#dr. loveless

[celestial-alignment]

Dr. Miguelito Loveless, Jim West, and Voltaire. 

--

“The Night That Terror Stalked the Town” Season 1, Episode 10

[radianttruthsii]

Michael Dunn, February 1964, with heads he sculpted of friends during a fallow period

[Click for large image]

[ghostleeeaf]

[purpletrashcans]

honestly it's probably a good thing i haven't had the courage yet to get a tattoo otherwise i would 100% be covered in stupid fandom tattoos rn no doubt

[larsisfrommars]

The Night of The Murderous Spring Is So JUICY!

I think I need to talk about how insanely gay this episode of Wild Wild West is or I might EXPLODE. I know a lot of us who already watch the show knew this episode was ridiculous in the gay subtext department but I feel compelled to go in-depth about putting it into words.

Let’s not even dig into the fact that before drugging Jim Dr. Loveless proudly proclaims that he will make James West “kill the thing he loves” and was referring to Artemus when he said that! That’s already wild enough as it is.

For me like, through a shipping/gay subtext lense, I could already tell Artie was into Jim. There is a mountain of evidence to interpret their relationship that way at least on Gordon’s end. For West it was a little more sparse until and especially THIS episode. Which confirmed for me as relatively new to this show and fandom “ohhhh!! He really DOES reciprocate whatever ambiguously gay mess is happening here!”

The version of Artemus that Jim subconsciously conjures up for himself is so interesting. And of course, it appears to him when he’s in desperate need of comfort, of a rock to cling to, but can find none. So his hallucinating brain projects what he NEEDS most, not some lovely young lady (familiar or otherwise) to tell him everything is alright, but Artemus to take care of him. He WANTS to be taken care of and comforted by Artemus and no one else. I’m not crying YOU are crying!

His version of Artemus is pretty close to the real deal but there’s something… softer about this projected version. He’s not completely different, I wouldn’t even say out-of-character. But he is gentler, more patient and forgiving, and very much there to play guardian angel for Jim. All of his positive traits are exaggerated in Jim’s eyes, like hes always seeing the guy through rose colored glasses.

I say this because part of why I got a bit suspicious of this version of Artie was him being way too calm and forgiving when Jim starts being aggressive towards him due to the drug. Yeah Artie loves Jim but like, he’s got his own sense of self-preservation, intelligence, and a bit of a temper. I was expecting a joke or some sternness or something, hell maybe taking Jim’s gun from him. But of course he doesn’t and he can’t, because he’s not real and he’s there to comfort. Jim can’t be thrown off the course that’ll lead him to killing Artie by his hallucination’s own intervention. He’s himself but oh so slightly off.

Another thing was something that “Artie” said that didn’t actually make a lot of sense compared to the rest of established canon when Jim first starts getting temperamental. “Hey it’s me remember? Artemus Gordon? Mrs. Gordon’s son.” Now I know there’s probably some throwaway Doylist explanation for this, but the Watsonian in me prevails.

Artie never brings up either of his parents before this or ever again to my knowledge. Jim only mentions family once in a previous Dr. Loveless episode. It’s the kind of thing you’d say to someone where you’d known each other your whole lives, implying Jim would somehow know his mother. Now unless I’m mistaken they met each other in the military as adults. Which means Jim’s subconscious emotions have made him feel as though Artie’s known him his whole life. Which is some soulmate sounding mess if I ever heard it.

Then there is the crescendo of this madness where Jim shoots the illusionary Artemus in cold blood. Which is easily some of the most heartbreaking acting in the series. I have watched it a normal amount of times (lying)!! Dying “Artie” looks confused and betrayed but he STILL reaches out to Jim like he like wants Jim to know that it’s okay?! OUCH. Then of course there’s the little “why?” before he dies that pushes Jim over the edge.

Jim completely flies off the handle after Artemus’s apparent death. Careening through the street, threatening the hotel staff, trying to get himself arrested for murdering Artie. I don’t know whether it was a side effect of how much hallucinogen he ingested or what. He straight up faints like some tragic Victorian protagonist after returning to his room, overwhelmed by the evil that he has seemingly done.

When he comes back around he is not at all acting like the Jim we know and love. It’s almost like he wants Loveless to kill him with the way he goads the guy. He’s despondent and jaded and being reckless with his own life. He only snaps back to normal when he discovers Artie is in fact alive and well. Which is such a beautifully loaded reunion. He responds to Jim’s unusual tenderness with a sassy joke (which is of course how we know this one is real). It feels very akin to the Kirk and Spock reunion at the end of Amok Time.

I also think it’s worth noting that I think the first time I ever heard James West utter the words “Artie! Help me!” when he’s trying to prevent the ducks carrying the murder-LSD from being released (this episode is NUTS). Which you know in light of the events of this episode is a big step in Jim being a bit more vulnerable as a character. So there is THAT too.

Hey, and maybe it’s just me, but whether it was deliberate or not, something changed about the whole tone of the show after this particular episode. It felt like the showrunners were slowly having it dawn on them the show is at its strongest when it plays off of the bond shared by these two characters. This episode along a few other gems from season one seem to have clinched it. I noticed in season two so far they’re using Artie and Jim’s relationship as a support beam where it was more of a flexible suggestion before. Which has ✨implications✨ whether you interpret the relationship as gay or not. The events of this episode cracked Jim West’s very hard shell, and made these two characters closer than before.

[garaks-huge-naturals]

the frustrating aromantic representation of chuck tingle's "bury your gays"

i feel like i should preface this by saying that i'm a huge chuck tingle fan and, representation aside, i greatly enjoyed his book. so this is not like, a hate take down. this will contain spoilers for bury your gays, you are warned.

the parts i have issues with will be more towards the end and are marked.

a quick synopsis: misha is a queer horror writer who is told to either kill off his gay characters after getting them together, or let them live and be straight (for the algorithm, ratings, etc). while he is reeling from this he begins being stalked by the monsters/villains of his past works. plot happens and these monsters are really nanobot contractions from his studio's fx company. misha survives these attempts on his life (and his boyfriend's and best friend's), eventually giving a heartfelt award speech about the need for a shift towards queer joy. when he comes back to work the entire studio is like decked out in pride flags and the now stereotypically gay management tells him that queer is IN! even better, it's profitable (according to the algorithm). but these nanobots are still out there. so they go to the fx studio to insert a virus that takes them down, the best friend, tara, being an unprecedented aroace that the algorithm has no information on due to a lack of content, is able to circumvent the nanobots and take them down!! happy ending!! yippee!!

i'll be going in order of the book, touching on the times where tara's identity is relevant

tara's aspecness is established almost immediately when she says "you know i don't swing that way...i don't swing any way, baby." classic aspec joke, i have no issue with this.

its first explicit mention is on page 42, "tara is aromantic and asexual, which has always made me appreciate her take on relationship advice." ok this part is so real. we are so good at that.

ok now we get into the main stuff. Tara says, "do you realize how hard it is to tell your parents you're asexual?" this part is true, and in comparison to misha coming out as gay. and i really appreciate it highlights the strange societal position aspecs are in!! it's hard to affirm an identity defined by a lack. and even harder for baby wanting parents to accept an identity that is largely incompatible with the nuclear family model. as this is in reference to like sex -> having a child, mentioning just the asexuality makes sense. but it is still weird to not mention how hard explaining aromanticism would be considering aces can more easily have straight passing relationships. let's begin a tally: ace mentions: 2, aro mentions: 1.

(!) time skip we are now towards the end. misha is giving his heartfelt speech, "i call on all of you to usher in a new era of stories where the gay, or bi, or lesbian, or asexual, or pansexual, or trans character lives happily ever after. buy those stories. make those stories profitable." we are now entering the territory here i begin to get a little angry. fandoms and drama in shows are so closely tied with romance. they are profitable. they are like, the lifeblood of ao3, etc. people also have this notion that you need a partner to be happy, and that this is a universal goal. so characters and story arcs that stray away from this tend to be, y'know, less profitable. and since this is extremely relevant to aromanticism as an identity and important to debunk, the lack of a mention of aromanticism is frankly stunning. our stories are not wanted, we have no characters to live happily ever after. because we are not profitable. we don't get that joy. so where are we? this is a nitpick but i find it strange that misha would forget to mention like, entirely half of his friend's identity. ace mentions: 3, aro mentions: 1

(!!!) this is the most egregious part to me. when i read this part i was genuinely so stunned that i started crying. ok so i've established that aros have very little representation. it is a fact that there is less aro representation than ace representation. especially in regards to non-ace aros. "there's a hero clad in pink, purple, and blue, the bi one...this continues on and on until every aspect of the community has been covered...tara steps up next to me, her eyes locked on the poster. "there' no asexual hero...they've got everyone up there besides an ace character...every fucking time." ok. so. a lack of representation for aspecs is like a Thing That We All Know. as also established, aros are not algorithm friendly, so i just see no plausible way that there is aro representation but not ace representation. and there's just this like, poetic irony to this. that aros are so forgotten, so uncared for, that the author of the fucking book forgot to even mention them. because there are three ways this shakes out here. either there is an aro in the line up and dr. tingle deprived us of the validation we need to justify our anger for a lack of representation (which effects us all but aros more). or he just straight up forgot to include us. or he's grossly conflating the two identities. there's no good option. anyway. ace mentions: 5, aro mentions: 1

here we have yet another mention of tara being ace, yet not aro, "my name's tara. i'm the asexual in the corner everyone's been ignoring." would be funny if aromanticism hadn't been grossly ignored once again. ace mentions: 6, aro mentions: 1

(!!!) time for tara to save the day (girlboss). "just pull up all the information you have on asexual and aromantic heroes...oh wait, that's gonna be pretty fucking difficult because there are almost no human asexual heroes represented in popular media, are there." like actually like the fuck. what the fuck. there are so little aro heroes that the author forgot about the one he had!! there are so little aro heroes that the author fucking forgot to mention how few there are. incredible. ace mentions: 10, aro mentions: 2 (ace mentions not quoted here but part of the rant)

so. thats the end of the book. it seems to me that dr. tingle might be a little confused. he's been a great supporter in the past of the aspec community. but there is a pattern of aro erasure in this book that frankly, pisses me off! but wait, there is more!

dr. tingle. babygirl. bestie. what the fuck is this? op explicitly said aroace character. and what do you do? you reblog with only an ace flag. do you not remember your character's own identity? or do you not acknowledge aros outside or aces? let's look at some more quotes from this post.

wow thanks for the solidarity dr. tingle (like, actually)!

what is this? whoopty fucking doo! aros totally dropped after their initial mention? again! but there is simply no precedent for this!!

i'd like to end this with a quote by dr. tingle.

glad you remembered the aces. maybe next time, remember the marginalized people you leave behind.

[egg-emperor]

when you're aro and/or you write character as aro people think you're gonna use the love of family or friendship for a substitute of romantic love but sometimes you don't want any of that either and it's not required at all. it's okay to be a loveless aro in any and all forms, romantic, platonic, and familial and just not want or care for the concept in general. hope this helps lol

always expecting a substitute or thinking it's bad or boring or in need of being fixed if that isn't the case is still amatonormativity. sometimes it isn't always all about love. and the amount of love you give or receive does not determine your worth and it's not what defines you and it's not what makes you human or less than. it's not needed to be whole and happy and content

[mar64ds]

I would do anything for a canonically aspec character in deltarune

[acilykos]

Hi. I see you're aroace and I'm too so I was wondering if I could ask you a question? Idk if this is something you do I found you through aroace senkuu post so absolutely feel free to ignore if you don't want to talk about it.

So basically I'm trying to figure out what exactly loveless means. BC a lot of people both arospec and not have told me that label might fit (as in I want 0 romance etc. But also no platonic equivalent). However. I am a very passionate person about my chosen career, music, art, my cat. Those are all things I feel so strongly about, I wouldn't know what to call it but "love". Similarly there are people I care about, just not in a way where I want romance with them or a platonic version of that kind of relationship.

(I've seen you call senkuu loveless too, and I'm a little confused BC he clearly does care deeply about some people and possibly even more so science. Why not call that love? Is it a terminology thing?)

I'm not trying to pick a fight, I really like your analysis of senkuu.

I'm genuinely trying to understand.

It's possible to reject the societal notion of what love is. I do so myself.

But there's no denying that the chemicals involved are something everyone experiences. Like. Everyone gets dopamine, vasopressin, oxytocin etc. It's just the context that's different. Much like oxytocin is experienced both in mother-infant bonding and in sexual contact, I get a dopamine rush listening to music but not making out with someone.

(granted romantic love hasn't been that well examined but there does seem to be a consensus on the general chemistry involved)

Same chemicals but different result/feeling, you know?

Not getting these chemicals at all is impossible I think, so that can't be what loveless means.

So what does it mean??? Is it just about society's perception of love??

I personally approached my lack of romantic attraction by Googling the brain chemistry BC clearly I wasn't getting anywhere with the emotional side. I'm not an expert. But the definitions of different aro orientations I see commonly, don't actually address this at all. It's like everyone decided on a different definition of "love" and nobody told me any of them.

Again, I know this sounds very passionate, but I always sound like that. I'm not trying to pick a fight, nor am I expecting you to solve my identity crisis. So really no need to reply if you don't want to. I can see how this would be. A lot to try and answer.

Hi, hi!!

First of all, I'm happy to meet a fellow AroAce!! I'm also calling myself loveless because it fits the most, I did research before and found it was the closest to describe myself.

Second of all, I think it depends on the definition of what loveless means for oneself because as always, sexuality at the end of the day is a fluid and personal thing.

Apologies if some of the thoughts seem jumbled or contradicting. I just woke up, was very happy about getting to ramble and I just don't know how to properly describe my "emotional thought processes" because I decided to illustrate my points with examples.

It's a long read too, I hope you don't mind.

Personally, I define it as a "lack of attraction" because oriented and angled AroAces experience other types of attraction (like platonic, aesthetic, etc.), but don't ask me to explain the difference between either, I really have no idea what it is (no offense to any angled or oriented AroAces). Personally, I find it ironic that the two most known "orientations" of AroAce people are still based on experiencing attraction despite AroAces being known for not experiencing it. So we had to create another word to say "Yeah, we actually don't experience any type of attraction”. It's also ironic to me that we call it "loveless" because it's not that we don't love, we just aren't attracted to people.

I'm an artist, I love art and drawing myself, as well as writing.

I'm also a scientist, I love chemistry, astronomy, pharmacology, psychology, really, I'm just always happy to talk about any subject. In fact, that's my current career, I'm a pharmaceutical technician.

I have favourite songs, favourite subjects, favourite seasons. Favourite shows, favourite characters, hell, I also have favourite ships.

I care about my family and friends too.

It's just that I'm not attracted to people. I don't want a romantic relationship because I don't experience romantic attraction. Same as I don't want a sexual one. I just don't see the need or appeal for another person if the goal is to just have a dinner date or a climax. Sure romance and sex can come hand in hand, but that depends on whether or not you experience either or if you're committed in a relationship. Anyways, I digress.

These two are the typical ones people talk about when it comes to attraction, but then there are the illusive platonic and aesthetic attractions, and many more I believe. One of them is explained later which causes AroAces in the first place to also use the labels oriented and angled.

Platonic attraction, or at least as I come to understand it, is seeing a person and just wanting to be their friend. You see someone and you think "wow, I really want to be their friend!!" also apparently called having a "squish".

I don't do that. I don't really feel something compelling me to talk to this person to become their friend.

Same as I don't feel attraction towards aesthetically pleasing people (which is also a highly individual definition). Or well, for a lack of a better term, the only "Wow, I really like how they look" I experience is in terms of gender envy. I don't want to be with them, I don't want to be them either. I just think "I'd like to express my gender like that". If that makes any sense.

I see people talk about "they're hot" and "they're so cute looking" and how they have this attraction towards them because of the way they look, but I just don't? I may appreciate the beauty by acknowledging that someone has nice features or a cool style, but it's the same as me looking at the weather and going "Ah, the sun is shining, isn't that nice." before continuing to do whatever I did, not spending more time on thinking about the weather.

For a real life example: My sister and I are going to a driving school. She has an aesthetic (and I call it on purpose an aesthetic attraction. She has not spoken once with the guy and she also said it's not exactly a crush) on one of the other people there, which to me makes no sense given his general character he revealed at least at the driving school. She even took his pen he forgot at school (just some company gifted pen from when we got a visit that day) in hopes of giving it back to him and struck up a conversation (She failed to. She was too embarrassed, in case you're curious).

I only acknowledge he has a nice jawline. That's it.

I don't feel any type of attraction towards people. I don't want or need to be their romantic partner. I don't want or need a sexual relationship. Just because someone has a personality that clicks with mine, I don't automatically feel the need to become their friend. If we become friends, great. If we don't it is what it is.

Obviously when I'm friends with someone, I care about them, but it's just... not the way friendships are usually portrayed. I don't feel the need to have many friends, or meet up with them constantly or go on trips or anything of the like. I like them a lot, I want them to be well. I just... don't really feel an attraction? I don't know how to properly explain it.

An attraction for me is either the need to be constantly with them, one way or another, because you physically and/or mentally/psychologically feel the need to be in their presence, whenever an opportunity arises OR that you spent a lot of time just thinking about them (daydreaming, fantasies, you get it). I just don't feel like that. I'm fine with not talking or seeing friends for multiple months or years. I'm also fine if we don't talk constantly too. If the friendship ended because we couldn't maintain it, it wouldn't destroy me.

It actually happened multiple times, I'm fine with it. Do I miss them or feel nostalgic when I think about past experiences with them? Of course, I care about them as people.

But I'd feel the same about it even if we had stayed friends, because I obviously feel nostalgic with things I did with my current friends.

I just really don't have the ""need"" to have friends in my life. I'm not "attracted" towards them, I care about them and I like them, but it's just not the type of attraction or even love that society usually attributes to what (best) friends are supposed to be or behave like.

(Same for my family. I haven't seen some of them in years, I don't need to. I like them, I care about their wellbeing.)

You may be wondering, if that's my attitude towards friendships, how do I even have friendships.

They talked to me one day and we happened to keep talking because we liked what each other had to say. It's been years later, so it's safe to say that we still like each other, but not once have I ever initiated a friendship, funnily enough. All I did was just... reply or talk once and we kept talking and meeting up, and eventually we became friends, and because they know a lot about me and I about them, I care about them.

And this is what I think Senkū is like too.

He cares about his friends deeply and he obviously cares about his family too. But he doesn't feel any attraction to people. He never once had an "I need to be their friend" moment. He accidentally sort of becomes friends with them because of the situation they're in and then develops a friendship with them because they've been through a lot of things for multiple years.

How did he meet Taiju? Because Taiju saved his machinery. Senkū didn't have any friends prior to that. But then they talked and spent their childhood together and became friends.

Taiju introduced him to Yuzuriha, they talked, she helped with his experiments as well, and they too became friends.

Senkū not once initiated a friendship.

He may have approached some of them first, but not because he wanted to be their friend/felt platonic attraction, he just needed them for a plan, then he used them for his plans, but they stuck around and they talked and time passed.

If it comes to his plans or science, he talks first. If it comes to any "emotional" conversational topic, someone else initiates it.

Senkū just doesn't feel the need to have emotional connections, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't care about his friends or won't develop friendships, if that makes sense. He doesn't seek them, but if friendships happen to develop, he accepts it. He doesn't portray it outwardly, but deep within his heart he still cares.

Everyone in his life started out as an ally, it eventually became friendship. Senkū didn't recruit people because he wanted friends, he recruited them because he had a need for allies to wage war against Tsukasa, then Ibara, then Whyman.

You can even apply it to Senkū's relationship with Xeno, who is according to the fanbook one of Senkū's "closest relationships" (the other one being Byakuya). Senkū respects Xeno as a scientist and as the only NASA employee who actually helped him build a rocket, but even then it's because Xeno talked first and their relationship was strictly mentor and mentee, it was hardly a friendship in what society defines it as anyway. I guess the closest equivalent would be Marty McFly and Doc Brown from Back to the Future (I know, Marty isn't Doc's mentee, but it's about the assisting in science projects part), if it comes to media, but even then Senkū's and Xeno's mentorship would not fit the definition of friendship the way Marty's and Doc's does.

I also call Senkū loveless, because he would never enter a queer platonic relationship (qpr). Entering one would mean you experience a type of connection that is more than friendship, but not romantic or sexual. Or at least that's how I came to understand it. Personally, I'm still confused on what they're actually like aside from them developing from a "tertiary form of attraction". This is where angled and oriented AroAces come in, and why some people call themselves "AroAce lesbians" for example. They experience a different type of attraction towards women that's not just friendship, but it's also not romantic or sexual (at least that's how I understand it, any tertiary attraction feeling AroAces correct or explain it to me, because it's been confusing me for years).

Now look at Senkū and tell me that he'd ever enter such a relationship, when he barely feels the need to make friends on his own. He says it himself "love causes only problems" because of the emotions involved in it. He also, as we established, doesn't feel the need to make friends. If that's already too much and Senkū doesn't have the need for friends, and a QPR is similar, except it lacks the romantic and sexual part and is supposedly "more than a mere friendship", then Senkū definitely wouldn't have that.

I think it's important to mention that, but I think at this point it is obvious, I don't define attraction and caring as the same things.

Why would I? It isn't the same thing, otherwise we wouldn't have different words for it.

Attraction means I myself feel the need to be close to whatever attracts me, maybe that I can't stop thinking about it because I need it in my life, but it can also be superficial.

Care is that it doesn't cross my mind every day, but maybe I happen to think about it once because it crossed my mind, or if I'm with friends or family who tell me about something that happened to them, I care about their wellbeing.

You may also have noticed that I barely even used the word "love" despite talking about being "loveless". As I mentioned in the beginning, I really don't think it's the right term. We love. We care. But it's just not the love people think of first (aka romantic). I love my hobbies, I love my friends and family, I love my favourite characters. But none of this is what society tells me that love is supposed to be or feel like. But it's the most direct way of saying "I don't experience any type of attraction", as misleading as it is, sadly.

And that's it, basically.

Again, it's just my own definition and experience, so how true it is for the majority of AroAces or how much you agree with me, is totally up to you and anyone else. Emotional matters are confusing, and a lot of the time don't make sense and are hard to put into words, but I gave it my best shot with all I know right now. If you're curious or think that loveless may not be the right term after all, you're welcome to do more research on the terms angled and oriented, I bet there are a lot of AroAces who identify with those labels ready to help you out, and who know much more about it than me.

I hope I was able to help you in any way to find some clarity! Thanks again for stopping by, feel free to do that again any time!!

[aq2003]

ive had an enemies to lovers arc about the doctor's wife if i ignore all of the concepts of the tardis-given-a-human-body that i have in my head it is a fun and quirky episode

[unproduciblesmackdown]

truly something that, amidst facing / going through a dramatic Life Change ft. unavoidable emotional effects of that, there are instances where i can't conceal any & all degrees of being distressed / upset, & repeatedly getting "it's hard for me too" as a Direct Response to that: really something & a half how the asserted theoretical Sympathy of [i feel similarly!] is invoked so as to, oh you know, preclude sympathetic Treatment. such as that what would be More sympathetic in these instances would be to say Nothing, "if there's nothing but dismissal / making it first & foremost about someone else's feelings to say, don't say it at all" style

[celestial-alignment]

Not the tummy. :(

--

“The Night That Terror Stalked the Town” Season 1, Episode 10

[mogai-headcanons]

Metal Sonic from Sonic the Hedgehog is a polyamorous greyromantic omnisexual genderfluid robot who uses any pronouns!

His sibling Tails Doll is a loveless aroace nonbinary gendervoid kenochoric robot who uses it/its pronouns!

Their brother Metal Knuckles is an aroace agender robot who uses he/him pronouns!

Their dad Dr. Eggman is a bisexual trans person who uses he/him pronouns!

dni link

[aroace-nero]

[purpletrashcans]

i have a buzz cut and my friends want to paint my head, suggestions?

[larsisfrommars]

Wild Wild Reviews

The Night The Wizard Shook The Earth

Overall Score:

Story: 3.5/5

Dame: 2/5

Villain: 6/5

Gadgets: 5/5

Disguises: 1/5

Bonus Points: Gay Subtext: 3/5

The Yikes Dated Factor: 0/-5

Score: 20.5/25

Tier: A (82%)

Previous Episode Review

FULL REVIEW UNDER THE CUT

The Story

I wanted to rate the story on this episode higher, I really did but the first half is SO slow and I’m sorry but John Kneubuhl writes his female characters SO poorly that an otherwise fun and intriguing story suffers immensely for it. Which is such a shame because this is the episode where the BEST Wild Wild West villain was born! Every second Dunn/Loveless is on screen is absolutely fantastic and incredibly memorable. The doomsday device on which the episode revolves is compelling. Yet every moment where Jim interacts with Greta is an absolute slog of ham-fisted flirting and mid 20th century chauvinism. It’s like they had half a perfect episode but didn’t know what to do to fill in the rest of the story aside from the villain and the McGuffin. It also feels out of whack due to the lack of Artemus after the first 15 minutes and it’s very nearly lacking one of the delightful key features of the franchise, fun disguises. It’s absolutely better than TNOT Inferno, but I can’t honestly say it’s better than TNOT Deadly Bed, so right down the middle between them it goes.

The Dame

Our woman of the week is Leslie Parish! I know her as Carolyn from the TOS episode “Who Mourns for Adonais”.

*Sigh* Thus begins a parade of woefully underwritten female protagonists on The Wild Wild West. If I had a dollar for every time a female character on this show had potentially intriguing motivations only to be sidelined in order for Jim West to woo and fulfill the “kiss the girl” goal on each episode’s checklist I would be a rich man. She’s not getting a one but I was thinking about it. Mostly because of that TRULY weird scene where West can’t move and she’s feeding him by hand (Who let their fetish interfere with the quality of this show? Hope it doesn’t happen again! Except that it absolutely will happen… a lot). I decided against it however because she does show a modicum of agency in the first half of the story before it’s undercut by Jim playing weird mind games with her right after the odd fetish scene. I also think she gets overshadowed by Antoinette and Ms. Piecemeal, she just got lost in the shuffle. Ugh.

The Villain

Our villain of the “week” is Michael Dunn! Most iconically known for Wild Wild West but us Trekkies also know him as Alexander from the Star Trek TOS episode “Plato’s Stepchildren”. Continuing our Ancient Greece themed Star Trek cameos I suppose.

Ugh where do I even begin with Michael Dunn’s performance as Doctor Miguelito Loveless? It’s the birth of a legend, a landmark role for actors with dwarfism, an iconic antagonist for an iconic show. He’s a guaranteed smash hit every time he’s in an episode! He’s eccentric, insane, and dynamic, he’s equal parts humanitarian gentleman and genocidal maniac. His motivations toe the line of being reasonable for his background (bitter ex-aristocracy) and unhinged (what he’s willing to do to reach his goal). Heck, I know that the songs they decided to plop into his episodes almost felt like padding for time but he’s just so off-the-wall that I consider it part of Loveless’s charm. Maybe someday I’ll be able to fully articulate why this character is so beloved but that may need to be a post of it’s own (and I’m sure others have already beaten me to it). What can I say but six out of five?

The Gadgets

If I seem a bit biased about the gadgets it’s only because we haven’t gotten to any of the weirder/unlikely/unhelpful one. The carriage is so cool and it makes me absolutely insane that they never end up using a carriage with built-in defenses ever again. The only reason it wasn’t more effective is that Jim was outnumbered on enemy turf. Then of course there’s that clutch little pen that breaks him out of the cage Loveless puts Jim in.

The Disguises

The only disguise we get this week is a terrible attempt at posing as the man Jim failed to prevent being assassinated. I think you ought to leave the disguises to Artemus there Jimbo.

The Gay Subtext

(Don’t ship it? Skip it!)

Say hello to a beloved trope of this ship, and that is Artemus fretting over Jim putting himself in unnecessary danger (and occasionally vice versa)! Seconded only by Artemus complaining about rescuing him or having thought he was dead. Artemus still insists on discreetly keeping an eye on Jim after the professor gets assassinated. Not to mention the custom carriage he designed with Jim specifically in mind. Very normal of you Artemus good job my man, ilysm.

The Yikes Dated Factor

(See elaboration for 0 on this factor from previous episode)