Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor
21 July 2017 at 03:30 #61219
To be honest I’m finding this rather pointless. People have their opinions and I doubt I can say anything to change them. What the article that was deleted did say, what that since DW has started pandering to feminism, it’s gone down hill rather noticeably. If you think I’m joking, look at how the SJW tore into Moffat for everything under the Sun until DW became more ‘girl friendly’.21 July 2017 at 04:24 #61220
Okay, maybe I will take another crack at this. For one thing I’m tired of anyone who speaks out about a gender swap being labelled hater, bully, selfish, immature, tantrum thrower, and so on. It needs to stop. This has nothing to do with tantrums, it has to do with what’s happening in the media, and call it what you like, but the SJW are attacking male-centric roles and it IS having a negative effect on media, both socially and financially. Want proof? Look up Marvel and the SJW, they started pandering and sales tanked. They’ve straight up said it, and they’re axing a lot of their SJW focused stories and comics for that reason. The gaming industry is learning the same hard lesson as well. With Marvel what had fans so up in arms over the SJW comics was they replaced established core characters that people had read and supported for years.
“Oh, but leads need to change because it’s modern and progressive.” No, it’s demeaning and pandering. You want strong female leads, don’t replace male leads, establish new ones. Wait, didn’t they already do that with:
Alien movie francise, Xena, Buffy, Wonder Woman tv series/movie, The Bionic Woman, The Bride with White Hair film series, The Dead and the Deadly, The Heroic Trio film series, A Chinese Ghost Story film and tv series, Underworld film series, Terminator, Terminator 2, Terminator 3, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Earth 2, Star Trek Voyager, Once Upon A Time, The Survivors (both the original and the remake), Charmed, Relic Hunter, Charlies Angels, film and television series, Cleopatra 2525, Tru Calling, Dollhouse, Ghost Whisperer, Nikita, Dark Angel, Alias, Jessica Jones, etc.
In looking at that I can see the SJW have a point, there really aren’t any strong female leads for girls in the media to look up to. Media doesn’t NEED to replace male roles for the sake of female role models, there are more than enough if you just look. The problem with losing DW as something with a male lead has a lot more implications than most people think. Look at 98% of male role models today, I can summarize them in two words, ugh bash. That’s how they solve problems. Men are muscle who bash, even the nerdy types serve the purpose of creating gadgets for the ugh bash to hit something, or tell him a weakness to exploit when he hits. Doctor Who was one of the few remaining heroes for young men that proved you can solve conflicts with brains and words, not fists and guns, and now that’s gone too.21 July 2017 at 04:44 #61221
Who is SJW?
I read your post @antaus and fully agree. And the one deleted.
My ‘real life’ friends who happen to be women- half say great a woman as the Dr. The other half are saying its destroyed it for them. One said her family won’t be watching as husband and kids upset by it. It is just divisive of fandom. As a mother I also wonder how kids will accept their hero changing sex?
Earlier comnents about JNT and Colin Bakers era are spot on. They made the Dr unlikeable and the show was canned. Dr Who-news flash for AG people- was never a popular show growing up in the 1980s. I loved it, but it was never cool.
I think by introducing a female lead the powers that be think they will get new viewers, at the cost of long term fans. The show is carried by the central character. Bad episodes of Capaldis era were carried by Capaldi (kept me watching in spite of the bad story-moon egg -what the). Just saying that I wouldnt want to be in Whitakers shoes right now. The pressure must be enormous. I will be open minded, not much I can do – and hope to be pleasently surprised. I just hate the thought tho of my fav childhood character, yes over 35 yrs now, being changed into a woman. What sort of companion relatuonship would they have? Cant fathom it.21 July 2017 at 05:01 #61222
Social Justice Warriors21 July 2017 at 05:37 #61223
The pressure on new Doctors is always enormous. But all things considered, if the sixth Doctor’s personality didn’t make me stop watching back in 1984, there’s probably nothing they can do with the 13th that will.
As for companion interaction, I so want to see an encounter between the 13th Doctor and Jack Harkness. Even if it’s only in a minisode.21 July 2017 at 06:00 #61224
@genek1953.” But all things considered, if the sixth Doctor’s personality didn’t make me stop watching back in 1984, there’s probably nothing they can do with the 13th that will.”
Ha ha that is so funny and so true! Yes, I kept watching too!21 July 2017 at 07:33 #61225
Everywhere I go at the moment there is discussion about Dr Who. People who have not talked about it before or watched it for years are excited by the news. That can only be a good thing and if people do only tune on at Christmas because they want to see a woman take that role that is still good. Some may not bother again but plenty of others will realise that they have been missing out these past few years and re engage with the series. (Hopefully anyway.)
Yeseterday a friend showed me a diagram (unfortunately I failed to get the link) showing the reaction to new Doctors, from the “oh no it is the end of Dr Who” to this actor is great. Right now there is a high level of emotional response to the announcement which is exacerbated by the fact that fans have to deal, not only with a change in face but a change in gender. Several people have concerns which are emotive and understandable. I too initially felt “no” about a proposed gender change but that reaction was emotive. The more I have thought about it the more I recognise that there is no reason for not having a female play the role and plenty of reasons why there should be. I also suspect though that some of the objections are not from Doctor Who fans but are purely political from those who fear “political correctness”.
@mirime and @missrory. I too preferred to play with toy cars and blocks than dolls. Hated dolls. I desperately wanted to play with my brother’s train set but wasn’t allowed to do so. I also despise the way that marketing has driven gender divisions in toys. A toy brand which I have been a collector has moved increasingly from more gender neutral toys in the 70s and 80s to much more gender specific toys now which is deeply disappointing though a few years ago they did a line of pink vikings which I loved. Hot pink as a bold, warrior colour.. and it was probably more historically likely than the horned helmets.
In some ways it is one step forward and two backwards at the moment. Also talking of Hollywood, there are still far too few roles for women but that is not the main issue. There are too few films made by women and plonking a female lead in a film made by men is a not enough. Films, like toys, are becoming more gender specific, (I think) and that is extremely bad. Doctor Who has never been “gender specific” though it has often been perceived to be so and seeing that “nailed to the mast” as it were is pleasing. NO wonder I love Dr Who.
@tardigrade You made a good point re’ the Doctor calling himself Timelord when he rejects the elitism of Gallifreyan society. It does grate and I liked Danny making a point about that.
@cloisterbell I think you will find that some of us have expressed reservations about Jodie but we have learnt not to prejudge actors. I thought Matt Smith was way to young for the role and would be terrible but was won over the moment his head popped out of the Tardis. The roles I have seen Jodie in don’t say “Doctor material” to me but she is clearly a fine actor and no actor should be judged by the characters they portray and even less by their non acting presentation as many are introverts or not entirely comfortable when “out of character”, so until we have seen Jodie in the role it is not fair to pass judgments upon her casting. Give her a chance and be prepared to be surprised.
Janette21 July 2017 at 09:28 #61232Mirime @mirime
@antaus great list, but there is a fair amount on there you wouldn’t show to a young child. I love Alien and Terminator, but I wasn’t watching them when I was in primary school.
@whofangirl-73 not all long term fans. I’ve been watching for as long as I can remember and I’m not going anywhere.
The fanbase of just about everything is divided at some point on something. People have different opinions. It’s normal.
My little boy is only four and has watched a few First Doctor episodes, seen clips on YouTube (he loves Clara) and has played with my Lego Tardis. He’s seen the new Doctor and made no comment at all on her being a woman.21 July 2017 at 11:29 #61235
Oops thought my post was missing. so have deleted second post21 July 2017 at 12:20 #61236Missy @missy
@tardigrade: However, I actually think it may be a good time to ditch the Time Lord/Lady terminology altogether, as it’s not just the gender of the term that’s the issue. The modern connotations of “Lord” don’t sit well with the Doctor’s character. I don’t think that “Lady” is much better in that respect- it makes me think of “tea lady”, which doesn’t carry the right vibe either . The Doctor could call herself “Gallifreyan”.
Well now that’s a thought. Yes, you could call the show “The Gallifreyan.” She could also fix the fault and dispense with a blue police box altogether, and change it into something else. After a while, the title music could be changed too – why not? Just one problem, it wouldn’t be Doctor Who anymore.
@mirime: excellent article, captures why I love the twelfth Doctor so much.
When I was a child, we used to play games, and there was always a fight as to who would be the hero. Seeing as how we were all girls, obviousley someone had to take the male lead.
I cannot read all of your posts, there are so many, but find myself surprised that all of you have so much to say. We haven’t seen the first episode yet? No, I’m not being sarcastic, I mean it. Below are my only thoughts on the matter, and probably not anyone elses.
My feelings are that many viewers didn’t like Steven Moffat’s writing. Like my OH, some like all the “t’s” crossed and ‘I’s” dotted. I do not. I love a mystery, a puzzle, a look for clues.
I did read one post – somewhere- that SM preached at the viewer, and if they wanted that they’d go to church. He wasn’t preaching, he was addressing the young people who watch the show, I would have thought that that was obvious – or have we forgotten that this wonderful show is primarily for children?
Although I’ve enjoyed almost every episode since the series returned, the best (for me) have been since SM became head writer and Peter Capaldi the Doctor.
Since the exodus of SM and PC, I feel that I have lost two dear and trusted friends. Most peculiar for a fantasy programme for children, but that, to me, shows just how powerful this wonderful show was.
Missy21 July 2017 at 12:32 #6123721 July 2017 at 12:51 #61238Mirime @mirime
I think @missy and I feel similarly about the Twelfth Doctor – and I also don’t feel the need to have everything wrapped up neatly with a bow on top, nothing wrong with loose ends!21 July 2017 at 12:59 #61239JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
Hmmm, SJW — an expression that falls into the same bracket as the likes of ‘EUSSR’ and ‘magic money tree’ that tells you more about the user than it does anything else. The word ‘pandering’ is highly loaded too. It’s not pandering (nor demeaning) to listen to people’s concerns about representation. What is demeaning is any attempt to devalue or marginalise those concerns by dismissing them with pejorative language loaded with implications of ‘unimportant’ or ‘irrelevant’ in order to continue to operate from a position of absolute and unquestioned privilege.
But the thing that gets me about this expression is the idea that ‘social justice’ is somehow a bad thing, something that can be rendered in a pejorative sense. How can anyone, outside of the most rabid right-winger, be against social justice? Quite apart from anything else it runs absolutely counter to the ethos of the show. I fail to see how anyone could continue to watch Who for any significant amount of years without subscribing to its themes of tolerance, equality and, well, change.
And nothing has been ‘lost’. If anything the mythos of the show has been added to. No one’s saying that the Doctor is never going to be a man again. Chances are the 14th Doc will be. What you’re looking at is a probable maximum of three years of JW as the Doctor (and which might turn out to be amazing). What has happened is that another layer has been added to the character of the Doctor — something that showrunners of the future will have the option of exploring, or not, depending on their creative vision.
What’s more, while it’s true that the character of the Doctor should be celebrated for a cerebral ‘brains over brawn’ ethos, how is that gender specific? Those qualities will almost certainly apply to JW’s Doctor as they did to, say, Matt Smith’s. At the end of the day, you’re somehow saying that these values only count if embodied in a male and that to me shows a terrible lack of imagination and one, thankfully, that is not shared by the majority of the younger generation who from what I can see are embracing the idea of a female Doctor.21 July 2017 at 13:03 #61240toinfinityandbepond @toinfinityandbepond
Is The Doctor a “Good Woman”?
or even “Guid”21 July 2017 at 13:56 #61242
13’s response to Peter Davison…21 July 2017 at 15:50 #61248Cath Annabel @cathannabel
@antaus I’m with @jimthefish on the use of SJW as a pejorative. I’ve only started seeing this relatively recently, and I would suggest it is not really reasonable to take for granted (a) that people will know what it stands for and (b) that people will accept that it is a Bad Thing. Political Correctness I guess most people will have come across, but it is a highly disputed term, so many news stories about things being banned because somebody thought somebody might be offended, which turned out on fairly perfunctory investigation to be entirely untrue. And as with SJW, if there is a core of meaning to it, when we strip away the myth, isn’t it about not using language, not reinforcing and perpetuating stereotypes and myths about people that insult and diminish them, giving a damn about other people’s values and feelings, just being kind? As a feminist I’m used to ‘feminist’ being assumed to be a bad thing. It’s tiresome and depressing but hey. I don’t agree with every single one of the women and men who identify as feminist, but the core of it is of course about equality and fairness and not about reverse sexism, or silencing men.
We’re on this Forum because we care about Doctor Who. Some of us are feminists, SJWs even, some aren’t. Surely all of us want the show to be successful, to continue to capture the imaginations of children and adults, to retain the loyalties of long-standing fans (I’m one of those, I go back to the Troughton era) and to attract new fans. If the change makes some fearful about the future success of the show, I genuinely sympathise even if I don’t share that view, but surely all we can do is to wait and see.21 July 2017 at 16:33 #61250
@cathannabel Personally I don’t think ALL feminists or SJWs are bad. I think there are people in both groups that see the wrongs and ills of society and do want to change them for the better. My major malfunction is with the people who run the organizations because from the experiences I’ve had, I don’t see them as having the best interest of the people at heart. I may be wrong but I don’t feel that way.
I love DW, always have, and I want to see it succeed as well. One of the reasons I like the show so much is because most of the time I really don’t know what’s going to happen until it happens. How many other shows on television can say that?
Romance: Guy meets girl, they fall in love and have fun, big tragedy breaks them up, undying declaration of love saves the day. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Action flicks: Hero is going about their normal life, wham, bang, explosion, stuff happens. Hero has a problem they solves with excessive violence, gets to the big bad, huge fight, hero almost loses. Last ditch attack saves the day. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Horror: Average people go about their lives until big evil shows up and starts killing people. Then it’s all blood, guts and gore, people keep dying until the main characters find a way to defeat the evil. Big bad dies in huge final battle with bodies piled everywhere, hero makes a snarky one-liner and walks off into the sunset. Wash, rise, repeat.
There is so little variation I can sit down and nearly predict how a movie/show is going to turn out scene by scene. For me DW has always been a gem because it has the two things thing that 99% of Hollywood and most other shows have lost, writing skill and creativity. I’m not going to preemptively write off the show’s entire future as a dead loss because a woman’s at the helm, but I don’t like what I’m seeing. I guess we will have to wait and see.
P.S. Although I mentioned it before, Tom Baker was my first Doctor and still my favorite. Even if I did have to watch him in reruns.21 July 2017 at 17:36 #61251
Nice Guardian article jodie whittaker the force of nature taking on doctor who?21 July 2017 at 18:03 #61252
@antaus: A woman is not “at the helm” of Doctor Who. The person at the helm is the showrunner. The actor portraying the Doctor is the figurehead at the bow of the ship, and goes where the showrunner steers the ship.
Doctor Who began with a woman at the helm, way back in 1963. And Verity Lambert did quite a good job of steering the ship.21 July 2017 at 18:04 #61253Cath Annabel @cathannabel
@antaus Fair enough, I don’t know to which organisations you refer, and I don’t feel it’s particularly pertinent to the Who conversation. But if not all feminists/SJWs are bad, perhaps we can agree to work on the assumption that Forum members who identify as either are likely to be amongst the good guys, and focus on the programme? I, for one, am very much hoping that JW gives us a proper Yorkshire Doctor. Shame we’ve got so long to wait to see how any of this pans out!
Be reight, pal.21 July 2017 at 18:53 #61256
Does it really matter who takes over? If it doesn’t work out then-ok. Move on. All we know at the mo is-new Doc,new producer, probably new Tardis makeover. A lot to look forward to. I’m no fan of “political correctness” or box ticking, but its clearly a brave new direction.
One thing I would like is the absence of any kind of romance for the Doctor(whether its a he or she). The Doctor in my mind should be sexless and above such behaviour-the Rose/Doctor thing irritated me a lot. Really looking forward to JW21 July 2017 at 19:46 #61258
Yes, the Doctor and Rose was very irritating to me too. He’s ‘The Doctor’, not some love sick puppy from outer space. There have been many companions in the past far more developed and interesting than Rose Tyler, and he didn’t fall in love with any of them. My favorite companion from the New Who was Donna Noble. I think she was a good companion at first. Not too bright, not stupid, and did a lot of question asking for the audience. At the same time she also acted as the Doctor’s conscience in some instances when he let himself go too far. Then they got into that whole Doctor Donna, meta-crisis crap… *facedesk*.
That’s what I think the role of the companion should be. The stand in for the viewer, a friend, someone to keep him grounded, and occasional voice of reason when he needs it. Although I have to say my favorite part of Donna, aside from being pretty, was her mouth, and boy could she have one when you ticked her off.
@cathannabel I suppose I should have been more specific, I meant at the helm of the Tardis, not running the show. I know who Verity Lambert is. I watched some of the Hartnell episodes out of curiosity to see what Who was like when it first came out. Dated, and Old Who never had great FX, even for the time. That aside if taken into context for the era it was created in, it was some pretty good programming. The Brits were traveling through time and with some fairly interesting stories, while in America we had space heroes from the future wearing plastic wrap. They had the Tardis while we were still flying through space in a firecracker that had fins glued to it. XD21 July 2017 at 20:13 #61261
What personality should the new Doctor have? Dark and mysterious? Zany? Arrogant? Manipulative? Aggressive? Naive? Rude? Superior? Bookish? Gung ho? Haunted by the past? Flippant? Just? Or all of the above?21 July 2017 at 20:39 #61263lisa @lisa
I don’t get why Rose/1o irritated any one and River/11/12 didn’t?
So what’ s wrong with sex 🙂 My take is the Doctors can have any
kind of relationship that they want to and we will all gain from their perspective .
But tbh I’m not expecting kinky.
But then again …….. British show – who nose21 July 2017 at 21:10 #61264
For the record, I found the whole River thing irritating too, and I never really engaged with the River character too. Hope the new Doc can find have an entirely new aspect/direction to take and surprise everyone with something none of us expected.21 July 2017 at 21:28 #61265geoffers @geoffers
I don’t get why Rose/1o irritated any one and River/11/12 didn’t?
i think it did grate on a few, especially as river hung around far longer than rose. but for the most part, i believe everyone was simply used to the romantic side of the doctor by then, because of the thing with rose.
in my headcanon, 10 was still emotionally closed off to love and romance, from his experiences in the time war, and rose brought him back from that. and 11 took a while to warm up to river, as well. it was her sass and cleverness than won him over.
i’ve never viewed either relationship as “sexual,” though, as romance (and falling in love with someone) can happen without the sexual component. (even kissing isn’t necessarily to be seen as exclusively sexual, just think of all the parents who kiss their children on the lips.) one can argue that river and 12 must have taken the relationship that far, having spent 24 (?) years together, exclusively, but until we learn (at least) that they had a child (or two), i won’t commit to believing that that was anything more than a romantic thing, either.
so, while there’s nothing wrong with sex in doctor who, we still have no definitive evidence that the doctor has had relations with earth women… or even how that would work (given that time lords may have entirely different sex organs, as they do brains and hearts). and i’m not even 100% convinced that susan is his actual granddaughter, and not just a made up relationship, for whatever reason…
🙂21 July 2017 at 21:50 #61266JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
I didn’t mind the Rose/10 thing, although its conclusion was a bit soupy for my liking. My rationalisation was that the Doctor had had loving — and probably sexual — relationships with certain BG companions, it was just that it hadn’t been made explicitly clear before because of the nature of the show. Certainly in my headcanon, Doctor 4 and Sarah-Jane acted like a married couple in their interactions and I see no reason why they can’t have been in a relationship. Similarly, Doctor 4 and Romana and Doctor 6 and Peri.
But, yes, the problem is that in modern Who that aspect of the Doctor’s life does need to be addressed and the Martha storyline made it clear that a mooning, unrequited companion isn’t really going to work long-term, any more than rehashing the Rose story would. River to my mind was an elegant way around the solution and I loved every minute of that arc. By having the Doctor a married man, it establishes his romantic credentials — to persist with the ‘s/he’s not interested in sex would just not convince these days and might even be treated with some suspicion — while getting around the constant wondering about the precise relationship with the companion.
It’s going to be interesting to see how CC deals with this now that the Doctor is a woman. It’d be fun to see River return but I highly doubt she will. It’s unlikely that CC will want to use SM’s characters, any more than SM had any interest in using RTDs.21 July 2017 at 22:06 #6126721 July 2017 at 22:39 #6126921 July 2017 at 23:54 #61271
So the Radio Times article above says:
It is thought that she was given the job at least five months ago by Chris Chibnall
Whittaker is expected to start filming for the role next year for a likely broadcast in autumn 2018, with the role of her companion still undecided according to sources.
His (Chibnall’s) statement said: ‘I always knew I wanted the Thirteenth Doctor to be a woman and we’re thrilled to have secured our number one choice. Her audition for The Doctor simply blew us all away.’
‘Jodie is an in-demand, funny, inspiring, super-smart force of nature and will bring loads of wit, strength and warmth to the role. The Thirteenth Doctor is on her way.’22 July 2017 at 01:57 #61277Bluesqueakpip @bluesqueakpip
Okay, I wander off for a week to places where you have to stand on a hill and wave your phone in the air to get a signal, and the BBC has the sheer temerity to announce the casting while I’m away. 😀
I’m sympathetic to those struggling with the gender change. When you have a show like Doctor Who, often a much loved part of people’s childhood memories, you will get some people rejecting a major change. The head-logic of casting a female actor to play the role gets overruled by the heart, which doesn’t want that much loved part of childhood changing quite so much.
One of the peculiarities of the acting business is that two thirds of the available roles are for males – in an industry where two thirds of the available actors are female. Furthermore, male actors had and have number of ‘gender-swap’options available. If you’re a bloke, you can play female Shakespearean roles quite easily. Or Classical Greek drama, if you prefer. There’s an entire ‘drag’ genre – the recent production of Matilda has a male actor playing the headmistress. David Suchet has done Lady Bracknell … I could go on.
So if there’s a very long tradition of male actors playing female roles there is no logical reason not to cast a female actor in a male role. None. We’ve gender swapped roles for literally thousands of years; the only change is that now the gender swaps include female to male, as well as the traditional male to female.22 July 2017 at 02:24 #61278Yoda @yodajeep83
My problem with the female change of the time lord race. As the Doctor stated they are an advanced race. He was married. Had children. So the idea of being involved with someone for the rest of your life..? Or is it for them the rest of your regeneration? Because they retain their memories. So you marry as man and women. Something happens to one of them and they change into the other gender. Because they do not get to choose who they become. That means they could never have children? Even plants have a male and female gender in their species. It to me doesn’t seem right that all of a sudden you’re another gender/sex. With this last season it has seemed like they were setting up a “you can choose your gender” transgender is for some reason often confused with sexuality. Bill was a lesbian. She was a women who liked women. Captain Jack was a person who liked everything. Not just men or women but also alien. So any way it seems as though the show has started a political stance. I love the show. Peter was kind of weird. Not my favorite. But changing the doctor to a women seems like a political tool.22 July 2017 at 02:29 #61279
I am not warming to the idea of a female dr at all- HOWEVER there are certain species on Earth that do change sex mid life. Could it be at mid life timelords change sex (like the Master). As some kind of menopause? Change of life?? Hmmm.22 July 2017 at 04:13 #61281
If the Doctor is representative of Time Lords in general, they retain their memories but their personalities can change. So it’s quite plausible to imagine that after a regeneration or two relationships with friends and family may not endure. The Doctor himself has said that he can’t look back on his.22 July 2017 at 09:37 #61283
@jimthefish Yes got to applaud the announcement of a “female doctor” if the biggest objection is that it is “too PC”. This is one of those debates where it is the failings of the arguments against rather than those for that show that the matter in question is a good thing. There have been a couple of posters with actual arguments to support their objections but most are simply frothing. I really look forward to the time when the Doctor’s gender, hair colour, skin colour etc is not an issue, just as long as the Doctor retains a British accent.
@whofangirl-73 I think we can assume that relationships don’t work the same way on Gallifrey as on earth. After all why should all alien societies emulate our own? Although Gallifreyans look like us we know that they are very different biologically. Maybe the Christmas special will touch on this, (though I like to retain the mystery about the Doctor’s past).
Janette22 July 2017 at 10:56 #61285Anonymous @
You know, in real life people do change gender these days and that must involve a huge period of adjustment, not only for them but for their friends and family also. When your son/husband/father/best friend becomes female (or vice versa) there must be various stages of adjustment between grief and loss and full loving acceptance. Some people can achieve the latter, others, sadly, can’t. I imagine many long term fans of the show are going through that process now (not losing sight of the fact that this is a work of fiction and not real life.)
For myself, I used to be mildly against the idea of a female doctor on the vague grounds that the doctor has always been a man (in the viewers experience). Michelle Gomez helped me change that mindset and also, watching Katherine Kelly in ‘Class’ I kept being struck by the thought that she’d make a great doctor. Both actors have the ability and talent to bring that energy and vitality to the part while delivering a completely different characterization.
As for Jodie Whittaker and Chris Chibnall – we shall see, as we have with all new doctors and showrunners. I hope they ace it.22 July 2017 at 11:26 #6128622 July 2017 at 12:15 #6128722 July 2017 at 14:07 #61289Anonymous @
Is your picture a comment on my post or have I missed something?22 July 2017 at 15:01 #61291
No, no comment on your post (I would have tagged you).
It’s the UK Prime Minister’s husband taking out the bins (A Boy Job)…….22 July 2017 at 16:13 #61292Anonymous @
Fair enough! Although I do spout rubbish sometimes but I didn’t really think you were saying that.Thought there was an irony I’d missed.
(It didn’t help that I thought the chap was Arthur Askey. Which dates me.)22 July 2017 at 16:21 #61293
@Margaret-Blaine Bow ties are cool…22 July 2017 at 20:05 #61295Anonymous @
Perfect picture!22 July 2017 at 20:41 #6129622 July 2017 at 22:06 #61300
The Christmas show. 12th Doc, 1st Doc, regeneration, new Doc. Anyone who can predict how all this will pan out is a genius. I’m sure that the moment has been prepared for………..23 July 2017 at 11:36 #61308Serahni @serahni
@antaus Your opinion sounds much like my cousin’s, who I’ve chatted to on and off about this since Missy arrived and it seemed likely she was a precursor to ‘test the waters’. He has exactly the same feeling about the importance of The Doctor as a role model who doesn’t use brawn to solve his problems, and I do empathise with it. The world is never going to grow out of needing examples of men who can use their brains at all, since there seem to be an alarming amount with Twitter accounts that make you wonder. 😉
I think I also said up earlier that we have to be careful that the quest for balance doesn’t become one of replacement instead of creation. Gender swapping fictional characters is okay up to a point, but I’m not sure that the correct message to be sending out is that men don’t deserve ANY representation. I would personally not mind waking up in Themyscira but that might have something to do with the pervading tropical sunshine and vague hope that I’d shed a few pounds under Amazonian regime. I’m not sure that it’s actually a society we should be striving for. lol Balance is hard to achieve when you’re talking about an entire cultural shift affecting so many people, so I’m glad we have spaces like this where debate can flourish and is, mostly, civil. We’re only really in trouble when diversity of opinion is lost forever.
I am holding out opinion in favour of seeing how they deal with this. For me, they will have got it right if the gender thing is acknowledged but rarely central to any of the storytelling. I know people have mentioned possible historical complications if The Doctor tries to assert authority whilst looking like a woman in certain time periods on Earth, but if that’s true then I guess I just hope they don’t visit the past very often. I want it not to matter. I want the narrative to barely notice it. I could be wanting a lot, and if this turns out to be the political move everyone fears, I am pretty sure I will find it tedious, but in the meantime, I will remain hopeful that we end up with a character and a story that transcends gender altogether.23 July 2017 at 11:37 #61309Craig @craigEmperor
From The Mash Report (which, if you don’t know, is a spin-off from a sort-of UK version of The Onion, The Daily Mash – I get all my news from there: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/23 July 2017 at 12:31 #61310Craig @craigEmperor
And I quite liked this silliness as well.23 July 2017 at 13:12 #61311Nick @nick
I think I also said up earlier that we have to be careful that the quest for balance doesn’t become one of replacement instead of creation. Gender swapping fictional characters is okay up to a point, but I’m not sure that the correct message to be sending out is that men don’t deserve ANY representation….For me, they will have got it right if the gender thing is acknowledged but rarely central to any of the storytelling….I want it not to matter. I want the narrative to barely notice it.
Apologies for mashing your statement together. In my opinion, gender swapping the Doctor shouldn’t matter at all, so long as the role reversal continues with the companion. We are bound to get a single male companion for Jodie eventually. We may not be able to avoid the romance element than RTD introduced, but so long as the other change in emphasis RTD and Moff introduced continues.
Since 2005 we have had a series of well written female companions with significant characters and character development who in many ways have proved to be more human and saved the Doctor on many instances. If we now have a series of strong male companions, with similar interesting characters and character development, who continue to save the Doctor, when she gets her humanity wrong, or makes some other mistake, then the series will retain, if not enhance, positive role models for young boys.23 July 2017 at 17:14 #61317
The topic ‘Jodie Whittaker announced as the new, 13th Doctor’ is closed to new replies.