi adventure or dream career  poison) but Amy unlike us and Reinette; Amy gets a second chance.

 The companions with Doctor Who have always had a vague wish fulfillment aspect alongside the Doctor to go with his shades of Peter Pan-like function but with Amy, she is the ultimate example of wish fulfillment and an audience surrogate. And viewers in the teen's to thirties range all over the world, particularly in America, could relate to that. Many have already experienced the disappointment of growing up and loosing childhood magic and belief. Many think we have moved on, but deep down, like Amy when we meet her again at age twenty-one and then twenty-three on the eve of her wedding: we have not. Amy's second chance with her "imaginary" friend from when she was seven years old; that second chance of magic and adventure despite being all grown up is the ache and want of many young adults and even adults who are "all grown up". We want to see Wendy as an adult be able to go be with Peter, even if she herself does not want to go. That's the audience projecting their desires onto the characters.

So we in a sense because we see Amy from the start, with her backstory of meeting the Doctor then him leaving; it sets it differently as she by the time he comes back already has him wrapped up in her life and personal mythology. And then to see the building rapport between Amy and the Doctor and the close, extremely close kinship they develop over supposedly on and off 200 years HIS TIME.Their friendship is despite the early bumps and Amy's flirtations is extremely sincere. It's SO deep due to that childhood connection. Most friendships and lovers should be jealous of how deep Eleven and Amy's bond created - hence Rory's truly reasonable concerns at first. Eleven's naive or more juvenile traits make this perhaps easier than ever before to truly bond past a romantic attraction as it is a perpetual back and forth of authority versus child with Amy. He treats her like a child- she treats him like a child. He fathers her often quite sternly (especially when agitated and in their first adventures). She mothers him. Like Donna they banter like equals, but in a different manner.

Doctor: No helpful hints?
Amy: Hm. Well, here's one. Bow tie: get rid. 

Eleven dotes on her like a child as well in which she openly obliges  (a good example is in Vampires In Venice after he heals her neck he pops a candy in her mouth or in either The Pandorica Opens or The Big Bang after she was drugged by the cyber-man and Eleven preens her afterwards). Amy at times though does seem to push back and claims to "not be so clingy". The funny thing with Amy and The Doctor; they switch places of dependency over time. Amy's own doting and authoritarian streak with the Doctor, as  becomes more mature; she becomes exactly what Wendy was supposed to be for Peter; a mother to the Lost Boys and to an extent Peter himself.

Moffat has gone on the record that Amy understands the Doctor incredibly well, so much so that perhaps even more than his current incarnation understands himself. Early in her travels without him sharing information she figures out quite a lot about him just by observation. She has on numerous occasions have made comments on the Doctor's inherent sadness or his susceptibility for getting upset and treats him much like a mother figure would when that occurs.

She scolds him in A Town Called Mercy for having flown around alone and throwing a giant temper tantrum all throughout the episode; saidd alone binge I feel took place after The Angels Take Manhattan. In fact most of Series 7 part 1 (after Asylum of The Daleks) I feel took place after the Ponds were rocketed back into the 1930s at least in the Doctor's timeline. We already know that part of the season was already out of order due to the mention of Rory's cell phone in Henry VIII's bedroom. The Doctor's sadness when dealing with them, particularly in Mercy as well as his going to give them an anniversary present in The Power of Three as well as he and Amy's exchanges in all those episodes seem to me he knows what is about to happen; the "fade away from me" line and talking to Brian Williams in particular is telling. 

The Doctor: One day—soon maybe—you'll stop. I've known for awhile.
Amy: Then why do you keep coming back for us?
The Doctor: Because you were the first. The first face this face saw. And you were seared onto my hearts, Amelia Pond. You always will be. I'm running to you, and Rory, before you fade from me.
Amy: Don't be nice to me. I don't want you to be nice to me.
The Doctor: Yeah you do, Pond. And you always get what you want.

 Amy does gets what she truly wants in the end: Rory. But this exchange shows something that is curious and why in particular loosing Amy hurts A LOT. The phrase "fade away from me" which evokes the angels of course, but sounds so much more like it would be Amy saying it to him. Childhood magic, imaginary friends fade after their creators grow up. We never hear it from the other side. And now you have the childhood figure saying that to her; Amy, now in her early 30s  who has been seeing him on and off for twenty-four years. She's all grown up. Childhood doesn't want to let go of her, whereas before it was her still holding onto childhood. And the Doctor has taken the role of child; particularly now that Amy is technically his mother-in-law. And as an audience surrogate Amy fulfills a lot of niches in that role; many would love to be able to take care of the Doctor and be his friend and confidant. Many are just as sad as The Doctor, and would like such a romantic but platonic figure or friend as Amy Pond in their lives just as many want The Doctor or Peter Pan in their lives.

The clincher on WHY people, including myself got so utterly cut up once Amy finally decided to give up her adventures with the Doctor is exactly that; she choose to "grow up". We are suddenly in the Doctor's shoes. This mother-like best friend, confidant whom he has bugged for over twenty-four years total her time; is being wrenched away from him. Even River knows (something) or can see through the Doctor's childish grasping to hold onto Amy:

The Doctor: What are you talking about? Back away from the Angel. Come back to the TARDIS, we'll figure something out.
Amy: The Angel, would it send me back to the same time, to him?
The Doctor: I don't know. Nobody knows.
Amy: But it's my best shot, yeah?
The Doctor: No!
River: Doctor, shut up! Yes, yes, it is!
The Doctor: Amy—
Amy: Well then. I just have to blink, right?
The Doctor: No!
Amy: It'll be fine. I know it will. I'll be with him like I should be. Me and Rory together. {calling River over} Melody.
The Doctor: Stop it! Just, just, stop it!
Amy: You look after him. And you be a good girl and you look after him.
The Doctor: You are creating fixed time. I will never be able to see you again.
Amy: I'll be fine. I'll be with him.
The Doctor: Amy. Please. Just come back into the TARDIS, Come along, Pond. Please.
Amy: Raggedy Man, goodbye.

There is also cut dialogue of the Doctor's (supposedly, is this based in fact?) from after Amy says
 "I'll be with him [Rory] like I should be." which further reinforces how desparate the Doctor acts:

"From your point of view. From mine, you'll just turn to dust. Please don't. Please don't do that to me...Amy. My Amelia. The first face this face saw

 We, like The Doctor, don't want Amy to go. His visceral incredibly selfish reaction; pleading, saying no, begging is all heartbreaking. " I will never be able to see you again." and "Come Along Pond PLEASE" carries such selfish weight. He sounded like a child, and it is a childlike reaction, and we get just as upset alongside him. She is finally firmly choosing Rory over him. We are loosing our audience surrogate.She's all fully grown up.

We selfishly, like the Doctor want Amy and Rory to be able to continue traveling alongside him or at least have him in their lives because WE want that relationship. We want to live vicariously through Amy because of her such long reaching influence with the Doctor. That is actually a lot to ask of her, and there is a time when she like the true Wendy, must grow up completely and thus her adventures must cease and be entrusted to her daughter. And it is obvious so long as the Doctor pops up; neither Rory nor Amy can commit or truly "live" an adult life. That severance of the mother/friend figure that obviously means so much to The Doctor is so painful and we feel the same way too because "our" second chance through Amy is being cut too. THAT is why Amy Pond is so sad. The girl who waited so long, like all of us, and then gets her wish. And we don't want it to end because it reminds us that our wishes for the same thing go relatively unfulfilled. There is also a lot of ties into the  puer aeturnus psychology and the feelings of loss associated with the phenomenon of growing up or the pain of separation which is a big part of I feel Eleven's character under Moffat and his writer's pens. More on that another time.

Many point out there are loopholes; there surely are ways he can go get the Ponds. I'm sure there ARE ways he could go and rescue the Ponds and go have fun with them until they're old and gray and they still die in Manhattan. Surely. If River can send Amy her novel, certainly there are ways. But that's not the point; Amy and the Doctor becoming severed fully from each other; it's symbolic of Amy fully growing up and thus the adventures must cease. And that hurts.

Though look at this way; The Ponds were sent to Manhattan the same place River was in the 70's seems all too coincidental to this particular writer. We really don't know what River was up to between the time she first regenerated in Day of The Moon and the next time we see her growing up in leadworth as Mels. She was hiding from The Silence after all (well sorta). That means (while they were older) both River Song and her parents were in the same city for quite a while....since it wasn't until the mid nineties that she'd be school friends with Amy and Rory as they were both born I think in 1989; my age. Since Rory and Amy don't die (if they were indeed sent back to 1938) until the late eighties and early nineties...I have a little hunch River might have ended up living with the elder Ponds as a child-teen for little bit and after they died made the trip to the UK to find them as children on Amy's command and then grow up with them again. Why else would River say "Hope my old man didn't see that, he gets ever so cross" comment even apply to any Rory she's seen or interacted with? I wouldn't call her ever being present while he was being cross. Sounds more like a much older Rory? Hmmm....what do you think? 50th special; scene of old craggy Ponds? Why were the Ponds epilogue with their adopted son and Brian Williams not filmed? Hmmm.

You have to remember if River was involved in their lives or not while in NYC; Amy and Rory lived LONG productive lives together and seemed to also adopt a child. Seeing them alive and older would most likely help soften the loss a bit I think; people forget they lived on. Think Moffat will throw in a bone or fill in some of River Song's narrative gaps? (le sigh probably not). 

But yes, that's the gist of it; many subconsciously (or consciously) want to be in Amy's shoes (care for the kidnapping, knock outs, dying, pregnancy, getting tied up a lot) because she gets that second chance at childhood. The beauty of her and the Doctor's relationship is also what makes it so bittersweet and even enhances its beauty in the end. As Idris said;

Idris: "Alive." I'm alive. 

The Doctor: Alive isn't sad. 

Idris: It's sad when it's over.

There is a bittersweet sting to the beauty of Amy's story because it simply ends. And like the Doctor; the viewers, we don't like endings. And it sucks. A lot. But like all stories, it can be retold over, and over. And Amy in effect somewhat does that; by telling the Doctor to return to her to tell her stories the morning after he left (as seen in The Big Bang when she looks up smiling after the Tardis sound awakes her) and then leave again; Amy essentially writes her own story and adventures, her whole existance as we saw it and thus ensures that always at the end The Doctor goes to tell her younger self the same stories hence creating a never ending cycle or loop; it always goes back to the start.

Oh, and one final note;  Jen does the same thing to Clara now as she did to Amy when she first saw her; mainly cursing her out especially after seeing the Christmas Special. You got HUGE shoes to fill Clara. Huge Scottish ginger shoes. 

Talk to everyone again real soon

- Max

Paper Abstract, Thesis and General Outline

ABSTRACT: “Never let him see you age. He doesn't like endings” is a warning just as fitting for Amy Pond as it is for Wendy Darling. Examining seasons five through seven (2010-2012) on Doctor Who reveals many adapted myths, legends and fairy tales threaded into the Neverland of Amy and the Doctor. Amy as Wendy then transforms from child to mother, both literally and figuratively, in season six, and the Doctor seeks refuge in immaturity. Amy’s dual legacy as friend and “mother” is further developed through her daughter. A thrice-changeling, River Song begins as a Tinker Bell archetype, but develops into Wendy’s daughter Jane.
The tone drastically shifts from childlike innocence to mature subject matter; the relationship between Amy and the Doctor develops from unrequited love to a deep mutual understanding, and finally the Doctor becomes dependent on their relationship, which Amy has outgrown.
The Amy/Doctor relationship coincided with the rising popularity of Doctor Who outside of the UK. We will argue that this relationship appealed to American audiences due in part to the rise of extended adolescence. The Eleventh Doctor’s connection to the Jungian puer aeternus and “Peter Pan syndrome” provides a cathartic experience through Amy’s escapist adventures.

THESIS: The Smith/Moffat/Gillan era of Doctor Who is a modern adaptation of the Peter Pan myth in many ways. These adaptive elements are the reason that the show’s popularity has spread outside of the UK and finally reached a similarly massive level of popularity in other countries as well--particularly the United States, because of the growing phenomenon of “extended adolescence” among the show’s targeted audience.

OUTLINE

• Moffat’s Usage of Fairytales, Myth and Archetypes and Literary Metaphor.
• A)  Moffat's Pre-Series 5 work e.g. The Girl In The Fireplace
• B)  Elements Moffat uses in series 5-7 e.g. Sleeping Beauty, The World Turtle, Minotaur, Pandora’s Box. 5 takes prominence.
• C)  Amy as embodiment of literary metaphor, her own author of her existence; twice, both in The Big Bang via the crack (not intentional) and intentional at the end, telling the Doctor to dictate what stories young amy will eventually (most likely) act out as make believe as she grows up.
• She is a literary circle like the very myths and stories she loved.
• ["we're all stories in the end", dual audienceship of childrens' stories--that's really driven home by Amy telling her own story in a way she's a child in control of how the adult tells the story, which is huge for a children's story/show she eliminates any parental control over her life]
• D or E) The ultimate adaptation of “Peter Pan” (very generalized, how we first came to realize this, how it has developed--season 7.1 conclusion was a real clincher for the theory.)
• E or D)  Puer Aeternus 
• [God Pan, Hermes--Barrie ALSO used these characters to develop Peter, so this will only be introduced here then delved more into later in section 2.]

Fantasy that's Sci-fi, Sci-fi that's Fantasy

A clip of the Darling children learning to fly and going off to Neverland from the 1924 silent adaptation of Peter Pan with Betty Bronson as Peter and Mary Brian as Wendy. It continued the pantomime tradition of Peter being played by a woman. For it's age, it plays the source material rather straight and uses a great deal of the original play script  here and in effect resembles a stage production itself, so unlike many silents of the era this is still quite "modern" in its delivery. At least this scene. Being made in 1924, only 20 years after first performance of Peter, the synergy of stage and the new(ish) rising potential of film and film effects just oozes from this clip through the use of the  special effects. Yes, now crude by our standards, but check out that Tinkerbell at 4:08! That's pretty darn cool. Legend of Zelda anyone?

Peter Pan as a production has, since it's start, taken full advantage of and in fact cannot have existed without the innovations of electricity and the progress of technology around the turn of the 19th century and the dawn of the 20th. Jen has an excellent book, Peter Pan in the Popular Imagination that has an article all about Tinkerbell and that relationship between Peter Pan and technology as a production. She'll probably discuss that at another time.

Which I find curious is that while Peter Pan, set in the designated genre of fantasy is so inexplicably related to technology and progress (the assumed realm of sci-fi) we now have in contrast Steven Moffat almost doing the opposite, almost  inverting that, with Eleven he has been taking a purely sci-fi show, born exclusively out of science (and to educate children) and is bending it into the realm of  fairy tales and mythological, pagan-like motifs, essentially giving sci-fi a fantasy skin. For instance in the new Christmas special, the Tardis now apparently sits on a cloud, accessible by a ladder as told by the governess Clara (the new companion) to her children in their nursery. This is the simple stuff of fairytale of old; hatches to underground palaces found by pulling a parsnip or cabbage and the like from the field. It also echoes the stories of Peter as an urban legend in the neighborhood,  of which Mrs. Darling is familiar: the boy frequenting Kensington Gardens.

It is curious to see that the upcoming Christmas Special, now that we mention it, is being set in late Victorian London: the same era of Barrie and Peter's rise into the public consciousness.  Clara, a dreamy governess, young children, a nursery.  Peter Pan is a common Christmastime pantomime in Britain hence somewhat associative to the holiday. It all seems rather intentional. Why is The Doctor hiding there? Yes Moffat has been echoing past literature greats the last two Christmas specials, with last year's an explicit nod to The Lion the Witch And The Wardrobe, but to my knowledge there are no specific literary allusions this year...or is there?

The focus on children and innocence, ruminations of youth and of growing up, children's literature and the like was never stronger than in that period of time. and one could say setting the holiday special during the Victorian Era England is usually a no brainer. They just go together. Why? Well probably the institution that is A Christmas Carol, and due to Christmas itself  was a holiday turned fashionable and transformed into the juggernaut of a holiday (as we know it today) in part thanks to Victorian society re-adopting, appropriating and popularizing certain traditions full force. Christmas has always had that Victorian touch to it ever since. Is placing the lonely Doctor, in mourning for the Ponds, in this era of pure fairy tale and pagan-rooted indulgence particularly symbolic that way?

Stuff for Monday ruminations! 

Talk again real soon,

Max 

What has a giant night light on top of it?

 "Can anything harm us,
Mummy, dear, after the
night lights are lit?"

37
 "Nothing, precious. They are
the eyes a mother leaves behind
her to guard her children."

38
 "Dear night lights that protect
my sleeping babes, burn clear
and steadfast, tonight."

Sound familiar?

Puer aeternus is Latin for eternal boy, used in mythology to designate a child-god who is forever young; psychologically it is an older man whose emotional life has remained at an adolescent level. The puer typically leads a provisional life, due to the fear of being caught in a situation from which it might not be possible to escape. He covets independence and freedom, chafes at boundaries and limits, and tends to find any restriction intolerable.<sup>[1]

Notes:
^ Sharp, p. 109

Sharp, Daryl. Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms & Concepts. (pp 109 – 110). Inner City Books, Toronto, 1991. ISBN 0-919123-48-1

We have MANY MANY other books to purchase and or take out from the library aside from the over a dozen we currently already have and most likely WILL be using for this paper.   The subject of the puer aeternus is pretty pivitol not only for our comparisons of Eleven and Peter, whom is the poster child for the archetype,  but may explain to a degree Moffat's intentional plans for the character and how the personality change and his relationship to Amy correlates to real world issues with young adults and teenagers today moreso than ever before in the show's history.

A late-nite tidbit for the brain to nosh on. Talk again real soon! 

- Max</sup>