How many companions waited for the Doctor, and waited and waited?

5 of 14

Jakes_stuff

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Salford_Who:
“But you've just contradicted yourself - you (quite rightly) refuse to suggest the the TV series isn't canon.

Canon cannot be about personal opinion, if the TV Series trumps anything else that is written, it makes the TV Series canon, and anything else may or may not be canon, but not until it is confirmed within the tv series.”

I really have not contradicted myself

Webslark

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“But the people who chose to think they are canon are just offering their opinion. There is no-one thumping the table saying they are definately canon. But you are not offering an opinion, you are saying it it fact - and it isn't

If you chose to dismiss all other Doctor Who media, that is totally upto you, and entitled to your point of view, but you don't get to say what everyone elses should be.”

Ummm, I think there is at least ONE person who is (obviously not your good self)

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Salford_Who:
“I have as much authority as those saying that they are canon, and getting their knickers in a twist because something that has been said in an audiobook/play has been contradicted in the tv show.

When Doctor Who returned in 2005, it wasn't Doctor who returns to the tv screens, it was Doctor Who is back, which meant is was away, retired.

That's as much authority as I need to dismiss the audiobooks/ play/ books/ ideas scribbled on the back of cigarette packets/ fan fiction.”

er...who exactly said this? The statement in bold, I mean? I'm fairly sure the BBC never did.

crazzyaz7

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by nebogipfel:
“He may have been thinking of his inadvertent engagement in The Aztecs.”

I now you were't being serious...wel not much

...but just wanted to say for me that bit, i think he is definitely talking about weddings...because he talks about nothing happening to him the right order....and how that makes him rubbish at weddings...especially his own....so I don't fee the engagment can come into that

Originally Posted by nebogipfel:
“Yeah - just a lighthearted aside. I forgot to put a smiley in. Here's one now: . But (to keep the argumentative mood flowing!) the only purpose of an engagement period is to lead in to the wedding event, so bottling during the former does by default make you a bit rubbish at the latter.

I do really think that he meant a proper wedding, though (I just thought I'd be a clever dick in front of Granny). And in my head he once did have a wife, a daughter and a granddaughter (who we saw), but I don't have a great deal of direct evidence for that loosely held belief. I am also happy for people who have a continuity from the audio plays and novels to enjoy all that stuff as well - I'm not saying they're wrong, but I mostly get continuity from the TV episodes. I don't really much mind if he never explains his true back story.

I suppose time lord society must be strange so I can understand why the lungbarrow type speculations are interesting. Maybe they do get married, but when one of them regenerates the other gets to invoke an opt out clause. It's not just physical looks - imagine waking up one morning to find a sixth Doctor type grumping about making an arse of himself. Or maybe most regenerations were non traumatic non emergency ones and there's a degree of choice and control (flicking through a catalogue like Romana - but let's not remember that.).”

It does seem that the Doctor is the main one who struggles with his regerations...even the Master wanted to be Young...and became young...

Originally Posted by Salford_Who:
“But are stories published in your head canon?

Divorce proceedings must be commonplace on Gallifrey.

"He's not the man I married your honour"...”

lol

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“There's no evidence on screen that Andred or any of the other guards were Time Lords. The Invasion of Time and Arc of Infinity both strongly imply that they aren't, and that the Time Lords are simply the planet's elite. So it's far from certain that regeneration would be an issue when it comes to them.”

to turn that round...there is no evidence that they weren't Time Lords...or didn't regenerate...or live a long life compared to a human anyway....

Plus anyway....regeneration would be a well known fact in Gallifrey....I think only Doctor seems to forget to tell his companions....Ithink Andred may have been a bit more open

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“You haven't answered my question though have you really! As myself and Ting have repeated MANY times, until someone like the BBC comes along and says things such as this are NOT canon they are open to other peoples personal opinions.
You are entitled to your opinion that they are not canon, but thats all it is, an opinion.”

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“HaHa! You accuse ME of getting wound up? Read back your post and see who seems the most wound up!!

Whether you like it or not, what i said in an earlier post STILL stands, canon is open to individuals personal opinion and until someone comes along from the BBC and says different thats the way it stands.

I'd understand your argument if the BBC had categorically stated 'The books and plays are not Canon' and the likes of me and Tings were still saying they were.

As for inconsistances between the tv series and the books/plays, its science fiction! Numourous explanations could be applied to most scenarios!

Some people think the books and audio plays are canon, some do not. I can accept people think differently to me, so why can't you?”

I agree Canon is more of a personal thing....the problem arises, and has arisen is that when (not you) some people claim there is no official canon to those who say only the TV show is, then later dismiss something like the comics because they want to dismiss it...yet get annoyed if anyone else dissmiss the books or audio plays for example...That they they hold the whole "no offical canon means everything is canon" against writer's they don't like...yet happily ignore the contradictions within the spin-off media that RTD.. I mean certain writers (

) supposedly commit a crime agaisnt if they dare to ignore them for the purose of telling a certain story.....and therefore are accused of being arrogant because the writer didn't have the same opinion as the person claiming that there is no officail canon...

I am more than happy to know about, and accpet that some people feel that the books and other spin-off media is canon...or not canon...or whatever....but I won't be suprised if there is a heated argument by someone trying to say that the TV show is only one canon, because the another person has decided to use the spin-off media as a way to pointlessly attack certain writers....when as you say contradictions can be explained away...and even if they are not..so what, its Doctor Who...it wouldn't be the same without its contradictions....
These so called contradictions allow for facscinating or crazy theories to emerge like season 6b....and its a shame we don't just see more of stuff like that anymore....

Salford_Who

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“But the people who chose to think they are canon are just offering their opinion. There is no-one thumping the table saying they are definately canon. But you are not offering an opinion, you are saying it it fact - and it isn't

If you chose to dismiss all other Doctor Who media, that is totally upto you, and entitled to your point of view, but you don't get to say what everyone elses should be.”

My opinion is based on fact - and actually where this "discussion" started.

Sarah Jane in the TV Series says that she never got married, but the spin off media say that she did (and had a child, and had another, and got killed)

Which one is considered Canon - as they all can't be.

Since the TV Series trumps the spin off media, then Sarah Jane never married, and doesn't have children. (and presumably never got killed)

This automatically makes the fiction where Sarah Jane was married null and void, and therefore not part of canon.

This shows that the books are not considered canon, and will only be canon when alluded to in the TV Series.

I know there are some people that have the opinon that they are, but they are only building themselves up to disappointment when the events in those plays/ books etc are ignored by the current showrunner on the TV Series.

Granny McSmith

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Salford_Who:
“.

Sarah Jane in the TV Series says that she never got married, but the spin off media say that she did (and had a child, and had another, and got killed)

.”

Sarah Jane got killed!

And on the Girl in the Fireplace thread I found out Jo got divorced and had 2 children - different ones in different stories!

I'm very disillusioned with all this spin-off stuff, and more determined than ever not to read/listen to any of it.

(Except the lovely 8th Doctor, of course. But he's on BBC Radio, so that's the same as TV isn't it? Which means it's canon).

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Salford_Who:
“My opinion is based on fact - and actually where this "discussion" started.

Sarah Jane in the TV Series says that she never got married, but the spin off media say that she did (and had a child, and had another, and got killed)

Which one is considered Canon - as they all can't be.

Since the TV Series trumps the spin off media, then Sarah Jane never married, and doesn't have children. (and presumably never got killed)

This automatically makes the fiction where Sarah Jane was married null and void, and therefore not part of canon.

This shows that the books are not considered canon, and will only be canon when alluded to in the TV Series.

I know there are some people that have the opinon that they are, but they are only building themselves up to disappointment when the events in those plays/ books etc are ignored by the current showrunner on the TV Series.”

er, Sarah Jane's fate in the books (like that of the other companions who died in other books) was effectively undone when the Doctor defeated the Council of Eight and reversed their manipulation of history. Sorry, but your alleged contradiction isn't a contradiction, and your opinion is still just opinion, not fact.

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Granny McSmith:
“Sarah Jane got killed!

And on the Girl in the Fireplace thread I found out Jo got divorced and had 2 children - different ones in different stories!

I'm very disillusioned with all this spin-off stuff, and more determined than ever not to read/listen to any of it.

(Except the lovely 8th Doctor, of course. But he's on BBC Radio, so that's the same as TV isn't it? Which means it's canon).”

I'm afraid that doesn't work: by that logic, Storm Warning is canon because it has been on BBC Radio, but The Girl Who Never Was (which ended Charley's story, begun in Storm Warning) isn't, because it has yet to be transmitted on radio. That makes no sense.

nebogipfel

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“er, Sarah Jane's fate in the books (like that o0f the other companions who died in other books) was effectively undone when the Doctor defeated the Council of Eight and reversed their manipulation of history. Sorry, but your alleged contradiction isnn't a contradiction, and your opinion is still just opinion, not fact.”

Phew. Good news Granny!

Jakes_stuff

22-09-2010

^^^ What Ting said^^^^^

crazzyaz7

22-09-2010

The issue of her marriage is still there too.....

and who is to say what happend during the time War....maybe that even deleted a lot of her adventures after Hand of Fear.....

smithers3162

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“About which part? And no, I'm not. I can be just as stubborn as you, pal.”

I bet you can't, sunshine

Jakes_stuff

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by crazzyaz7:
“The issue of her marriage is still there too.....

and who is to say what happend during the time War....maybe that even deleted a lot of her adventures after Hand of Fear.....”

Exactly!! As I said in an earlier post, its science fiction, and anything can be explained away.

In the programme itself (which no-one disputes is Canon) Steven Moffatt has now said if anything is inconsistant in the future it can just be put down the the universe reboot and/or the cracks, so no matter what situation has arisen in the books or plays, an sci-fi or a wibbly wobbly, timey wimey explaination could be applied

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by crazzyaz7:
“The issue of her marriage is still there too.....

and who is to say what happend during the time War....maybe that even deleted a lot of her adventures after Hand of Fear.....”

Well, then logically it could have equally well 'deleted' a lot of her adventures before The Hand of Fear. But there's absolutely no evidence that the Time War ever deleted anything.

CoalHillJanitor

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Granny McSmith:
“Sarah Jane got killed!

And on the Girl in the Fireplace thread I found out Jo got divorced and had 2 children - different ones in different stories!

I'm very disillusioned with all this spin-off stuff, and more determined than ever not to read/listen to any of it.

(Except the lovely 8th Doctor, of course. But he's on BBC Radio, so that's the same as TV isn't it? Which means it's canon).”

If you've got your back turned.

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“Exactly!! As I said in an earlier post, its science fiction, and anything can be explained away.

In the programme itself (which no-one disputes is Canon) Steven Moffatt has now said if anything is inconsistant in the future it can just be put down the the universe reboot and/or the cracks, so no matter what situation has arisen in the books or plays, an sci-fi or a wibbly wobbly, timey wimey explaination could be applied”

See, that I can accept-and though I was unaware of it, if that's the case, then in future there should be no problem with inconsistencies: it's a 'Crisis on Infinite Earths' scenario, an explanation which makes sense rather than simply disregarding things without explanation..

But if anything, it actually reinforces the books and audios canonicity, since it removes the main argument used by the people who keep insisting they aren't.

smithers3162

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by Jakes_stuff:
“It IS rather amusing! Especially how you won't accept someone has a different opinion to you and there is no right or wrong answer in this matter!

And you may not need some annoucement from the BBC to have your OPINION, which is all well and good and totally upto you.

And you shouldn't say 'end of' in such an agressive fashion and proclaim you are right, because you are not, but you are not wrong either, it's just your OPINION. Are you such a control freak and a spoilt brat you can't allow others to have theirs?

And if we are to talk about inconsistancies, what about the ones within the TV series itself? not that for a minute that I am suggesting the TV series isn't canon.

But the upshot of it is, as I've said many times, canon within Doctor who is about personal opinion, and if you can't accept that people have different opinions to you, you are in for a lonely life my friend. ”

Sorry to disappoint you, but I have a far from lonely life! I am also neither a spoilt brat or a control freak. And notice that unlike certain other posters on this forum, I have not reached immediately for the report button (or threat of) despite your silly little remarks, you are fully permitted to call me what you want to and I will probably be amused by every last syllable.

I fully accept that people have different opinions, however, the glaring inconsistencies in the treatment of sarah jane and Jo Grant show that the TV and audiobooks cannot both be canon, and anybody saying that audiobooks should be considered canon over the TV show is being ridiculous. Fair enough, when it seemed like the show would never return to the TV, the fanbs had their stories and could happilly consider them canon, and I'm sure within those confines a consistency occurred. Now, however, the show has returned to its original format, ie television, and the people who run the show have not adopted the canonicity of the other media. Therefore, as its the people who run the TV series that are actually formulating the future history of Dr Who, canonicity lies within the TV show, and that is why I say "end of", it's now beyond opinion, consideration etc - the TV show has to trump all.

And yes, there are and always will be inconsistencies within the TV show, but that is not a reason to consider every last piece of fiction written about the show is canon. End of

Mulett

22-09-2010

I would be very suprised if the TV show did anything to obviously undermine the Big Finish audio adventures. Indeed Big Finish seems to work very hard to stay within continuity.

smithers3162

22-09-2010

100% correct my friend!!

tingramretro

22-09-2010

No-not 'end of', so keep your arrogant pronouncements to yourself. And they're still not 'audiobooks', at least try to keep clear what it is you're dismissing. An audio or radio play is not an audiobook, any more than Bernard Cribbins reading out a book on Jackanory is a play.

smithers3162

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“No-not 'end of', so keep your arrogant pronouncements to yourself. And they're still not 'audiobooks', at least try to keep clear what it is you're dismissing. An audio or radio play is not an audiobook, any more than Bernard Cribbins reading out a book on Jackanory is a play.”

(yawn)

crazzyaz7

22-09-2010

Yes anything can be explained away...and that is Moff's way to shut some fans up really....as he says its only fans who give a damn about things like that, but for him he just cares about story telling....

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“Well, then logically it could have equally well 'deleted' a lot of her adventures before The Hand of Fear. But there's absolutely no evidence that the Time War ever deleted anything.”

So the issue of her marraige contradiction still remian then......not a contradiction by RTD....

Originally Posted by tingramretro:
“See, that I can accept-and though I was unaware of it, if that's the case, then in future there should be no problem with inconsistencies: it's a 'Crisis on Infinite Earths' scenario, an explanation which makes sense rather than simply disregarding things without explanation..

But if anything, it actually reinforces the books and audios canonicity, since it removes the main argument used by the people who keep insisting they aren't.”

But in a way it is simply disregarding away things.... "why is Jo without kids? Oh its the crack's fault! Why is Nyssa meeting the Eleventh Doctor as if she has for the first time since she was left on Terminus? Oh its the cracks fault!".....it will became a cliche for fans in itself like timey wimey or season 6b....because Moff said that there won't be any "history has wobbled" scenes.....and therefore it is the same as not giving a full explanations as not to bog down the new viwer with contunity rubbish...from books!!!!

The point is why hold it agaisnt one writer for ignoring and therefore creating contradictions...when the contradicting dates of UNIT are part an parcel of the show...and contradictions within the spin-offs are part and parcel of that spin-offs. I would happily support you in your right to believe that the books and audios are canon....and that there is no offical canon...if you weren't so picky and choosy, and inconsistant, because it weakens your argument...

tingramretro

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by smithers3162:
“(yawn)”

I see. You're deliberately using an incorrect definition in order to aggravate me. Yes, yes, very clever...

Jakes_stuff

22-09-2010

Originally Posted by smithers3162:
“Sorry to disappoint you, but I have a far from lonely life! I am also neither a spoilt brat or a control freak. And notice that unlike certain other posters on this forum, I have not reached immediately for the report button (or threat of) despite your silly little remarks, you are fully permitted to call me what you want to and I will probably be amused by every last syllable.:-”

Bless you that you feel the need to justify your life to us all!
Am I supposed to be grateful that you didn't report my post? When it comes down to it all I said was you were behaving in the manner of a spolt brat, which I still stand by.

Originally Posted by smithers3162:
“ I fully accept that people have different opinions, however, the glaring inconsistencies in the treatment of sarah jane and Jo Grant show that the TV and audiobooks cannot both be canon,and anybody saying that audiobooks should be considered canon over the TV show is being ridiculous.”

The sarah jane stuff has already been explained by Ting higher up in the thread, and myself have also offered a couple of theories which you are in no place to dismiss just because you don't like them.

And I've not said anything along the lines of I think the audio plays should be considered canon over the tv show! You're blatently making things up now! All I've said is in my opinion, they can fit in with the continuity of the tv show!

Originally Posted by smithers3162:
“ Fair enough, when it seemed like the show would never return to the TV, the fanbs had their stories and could happilly consider them canon, and I'm sure within those confines a consistency occurred. Now, however, the show has returned to its original format, ie television, and the people who run the show have not adopted the canonicity of the other media. Therefore, as its the people who run the TV series that are actually formulating the future history of Dr Who, canonicity lies within the TV show, and that is why I say "end of", it's now beyond opinion, consideration etc - the TV show has to trump all.

And yes, there are and always will be inconsistencies within the TV show, but that is not a reason to consider every last piece of fiction written about the show is canon. End of ”

But as already been addressed, NOTHING has happened in the books or plays that cannot be explained inline with the show returning to TV!
And again, if someone wants to consider 'every last peice of fiction' about the show as canon, they can if they want - ACCEPT THAT - you cannot change the way people think, or bully them into changing their opinions.

JohnnyForget

22-09-2010

The books and audios ARE canon. End of.

Sorry, but I have as much right to make that arrogant statement as others have to make the equally arrogant statement:-

"The books and audios ARE NOT canon. End of".

How many times does it have to be repeated that what is and what isn't canon is up to each individual fan? .... until, of course, the BBC make the authoritative statement on canonicity one way or the other.

End of.

5 of 14