#tv knitting

[simplybydreaming]

Darrowby Knits Master Post

For the easy finding of the Darrowby Knits collections!

Siegfried's Yellow Cardigan: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Finished Cardigan

Dorothy's Darrowby Fair Jumper: Part 1, Part 2, Finished Jumper

Audrey's Cable Cardigan: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Finished Cardigan

[uncertainturquoise]

we all know about TV knitting but I think there is also knitting TV because I know I can’t focus on my project and a political thriller at the same time

[amuseoffire-upon-ravelry-blog]

Doctor Who and the story of Rosa Parks

I love tv knitting, and it's very hard to find stuff that makes for good tv knitting. It has to be something where watching and seeing what's happening isn't necessarily important, because I only look up occasionally from what I'm doing.

I'm loving the new season of Doctor Who, which is NOT tv knitting. Jodie Whitaker is an absolute treasure. And the episode from this past week is a fun return to one of my favorite kind of episodes: the historical episodes, centered around specific events and people from history. And the setting of the episode this week is Montgomery, Alabama and the bus boycotts of the Civil Rights Movement, with Rosa Parks as one of the main characters of the episode.

Spoilers. You've been warned.

Overall, I loved the episode. It was a powerful, modern representation of one of the most important moments not just in so-called "Black history," but in human history. And because the Civil Rights movement is so important, how it's represented matters deeply to our human narrative. The episode, unlike other historical episodes of Doctor Who, doesn't play with the historical events surrounding Rosa Parks and turn them into fodder for light-hearted sci-fi elements. Queen Victoria as the founder of Torchwood, Shakespeare's Globe theatre as the site of a hostile alien invasion via a lost play, and mistaking Queen Elizabeth I as an alien in disguise are really good examples of how Doctor Who has done this in the past.

This approach would not have been appropriate in this case, for reasons the episode makes perfectly clear: racism is a current battle ground that many people still fight on, and historical revisionism is a dangerous tool in that fight. Taking control of someone else's history, especially when they're a disenfranchised minority group, is dangerous. Doctor Who wanted no part of this, and the entire premise of the episode was to restore historical events surrounding Rosa Parks to their original state because a racist white guy has decided to enact violence upon an entire group of people by changing their history.

Anyone who saw the episode and is at least nominally familiar with Rosa Parks is probably with me so far. And with that premise of historical revisionism = bad, let's explore another story the episode doesn't mention. This one IS from my tv knitting: Drunk History (on Hulu and Comedy Central)

Rosa Parks and her actions were one of many, MANY important catalysts in the Civil Rights movement. She didn't act alone. She wasn't even the first black person to refuse to give up her seat on a bus in Alabama. Rosa Parks got the idea from Claudette Colvin, a 15-year old girl who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white person earlier that same year. Rosa Parks found out about it as the secretary of the NAACP in Montgomery. She and Claudette Colvin knew each other, and Rosa Parks was her mentor and very close friend.

Rosa Parks did not spontaneously refuse to give up her seat on the bus. She volunteered and chose to do so, as planned by the local chapter of the NAACP in Montgomery. It was a premeditated protest, directly inspired by the actions of Claudette Colvin. To leave Claudette out of the story was a choice that was originally made by the NAACP in crafting the narrative of Rosa Parks. That decision galvanised white support for the bus boycott. Consequently, Claudette Colvin is not nearly as well-known as Rosa Parks—even though she took the same calculated risk, and did it first without the prompting or support of anyone.

This episode of Doctor Who is powerful. It's one of the best I've ever seen because of the positive, inclusive message it tries to send. I truly loved it and found it inspirational. But there is a real disconnect between what its stated ambition is, and what it actually accomplishes because of how it chooses to portray Rosa Parks within the context of her own life. The "one person can make a huge difference" message is valuable, and when you view Rosa Parks in isolation that may be what you take away from her experience. But a better, more historically accurate message would have been "none of us can truly inspire change alone," because Rosa Parks would be the first to tell you that's not what she was trying to do. Change happens when we work together for it, because none of us exist in isolation. Nothing ever happened or made a difference in the Civil Rights movement when people acted alone. People who act alone are easy to forget. We can only affect lasting change when we work together. That's the difference between Rosa Parks and Claudette Colvin. That's why we remember one and not the other. Rosa Parks had an entire movement of organized people behind her that were committed to remembering her and telling her story. But there would be no Rosa Parks without the courageous acts of unknown people who have largely been forgotten, like Claudette Colvin.

So how could the episode have incorporated this larger historical context differently? I think a red herring where the Doctor and her companions think they're supposed to be helping Rosa Parks, but they really need to find and help Claudette Colvin would have been even more interesting. It would have accomplished their stated purpose of protecting and defending history from revisionism even better. It would not have been as straightforward and easily digested by many audiences because not many (let's be honest, white) people know who Claudette Colvin is. But that would have been part of the appeal to people who prefer plots with a little less transparency from the start.

That the writers at Doctor Who even went here is a testament to what they hope to accomplish with their storytelling, which I'm a huge fan of. And I have always loved the episodes where they play with history because I'm such a history nerd. I'm hoping they continue to explore this balance between historical accuracy and compelling fictional storytelling. And I hope I don't have to wait so long for another episode like this to come around.

(Oh Moffat. How I DON'T miss you.)

[knittedfluffyfloofs]

Made this cute little dress while watching Lucifer, one of my many favorite shows about people who make bad decisions.

[redheadfibers]

reasons you should be watching shadowhunters:

Magnus Bane

Magnus Bane flirting with broody demon hunter archer dude

Magnus Bane making absurd historical references (not limited to hooking up with Michelangelo) 

broody demon hunter dude’s sister

vampires collecting historical artifacts, aka raiding their own tombs 

mostly Magnus Bane

[redheadfibers]

why has it taken me so long to watch shadowhunters? this is so unbelievably bad and perfect for evening tv knitting

[redheadfibers]

pretty sure I’m now watching tv almost exclusively for pretty scenery and knits? is that weird?

also i’ve concluded that living somewhere that requires 2-3 sweaters under your coat is the best place I could live. almost no exposed skin, sunscreen, sunlight, or sun allergy. cozy, vampire-approved living.

[redheadfibers]

why do I always wait until after dark to start something super creepy and super realistic? vampires, fine. a drama of creepy realistic murders? not so much.

so yeah, watching Hinterland which, no, netflix, is not like Rosemary and Thyme. at least wales is super pretty and promises some exciting knits?