The other day, when reading a recent Jane Espenson interview-plus-portrait, it occured to me that there is a reverse mirror phenomenon going on. Remember when back in the day, as Joss Whedon himself pointed out, Marti Noxon was blamed for all that was unpopular about Buffy while Joss was credited with all that fans liked?
...well, you know, I haven't seen a single review of Caprica that mentions Jane Espenson. I have seen a lot that mention Ron Moore. (And only Moore.) Especially the critical ones. The thing is, Jane was the headwriter and showrunner of Caprica. By all accounts, this was her baby. She had complete creative freedom. If Moore was involved at all, it was via suggesting the spin-off to begin with, but not otherwise; his name is in the credits the same way Glen Larson's was on BSG (i.e. "executive producer" as in "created the original universe and thus is duly credited", not producer as in "actually supervises the show"). This is not something that was kept secret until now; back when Caprica was launched, Jane Espenson did most of the usual promoting interviews etc.; she continued to do so until the show was cancelled. So - why is she utterly absent in any fannish discussion of Caprica?
I think the answer is obvious, and as I said, the reverse phenomenon from the Joss 'n Marti thing. At the time BtVS' sixth and seventh season was broadcast, Joss was at the height of his popularity. This is no longer so, but back then, he basically could do no wrong in much of fandom's eyes, so given that Marti Noxon was now sharing the executive producer credits and had taken over a good deal of active show running, anything that was perceived as negative was blamed on her. Now Ron Moore became a controversial figure, to put it mildly, even before BSG ended. Jane Espenson, on the other hand, has been a fannishly beloved writer throughout her Jossverse days, for her mixture of humour and geekishness (and from the Buffy/Spike quarter also because her scripts tend to be among the most B/S-friendly). Her initial episodes on BSG were less well received but this was blamed on the general tone of the show (and Moore's showrunning), not on Jane. To be fair, also later well-received episodes such as The Hub by and large were seen in an overall BSG context rather than as something Jane E. specifically brought to the show. Even The Plan, which already had her not only as scriptwriter but co-producer, was primarly reviewed, both negative and positive, as a Moore product. Okay, he was still showrunner. (Along with David Eick, but it's Mr. Eick's lot, it seems to be invisible. Back when he co-produced American Gothic it was all Shaun Cassidy, too.) But Caprica, as I said, is Jane through and through, so the way it's still seen as a Ron Moore thing seems to me indicating the desire to blame someone who is not the person still fannishly loved.
(Incidentally, this does not mean I want to read anti Jane Espenson rants. Caprica was a mixed product - my take on it is basically what![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
abigail_n wrote, see link a few weeks back - but it had a lot of interesting elements. I loved some of her BSG episodes and was left indifferent by others. Which, you know, it's possible to say without liking Jane any less.)
To sum up: once fandom found a target for their ire, it doesn't matter any more how accurate or inaccurate this is.
Going back to the profile of Jane Espenson which sparked these thoughts, she's currently working for Russell T. Davies as one of the writers for Torchwood's fourth season. (What do you want to bet that whether said fourth season will be as amazing as I hope or an RTD failure, his will be the only name mentioned in fannish discussion, btw?) This presumably means she is not dependent on good old Moore (or Joss) for her daily bread in any capacity anymore, so the following statement about her time as a BSG writer versus her time as a Caprica showrunner would be free of the need of keeping the boss in a good mood:
She worked for Ronald D. Moore, whom she ranks among the best show-runners she's had."Ron was wonderful," Espenson said. "His ability to grasp things and know things so quickly and so decisively what will work is amazing. We gather around a cell phone and call him to pitch a story, and he would be in an airport somewhere and would just sit there and listen, and I'm thinking, 'oh, there are so many things we're leaving out.' And he'd just start saying, 'OK, I like it. Here's what you need to do,' and he would start rearranging scenes to make it work. (...)
(W)hen SyFy network executives offered her the job of show-runner for a spinoff called "Caprica," she went for it. In her own words, it was her biggest mistake. The job lasted a year, and the show was cancelled last fall. Espenson took it in stride and says she realizes that the demands of being a show-runner stretched her abilities. As a self-proclaimed control freak, she found that she was controlling all the wrong things. Although she's extremely proud of the show and is happy to launch into praise for those who worked on it with her, it's hard not to notice the rare moment of raw personal reflection that gives insight into the Espenson mind. "That's exactly why I wasn't a good show-runner," she said. "I'm too honest about my fears, so I just did it again. That's the biggest mistake I've made in this interview."
But don't buy it just yet. Espenson is a woman who knows what she does best.
"I think I'm a really, really good writer, which sounds awful, but I feel strongest when I have my fingers on the keys," Espenson said. "Projecting confidence and having the whole big vision thing in your head and knowing how to balance other things, that is all stuff I never bothered to learn."
She hasn't written off the idea of running another show some day, but she freely admits that next time, she'd do it differently. "I think there's a way to run a show when you learn how to delegate the bits you don't do well," she says. "I'd do it again if it were the right project, but this time I'd have more partners around me."
...well, you know, I haven't seen a single review of Caprica that mentions Jane Espenson. I have seen a lot that mention Ron Moore. (And only Moore.) Especially the critical ones. The thing is, Jane was the headwriter and showrunner of Caprica. By all accounts, this was her baby. She had complete creative freedom. If Moore was involved at all, it was via suggesting the spin-off to begin with, but not otherwise; his name is in the credits the same way Glen Larson's was on BSG (i.e. "executive producer" as in "created the original universe and thus is duly credited", not producer as in "actually supervises the show"). This is not something that was kept secret until now; back when Caprica was launched, Jane Espenson did most of the usual promoting interviews etc.; she continued to do so until the show was cancelled. So - why is she utterly absent in any fannish discussion of Caprica?
I think the answer is obvious, and as I said, the reverse phenomenon from the Joss 'n Marti thing. At the time BtVS' sixth and seventh season was broadcast, Joss was at the height of his popularity. This is no longer so, but back then, he basically could do no wrong in much of fandom's eyes, so given that Marti Noxon was now sharing the executive producer credits and had taken over a good deal of active show running, anything that was perceived as negative was blamed on her. Now Ron Moore became a controversial figure, to put it mildly, even before BSG ended. Jane Espenson, on the other hand, has been a fannishly beloved writer throughout her Jossverse days, for her mixture of humour and geekishness (and from the Buffy/Spike quarter also because her scripts tend to be among the most B/S-friendly). Her initial episodes on BSG were less well received but this was blamed on the general tone of the show (and Moore's showrunning), not on Jane. To be fair, also later well-received episodes such as The Hub by and large were seen in an overall BSG context rather than as something Jane E. specifically brought to the show. Even The Plan, which already had her not only as scriptwriter but co-producer, was primarly reviewed, both negative and positive, as a Moore product. Okay, he was still showrunner. (Along with David Eick, but it's Mr. Eick's lot, it seems to be invisible. Back when he co-produced American Gothic it was all Shaun Cassidy, too.) But Caprica, as I said, is Jane through and through, so the way it's still seen as a Ron Moore thing seems to me indicating the desire to blame someone who is not the person still fannishly loved.
(Incidentally, this does not mean I want to read anti Jane Espenson rants. Caprica was a mixed product - my take on it is basically what
abigail_n wrote, see link a few weeks back - but it had a lot of interesting elements. I loved some of her BSG episodes and was left indifferent by others. Which, you know, it's possible to say without liking Jane any less.) To sum up: once fandom found a target for their ire, it doesn't matter any more how accurate or inaccurate this is.
Going back to the profile of Jane Espenson which sparked these thoughts, she's currently working for Russell T. Davies as one of the writers for Torchwood's fourth season. (What do you want to bet that whether said fourth season will be as amazing as I hope or an RTD failure, his will be the only name mentioned in fannish discussion, btw?) This presumably means she is not dependent on good old Moore (or Joss) for her daily bread in any capacity anymore, so the following statement about her time as a BSG writer versus her time as a Caprica showrunner would be free of the need of keeping the boss in a good mood:
She worked for Ronald D. Moore, whom she ranks among the best show-runners she's had."Ron was wonderful," Espenson said. "His ability to grasp things and know things so quickly and so decisively what will work is amazing. We gather around a cell phone and call him to pitch a story, and he would be in an airport somewhere and would just sit there and listen, and I'm thinking, 'oh, there are so many things we're leaving out.' And he'd just start saying, 'OK, I like it. Here's what you need to do,' and he would start rearranging scenes to make it work. (...)
(W)hen SyFy network executives offered her the job of show-runner for a spinoff called "Caprica," she went for it. In her own words, it was her biggest mistake. The job lasted a year, and the show was cancelled last fall. Espenson took it in stride and says she realizes that the demands of being a show-runner stretched her abilities. As a self-proclaimed control freak, she found that she was controlling all the wrong things. Although she's extremely proud of the show and is happy to launch into praise for those who worked on it with her, it's hard not to notice the rare moment of raw personal reflection that gives insight into the Espenson mind. "That's exactly why I wasn't a good show-runner," she said. "I'm too honest about my fears, so I just did it again. That's the biggest mistake I've made in this interview."
But don't buy it just yet. Espenson is a woman who knows what she does best.
"I think I'm a really, really good writer, which sounds awful, but I feel strongest when I have my fingers on the keys," Espenson said. "Projecting confidence and having the whole big vision thing in your head and knowing how to balance other things, that is all stuff I never bothered to learn."
She hasn't written off the idea of running another show some day, but she freely admits that next time, she'd do it differently. "I think there's a way to run a show when you learn how to delegate the bits you don't do well," she says. "I'd do it again if it were the right project, but this time I'd have more partners around me."
