DoWntime is a collaborative blog that aims to regularily publish articles and thinkpieces engaging with the immortal and oh so iconic BBC flagship show, Doctor Who, from an intellectual and critical standpoint. That’s roughly the idea.
Who’s behind it?
It was born from the fusion of two blogs, Tiberian Travels and Literaryfilmytvfandomness, later joined by the handler of the most excellent Scriptscribbles Tumblr, because unity through strength and other Orwellian sentiments of the same nature. For a more factual answer:
- Samuel “Tibère” Maleski is a French, queer, Eng-Lit Master student that likes to write overcomplicated, barely cohesive ranty thinkpieces about television and cinema despite never having touched a media studies class with a ten-foot pole. He may or may not be overcompensating for having only discovered the show in 2013 and for his weird distate of the Classics. One may never know. Anyway, he owns a platypus plushie named after a famous dictator, enjoys dancing to the La La Land soundtrack in flowery shirts, and has two BAs, one in French Literature and another in English Cultural and Linguistic Studies, if those details are of any interest to the passer-by.
- Andrew “Scarves” Davis is a graduate with a BA in English Literature and an MA in Creative Writing. He’s very much a child of the new series, but has a huge love for the classic run as well. Also a huge fan of Sherlock, a massive lit geek, and a big animation fan, particularly Studio Ghibli. Very left wing. Which, yes, does inform much, though not all, of his writing.
- Kevin “Scriptscribbles” Burnard is a writer, media scholar and burgeoning filmmaker from southern California. He has been a fan of Doctor Who for more than a decade, at this point having seen literally every episode. As can be expected from that, Doctor Who is progressively consuming his very existence, and he hopes to share that experience with you.
What are you three writing about? What can we expect of that blog?
Everything Who-related is on the table. And maybe some things that have only the faintest connection to Who. You shall see. It’s a vast and varied buffet – retrospectives, and reviews, and hot takes and very personal and lyrical interpretations of stuff. Also, expect some heated, more-or-less organized debates when a new series comes around. Ah, and the jokes. The awful, awful jokes. Blame Tibère for those. He’s just … a bit awkward, really.
Doesn’t that overlap with the jurisdiction of other Who fansites, such as DWTV, or Eruditorum Press?
It’s not meant too, at least – really, this site exists to fill what we consider to be a void in terms of content: you can find interesting op-eds and good factual episode reviews on the internet, and you can find some really deep, almost academic research on the subject of Who, but there’s a lot of empty space in between. Or so the lady we hired for the audit said. Let’s just say that we intend to keep a relatively mainstream approach while still having a sort of overall editorial line? It’s not about presenting content, but analysing it and interpreting it, in very personal ways, that may not always be objectively true or anything more than pure subjective craziness but always aim to be a compelling and interesting read.
How often do you post?
Our main columns, “Tiberian Thoughts”, “Scarves and Celery” and “The Truth Snake” will have a new post every other week – so, six guaranteed posts a month. ” It’s susceptible to be much higher and more frantic, but that’s the baseline. Some old content from our previous blogs rewritten & updated, and lots of new things.
And what about those guest posts?
Ah, that’s where the “collaborative” part comes in. There are a lot of fascinating people with fascinating opinions on Who and no platform to share those. So, well, why not offering them an occasion to express themselves?
So, that means there’s going to be like, all sorts of opinions?
Well, varied perspectives, surely, but … Some sites publish every single kind of Who-related opinion there is, and that’s cool. We do aim to have a sort of overall editorial line, though, so let’s go over the few principles it’s made of?
- Hooray for Jodie Whittaker being cast as 13!
- “Listen” is the best Doctor Who episode of all time and is vastly underappreciated.
- The Rat is definitely not the worst part of “Talons of Weng Chiang“
- Steven Moffat is a cool guy and writes really well.
- Same for Russell T. Davies.
- Seriously, why is RTD vs. Moffat a fandom war? They’re both good.
- We tend to like Doctor Who most when it’s being inventive and trying new things, rather than recreating the past for the sake of it.
- We actually like “The Rings of Ahkaten“, “Kill the Moon“, and “In the Forest of the Night“. Yup, we’re those weirdos.
- (One of us even likes “Fear Her“. He’s a bit ashamed of it, though.)
- General political tendency is left-leaning SJWs with a dash of Marxism because it makes everything tastes better, just like pepper or grated chocolate.
Can I join in the fun?
Well, of course. Here be guidelines-shaped dragons.
- Any (even vaguely) Who-related subject is on the table, even if some other writer has tackled it.
- The content presented here has to be your own ideas and personal thoughts. It doesn’t necessarily have to be written for the site, though: articles you already made public on a blog or a Tumblr can be posted here. Articles you may have written for official or semi-official sources or media, including fansites such as DWTV, on the other hand, very much have to stay there.
- Said content does have to be at least vaguely aligned with the ideological positions (look at me mummy, I’m using big words!) developed earlier.
- Every guest article must be signed. ‘Cause it makes us look serious, and it makes archiving a lot more easier. You of course don’t have to use your real name. And we won’t google you. Promised.
- We aim at publishing personal, relatively in-depth looks into the Whoniverse. The articles then need to be of a certain length, at least 1000 words (the more the merrier, generally speaking), and avoid as much as possible the “op-ed” format practiced widely by sites like DWTV. To quote a few examples, an article like this http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/unpopular-opinion-the-tenth-doctor-52880.htm , while quite good (and at least one of us definitely agrees with its contents …), doesn’t exactly fit our vision for the site, whereas something like that https://janinerivers.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/reposted-come-buy-our-orchard-fruits/ definitely would. Meta, personal experiences with episodes, interpretations and analysis – this is the good stuff.
- We’ll run a spell-check before publishing and will eventually edit the syntax around a bit, but the articles need to be sent without grammar mistakes and in solid English.
Got it? If you’re still interested, you can send the articles at email@example.com, along with any question you may have.
I have a question / need to yell at you, where can I do that?
Comment sections, or the same e-mail adress, firstname.lastname@example.org!
- Twitter is that way: https://twitter.com/MediaDoWntime
- Tumblr is there: https://doctorwhodowntimeblog.tumblr.com/
Any guidelines for said comment sections?
Don’t be an arse, respect the people there, don’t post any creepy or offensive stuff and stay constructive. That’s about it, really.
See you soon, hopefully !