Doctor Who Thread III: Reverse the Polarity of the Neutron Flow

[Kosmopolite]

In non-paedophilia-related news, John Barrowman will not appear in the 50th Anniversary.

Now, a lot of people are bemoaning this, as they often do when we here something from Classic Who or previous seasons won't be returning or will be changed. Honestly, though, I think this is probably a good thing. As I've mentioned before, the Anniversary is going to be jam-packed at this stage, and JB not returned now means he won't be sidelined in a massive story, and will allow him to be reintroduced well at a latter stage.I think Jack deserves more screen time than it'll be possible for him to have in the anniversary special/s.

And what's more, I think an 11 story with looks back will be much more poignant than dragging lots of old actors out of retirement or other work to play lesser versions of the role that made them famous.

And, if that doesn't help you get over the news, remember rule one: The Moff Lies.

[Eldan]

@Eldan: Which bit is "if true"?

The love triangle. Bloody hell, Ladies, there's other creatures out there that are sexually available. Stop lusting after teh doctor immediately after you see him for the first time.

[Kosmopolite]

Love triangle doesn't necessarily mean that she's in love with him. Amy had the hots for him, for example. Maybe she's not interested at all, but River gets jealous. Who knows? At this stage, one sentence from one rumour is an awful lot to get angry about, no?

[Eldan]

It would be kind of funny if she fell in love with River, actually

[Weezer]

It would be kind of funny if she fell in love with River, actually

Now that is a triangle I can get behind.

[Kosmopolite]

There is precedence (Jack). And it'd be nice to have a fully out gay companion.

[Dienekes]

Hey, any chance we can have a companion with absolutely no romantic arcs? Or at least not one with any of the recurring characters. I'd enjoy that immensely.

There's a reason why my favorite companions of RTD's era were Donna and Wilf.

[Kosmopolite]

Why no romance? It's pretty much a staple in fiction and doubly so in modern fiction.

I don't get why some old-school Who fans are anti-love/sex/romance. Hell, I figure Peri and 6 had some excellent, angry sex. ;)

[Dienekes]

Why no romance? It's pretty much a staple in fiction and doubly so in modern fiction.

I don't get why some old-school Who fans are anti-love/sex/romance. Hell, I figure Peri and 6 had some excellent, angry sex. ;)

I am very much not an old-school Who fan. Only seen a handful of episodes from before the start of NuWho. No I dislike romance because romance is boring. And it is everywhere. Almost every bloody story tries to toss it in whether it's necessary or not. I don't understand why, I don't find it interesting, and I generally think it clutters up otherwise engaging storylines. As a general rule, I do not care who a character decides to sleep with.

The fact that it is such a universal staple in modern fiction is exactly why I would love if it did not turn up here.

[Eldan]

I am very much not an old-school Who fan. Only seen a handful of episodes from before the start of NuWho. No I dislike romance because romance is boring. And it is everywhere. Almost every bloody story tries to toss it in whether it's necessary or not. I don't understand why, I don't find it interesting, and I generally think it clutters up otherwise engaging storylines. As a general rule, I do not care who a character decides to sleep with.

The fact that it is such a universal staple in modern fiction is exactly why I would love if it did not turn up here.

This. Every single world of it. So much.

But I have more or less given up on finding any good shows without romance in them. So I'll just continue to hope, probably pointlessly, that it will at least be romance that leads to a few funny shenanigans.

[Kosmopolite]

Well, traditionally the "love interest" was introduced to get more women watching. These days, though, I think most people (notice I said most not all) like to have some romance in their sci-fi. It's one more element that makes it more believable, so allows it to go to more depths of silliness in other areas.

Frankly, I don't see a problem with it. If you run away with someone to go travelling, chances are you going to have more than a little bit of romantic interest in that person. And if not, you're likely to meet someone with whom you'll have a romantic connection. That's life.

[Dienekes]

Well, traditionally the "love interest" was introduced to get more women watching. These days, though, I think most people (notice I said most not all) like to have some romance in their sci-fi. It's one more element that makes it more believable, so allows it to go to more depths of silliness in other areas.

Frankly, I don't see a problem with it. If you run away with someone to go travelling, chances are you going to have more than a little bit of romantic interest in that person. And if not, you're likely to meet someone with whom you'll have a romantic connection. That's life.

You quite obviously haven't been watching my life. Hell if the Doctor showed up now and asked if I wanted to go seeing the planets and past with him, you better believe that I would go in a second, and it wouldn't be because I want to jump his bones. It'd be because of the desire for travel and to see the unknown. The crazy, amazing things that could be seen is far, far more interesting than someone making kissy-faces (sorry Curly, I know romance is your thing).

I legitimately do not see how taking up time with a romance subplot allows further silliness elsewhere. This show is about a time-traveling multi-bodied space alien who lives in a box. It was never going to be believable, tacking on romance does not make it more believable. It just fills up time that could be spent doing other things, like having a major plot arc actually finish on a satisfying note.

And don't rebuttal with it adds character depth and development. Sure, it adds one type. There are thousands of other less used means of doing that. You can have fully fleshed out characters without making a big deal of romantic attachment. Hell, I'm not even saying that the characters have to be completely desexualized goons, but having a prolonged arc about who's going to be with whom is dull.

[Kosmopolite]

My example wasn't with the Doctor. It was going travelling with someone. Someone could offer to show you every country in the world, and have you try every food ever created. All well and good, but unless you have some kind of connection to that person, you're not going to commit a big chunk of your time - let alone your safety to that person.

And that was pretty much the rest of my point, too. Ask any writer of genre fiction - if you want your audience to believe your nonsense, silliness and magic, you have to make the real stuff believable.

You've been using Donna as an example of a good non-romantic companion. Be that as it may, but she did have a strong personal connection with him. In that instance, it wasn't romantic, but it was a very strong friendship.

Same thing with Sarah Jane, as addressed in her appearances with the post-2005 Doctors. Even if their relationship never was romantic, romance is used as a metaphor to discuss it.

[Eldan]

How is it more realistic if you throw in romance? I think romance subplots make things, pretty much all things, less believable, not more.

[Kosmopolite]

Because life is full of romance sub-plots. Most people's lives, anyway.

[Eldan]

Never seen any amongst people I know.

[Kosmopolite]

Really? No crushes, drama, breakups, affairs, new relationships, failing relationships, marriages, children...?

[Eldan]

Hmm... my friends are lifelong singles. So are my cousins, and my brother. I asked my parents, once, they both don't really remember, they were too high when it happened.

So, no.

[Kosmopolite]

Assuming that's true and you're not a pre-adolescent or a monk, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you're an exception.

[Eldan]

Probably. And no, I'm 27 and quite secular.

Hm.. It's been a few years since I last saw any of my friends. So things might have changed.

[Dienekes]

My example wasn't with the Doctor. It was going travelling with someone. Someone could offer to show you every country in the world, and have you try every food ever created. All well and good, but unless you have some kind of connection to that person, you're not going to commit a big chunk of your time - let alone your safety to that person.

Someone offered me that (without paying for it mind you, don't have that kind of cash). I'd take the offer even if I hated the guys (or I guess since we're talking romance here, the girls') guts. That kind of offer doesn't happen to people, it'd be amazing.

And that was pretty much the rest of my point, too. Ask any writer of genre fiction - if you want your audience to believe your nonsense, silliness and magic, you have to make the real stuff believable.

You've been using Donna as an example of a good non-romantic companion. Be that as it may, but she did have a strong personal connection with him. In that instance, it wasn't romantic, but it was a very strong friendship.

Sure you have to make the real stuff believable. I don't see how romance has to be a part of that, at all. It is an added separate plot point that only occurs because the writers dictate that's how they're going to tell the story. Platonic friends can have just as many adventures and engage in just as interesting (often more interesting from my view) interactions than romantic relationships can.

As to Donna, I used her as an example once, but anyway they're friends, they do friendly stuff like have snark and go on adventures and so on. It is not at all the same as the romantic arcs that we saw with Rose, Martha, or Amy/Rory. For one it can be split much more easily into a narrative than romantic tension and resolution can.

Now I will not go so far as Eldan on this one. I have seen romantic plots play out in real life. But they are nothing like those seen on tv or movies. I would agree that romantic subplots do not add to the realism because of how they're unrealistically overblown. Most romances I've witnessed involve one guy asking one girl out. Agreeing that they like each other. Continuing to like each other for lengthy periods of time before they split do to disagreement, or just not being particularly good for each other. Sometimes someone cheats on someone else, that's basically the highest point of potential interest right there, and let's be honest here, it's still almost remarkably boring. Some few stay together. That's the whole story. Nothing at all interesting within them. Nothing that would be anything like the long looks, the will-they-won't-they crap, and the DRAMA that appears in any given show on the subject. It is unbelievable, or at least not regular, which would make it a part of the fantastic elements of the story not a part that was grounded in realism.

[Kosmopolite]

Maybe my romantic experience is different to yours, but I've seen those long crushes, the close friends who might or might not, longing looks, someone being oblivious to someone else's emotions. It happens all the time.

And to bring it back to who, if you meat the most different, interesting person ever, who introduces you to yet more people totally outside what you've known before - of course you're going to develop feelings for someone.

[Dienekes]

Maybe my romantic experience is different to yours, but I've seen those long crushes, the close friends who might or might not, longing looks, someone being oblivious to someone else's emotions. It happens all the time.

And to bring it back to who, if you meat the most different, interesting person ever, who introduces you to yet more people totally outside what you've known before - of course you're going to develop feelings for someone.

If someone has a crush on someone else and doesn't make a move on them, in my experience they move on. It's not a big deal.

None of that has been in my experience with meeting new and interesting people, and I have met quite a few. I cannot think of any I have had romantic feelings for. Especially considering the average time spent with any non-Doctor character is less than a day. Has to be a pretty fast romantic subplot that, which just makes it less realistic.

Now, let me specify. I'm not saying it's impossible, or even that romantic relationships developing over time is unlikely. It isn't. But we've already been down that road with: Rose, Martha, Amy, and River. And that's not including the one-shot characters. It's enough. Let's do something else.

[Thufir]

All passive as they wait their whole life to see the great Doctor again.

Bull. Reinette's life is well known because she was Madame de Pompadour. Amy was a bit messed up but she still lived her life. Clara we know nothing about yet. River I can see your point, except that was the point, because she was conditioned to be obsessed with the Doctor so she'd kill him.

No I dislike romance because romance is boring.

You are in the minority.

(sorry Curly, I know romance is your thing)

Pretty sure you're wrong about this. Random shipping/slash does not necessarily equal romance. I'm certain Curly appreciates a good romance element in a story, but not to the point that it could be considered 'her thing'.

And to bring it back to Who, if you meet the most different, interesting person ever, who introduces you to yet more people totally outside what you've known before - of course you're going to develop feelings for someone.

Not necessarily. I'll grant it's a distinct possibility, but it's by no means a certainty.

My own view in more general terms rather than specific rebuttals - I like romance if it's done well, makes sense and works for me. So no, I don't like romance being shoehorned into every piece of media whether it makes sense or not. I don't like that so many female characters keep falling in love (or at least lust) with the Doctor. I would very much like for Clara to not have any sort of romantic tension with the Doctor at any point, unless there's some good reason for it in narrative terms. On the other hand, if there is a decent reason for it, or if a decent story can be made of her having some such tensions with some other character, I'm totally OK with it.

A thought which sparked off this line of thought - why couldn't we have a companion at some point who could basically go through your sort of standard coming-of-age fantasy character arc with the Doctor? You know, where the character gets sucked into a fantasy world, goes on adventures and then comes home more confident and able to deal with their ordinary life? (Reason this sparked off the romance conversation was I was considering the possibility of a companion leaving an unrequited crush behind)
But it'd be neat. To have a companion who doesn't get obsessed with the Doctor or addicted to the adventuring lifestyle so they'll never give it up for anything, who would leave after a while, of their own accord, and view the whole thing as a positive experience. So, like Martha only done better and without the unrequited Doctor-crush.

[Sunken Valley]

Bull. Reinette's life is well known because she was Madame de Pompadour. Amy was a bit messed up but she still lived her life. Clara we know nothing about yet.

Reinette never liked her Madame de Pompadour life. The only thing she wanted was the Doctor. But she didn't try to do anything about it. She just waited. Amy didn't have a life. She was a kissogram who wasn't going anywhere. They even said the Doctor ruined her life. Clara yes that's true for now. But I give you all my 100% Guarantee
that she won't be any different. There will be a problem. And this time, you'll all see it.

And Romance people, you can't avoid Clara/Doctor. Moffat has said he is "smitten by her". However, the love triangle element "won't be done in the way you think"so there's still hope.

[Thufir]

Reinette never liked her Madame de Pompadour life. The only thing she wanted was the Doctor.

Well, that's a statement with absolutely nothing to back it up.

Amy didn't have a life. She was a kissogram who wasn't going anywhere. They even said the Doctor ruined her life.

What, did you expect her to have a fully established career and everything? At age 19? I stand by my previous statement.

Clara yes that's true for now. But I give you all my 100% Guarantee
that she won't be any different. There will be a problem. And this time, you'll all see it.

We all said you were mad, but now you'll show us all?

[thorgrim29]

How exactly does one rue a day? I feel like I've got to prepare myself. I agree that the doctor romance plot is overdone, and personally I think he has deep friendships with his equals (donna, jack, rory and to a lesser extent amy) and romantic relationships or hints of some with women who are most definitely not his equals, especially Rose. That does have some unfortunate implications, but I think at this point it's pretty well known and accepted that the Moff is a least a bit sexist so you have to accept it as an unfortunate quirk of the show and move beyond it or quit watching it.

The bad message to kids thing is just crazy tough... Kids talk to strangers, especially kids who will later become intelligent, daring and outgoing people like we know Clara is. Nothing wrong with that as long as their parents or someone else is close enough, the stats for kids molested/abducted by strangers are so small as to be almost insignificant anyway.

For me, all that scene establishes is that the Doctor does bump into Clara randomly (2 times is a coincidence, 3 times is a trend) so something is up with that, and that she had an at first glance normal childhood in modern day England. Also, she was an adorable kid.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

It would be kind of funny if she fell in love with River, actually

Nina is River?

[Kato]

Short note on romance subplots:
While - yes - I find it a bit annoying how each and everything needs a romance subplot nowadays romance is an essential part of life. And I have to say I find it unlikely a person with a normal social life would have never noticed any "romance subplots" among his friends in one way or another. (No offence to anyone where it holds true it's just... unlikely)
The thing is... I think if you are going on adventures, risking your life, depending on another it is much more likely for some kind of romantic bond to form among two people (or more) than in many more normal scenarios so I can forgive Who for having romances among the main cast. And with the lack of other male characters (except for Darvill or Barrowman) the Doctor kind of is the only likely target. In "Dinosaurs in Space" when there were other male characters around the romantic focus wasn't (entirely) on the Doctor, so that's okay in my book.

edit: I forgot. Clara/River romance? I think I can live with that

[Thufir]

And with the lack of other male characters

This is another thing which bothers me. Why are such a majority of companions female?
Along with, of course, why are they all contemporary and human?