@OB-Wan—

There are right words and wrong words to suit every occasion.

True, but this is not one of those occasions. You’re being painfully literal. Again. And to repeat, there’s nothing actually incorrect with the usage of the word, for the reasons outlined above.

But since you live and die by dictionary defintions, here’s the OED on the…[Read more]

@OB-Wan—

Words have meanings attached to them

Yes, they do but once again it’s a great deal more nuanced and complicated than that. In almost every case it’s not a one-to-one correlation (and let’s not open the can of worms of signifier and signified and to the relative instablity of the relationships between them). Let’s just say that there’s…[Read more]

@OB-Wan—

 I can just imagine how much RTD and SWM would be laughing at us for spending so much time discussing such a minor point.

On the contrary, I’d say they’d be chuffed that their work is continuing to engage and involve even more than 10 years after transmission. What writer wouldn’t.

It seems you have leapfrogged over the posts where I…

[Read more]

@OB-wan

It’s not nuclear power (and I know because I’ve worked in nuclear power).

Good. Now, imagine how you’d feel if I kept repeating the same, wrong, explanation of the way nuclear power works, using a dictionary definition, and consistently misapplying one of the technical terms.

I apologise if this is annoying you, but while you’ve wor…[Read more]

@ob-wan I can’t help you with complete collections.  But I do have a few sources you can try.

Netflix has “Classic Doctor Who” (that’s what it’s credited as).  It has some complete serials for a few of the Doctors.  It has 1 story arc (or serials) each for the 1st and 2nd doctors.  It has 3 or 4 for the 3rd Doctor (including “The Three Doc…[Read more]

Well, well, the DEM is just the gift that keeps on giving, isn’t it?

@OB-Wan—

It’s rather rude of you to use a loaded word like “prejudice” instead of “opinion” – a little passive aggressive too.

Not really. An ‘opinion’ is a conclusion or stance arrived at via evidence and argument. As you by your own admission are refusing to be swayed by a…[Read more]

@ob-wan

It might help if you read my blog, because then we’d all be on the same page about what a DEM is. Or you could read the Wikipedia article. Arguing from a dictionary definition is a bit tricky; at the moment you’re coming across rather like someone arguing that the force of gravity doesn’t apply when we’re stationary because the…[Read more]

@Ob-wan

If you look at the definition of DEM you will see that there is nothing in it that forbids such vague foreshadowing.

Now, there I have to disagree with you. The whole point of a genuine DEM is that it isn’t foreshadowed. If you keep vaguely mentioning Poseidon throughout your series, don’t be too surprised if he turns up in the last…[Read more]

@Ob-wan

Canon is whatever the writers say it is until they want to change it.

You’ve just defined the Doctor’s attitude to the laws of time. 🙂

@OB-Wan—

So your argument goes ‘I’ve made up my mind it’s a DEM and no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to talk me out of that prejudice’.

PotW does not end with a DEM for two fundamental reasons–

1. Bad Wolf as a concept is seeded through the entire series.

2. The heart of the TARDIS which creates BW does not come out anywhere…[Read more]

@ob-wan

To be fair, RTD set up Rose’s Mad Godz Skillz in Boom Town, when he established that looking into the heart of the TARDIS does Weird Stuff.

But in my blog I note that:

1. the scenario in Parting of the Ways is set up so that it needs a dea to unravel it, and
2. RTD not only knows perfectly well what he’s doing, he uses an actual winch as…

[Read more]

@OB-wan

There’s nothing any writer can do about the stupidity of the networks (but anyway, bringing Marsters in was a condition of renewing Angel).

And also, what @JimTheFish said. What both showed had was liberal use of  the word “quantum” as general purpose handwaveium.

@OB-Wan — The Parting of the Ways conclusion is not a DEM. To reiterate @pedant‘s point, go and read Pip’s blog on the subject.

Not sure I’d agree about the ‘magic’ angle either. As essentially a fantasy show, Who is full of magic. It just dresses it up in the borrowed clothes of SF a lot of the time, that’s all….

@JimTheFish

Have the same reservations – would much prefer Toby Whithouse – and entirely agree on Broadchurch 2. It was a masterclass in adjusting the universe to fit the story, which is bass ackwards and rather spoiled the understated humanity of the first series. But, he deserves a chance and we can also hope that Moff goes out on an even…[Read more]

@ob-wan I guess than, I’m just more general than most people.  When I think of “companion,” I tend to think of anyone who’s traveled with the Doctor, in the TARDIS in any capacity.  You mentioned the Brigadier traveled with the 2nd in the Five Doctors.  He also traveled through the Black Hole in The Three Doctors.

Well, a little more general th…[Read more]

@ob-wan @mccottonthedoctorfan For me, I don’t think it’s about the status they have, it’s the function they have in the narrative. Generally, the companion(s) are the ones who learn from The Doctor, but who also act as a means of us finding out more about him. In effect he/she are a proxy for the audience. I’m not sure River, specifically, has…[Read more]

@ob-wan

Hello there and welcome.

Re: “I usually go with the credits. When a person is listed in the opening credits, to me, that makes them a companion, even if it’s just for one episode, like Wilfred Mott in “The End of Time” or Craig Owens in “Closing Time”.

Adam, played by Bruno Langley, was the boy genius In DALEK and THE LONG GAME, the…[Read more]

@ob-wan I don’t think it’s exactly like that.  I think, because they’re married, it’s more of a status thing.  Like, and this makes River sound kind of pompous and snobbish and I’m really not trying to do that, she considers herself above his companions because they’re married.

@pedant Cheers, and thanks for the other thing. But I think you need to apologise to @ob-wan too.

Neither of you are bad people. Then hopefully we can all start off on a better footing tomorrow.

@pedant FFS! What are you doing? You want to re-start an argument? I just spent a while convincing him this was a welcoming site.

Apologies @ob-wan

@pedant Can you explain yourself? WTF are you up to? Are you angry about something else maybe?

This is a site for discussion about Doctor Who, and other related, and not so related stuff. It is not…[Read more]