I think this 'fourth wall' business is a bit out of context! The only time I've seen it happen is when Tom Baker tried to open a door in 'Invasion of Time' - looked to camera and said "Even the sonic screwdriver can't get me out of this one!"....and in the new series - Clara/Oswin looked at the camera when she said "Remember me" or something. THAT is breaking the fourth wall!
Meg Richardson did it every Xmas in Crossroads!

I think being self-referential or metafictional is more common, and that's what people confuse with the fourth wall. An epic fourth wall moment is in On her Majesty's Secret Service, where George Lazenby turns to the camera and says: "This never happened to the other fellow."

The beginning of TNOTD is almost breaking the fourth wall but as McGann never looks directly at us the audience, it's not.

It was just a passing phrase I didn't intend for it to be turned into its own debate

Me neither, I was just applying the term you used though admittedly it's not quite what we were talking about.

I was a Drama and English student so get indignant at misuses of terminology!

You mean, if he had died on Trenzalore the Daleks would have beaten the Silence? So it actually does mean the downfall of the Silence organization?

I suppose I could buy it, in that case, but I thought that they specifically said in TotD that the phrase was a way of saying that the Doctor wouldn't be allowed to answer the question. Maybe I'm just misremembering again!



To be honest I don't actually remember the RTD quotes at all so I don't know what the context was. Just on their own they don't sound any more or less cheesy, to me, than the Moffat ones.


Well, if you say so, but I can't say I ever noticed any questionable phrases during the RTD period. It's not something that ever impinged on my consciousness like the three Moffat examples I mentioned.

I've been doing amateur dramatics for 23 years so I suppose I should know better

Not quite, I mean if he had answered the question the re-ignition of the Time War would have beaten everybody

Yes, but that was never going to happen. He would have either died or destroyed the Daleks but, either way, he would never have answered the question.

Aye, I thought about that aftewards ...... erm ...... erm ........ look Zygons (*points*)

Good debating here people and for once my head doesn't hurt

Thrombin, I get the point you are making about using the question "doctor who" as being akin to breaking out of "acted" dialogue you would expect from the on-screen characters . It's not quite Hartnell like fourth wall breaking, but I struggle to think of any alternate phrase. In wrestling (WWE) they call it kayfabe - but then that is a lot of "amateur" and "dramatics" ...

Basically what you're saying is that the idea the timelords would use a key/cipher type signal that only the Doctor would be able to answer is perfectly plausible (and I think quite a good idea). However if I understand you, your issue is that making that cipher/question "Doctor Who" or more precisely I think as per the episode: "Doctor, Who ?" was wrong and is not what the timelords should have asked. Rather, they would have said something like "Alpha Who" - (using your example of alpha sigma) - or "What happened to Susans' parents?" lalalala - basically ask something that only the Doctor would know but also ask it correctly from their perspective and not the perspective of us viewers.

Silence must fall meant that the Doctor musn't say his name on Trenzalore and bring the Time Lords back and restart the Time War.

But there is- metafictional, or self-referential.

Breaking the fourth wall is when the characters interact with the audience. The name-dropping of the title isn't consciously done by the characters; there's no moment in which you believe that the Doctor is acknowledging himself as a fictional character in a TV series of that name. The writer is making the joke, not the character. It might break the reader's suspension of disbelief as they are reminded that what they are watching is not 'real' but it is NOT breaking the fourth wall.

It's more common for comedy shows to break the fourth wall, because they don't rely so heavily on the audience believing in their reality.

For example, let's take Bridget Jones (or St Trinians, or Mamma Mia! or any film Colin Firth has been in post-1995). We know that every time we see Colin Firth in a wet shirt, the writer is making an allusion to Firth's famous wet shirt scene in Pride and Prejudice. But Colin Firth's characters are not aware of the implication because they believe themselves to be real, rather than just characters played by Colin Firth.

So rule of thumb- if a character is winking at the audience, it is breaking the fourth wall; if the writer's winking at the audience, it's self-referential/in-joke/allusion/metafictional, whichever of those happens to be the most specific term. From that distinction, you can see that the latter instance is much more common than the first.

Hmm, I've learnt something new, and I like it so ..., stirring up a bit of a hornets nest here: I don't believe Tennant broke the fourth wall when his incarnation said "I don't want to go" - in my mind it was the character saying it and he wasn't looking at the screen. However, in DOTD - this was an in-joke right - a la Colin Firth

St Trinians is a great Colin Firth film and it's filled with allusions.

I agree with you that Tennant isn't breaking the fourth wall when he says "I don't want to go" because it's the character saying it. Of course there's the added emotional layer of Tennant being sad at leaving and I've no doubt he used his own emotions in his performance, but it is still the character stating that he doesn't want to go.

The NOTD one is close- all he'd needed to have done is look us in the eye- but he's clearly saying it to Cass. Of course, we the audience know that this is really the writer saying "Ooh, better you didn't expect Eight to turn up!" and McGann is aware of the in-joke but the character doesn't know that he's played by Paul McGann who hasn't played the role on screen for seventeen years.

Art is a bit sci-fi-ish as there are three realities: the writer as he creates his fictional world; the characters who inhabit that fictional world; and the audience who watch the fictional world. When you distinguish those realities from each other, it's clear that 'breaking the fourth wall' has a greater significance because the characters are undermining their reality whilst invading ours. Theatre does this much more often than television and film because the invasion is more effective.

Where? Where?



Yes, that's basically it. The best question would probably be something like "If you are the Time Lord known as the Doctor, say so". Or if they don't trust the truth field, then they can add "and state your true name".


Yes, that's what I thought it was supposed to mean (although I think it was "Silence Will Fall").

I was just using it as an example of an odd turn of phrase that I wouldn't expect someone to say to mean that. It wasn't like there was a cloak of silence coming down to stop everyone talking. Nor did the Doctor stop making noise at any time!


Since this thread is turning a bit pedantic (and I love pedantry ) I would object to the term "interact" as that implies a two-way communication. You can break the fourth wall one-way without requiring a response from the audience.

I agree that most uses of the phrase "Doctor Who" as an in joke in the programme can work as being within character. However, I believe I've shown that the use of the question "Doctor Who?" by the Time Lords cannot be justified in the context of the world in which the programme is set. His name wouldn't be preceded by the word Doctor and that question would be too ambiguous to really prove that the person speaking was the Doctor even if his name was constructed that way. Since it only works in the context of the audience perspective and not the Time Lords it's very close to a fourth wall moment. However, I agree, it would really need to address the audience directly to properly suit that term.

But the character himself isn't making the joke; the writer is. The Doctor doesn't know he only exists in the context of a TV show called Doctor Who.

Of course, the character can never truly interact with us when they broke the fourth wall in TV/film, which is why they do not use it as often, but they open up the possibility of communication

The Doctor is not the one asking the question. Are you thinking of some other part of the story? I'm referring to the question coming through the crack in TOTD in which the Time Lords boom out "Doctor Who? Doctor Who?" continuously.

It's not a joke but it's not dialogue that makes sense within the show. It is contrary to what the Time Lords would actually say in the world in which the drama is set and yet they are saying it (purely for the viewer's benefit). That's my point. I accept that it's not really fourth wall stuff but it's not quite the same as the self-referential examples you have mentioned up till now, where the dialogue could still make sense within the show's universe even if they have a wider meaning to us.

Just to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying that it was bad of Moffat to use the phrase. There's this thing called "artistic license" which is where you put the audience's enjoyment of the drama ahead of realism or logic. It's like all those space battles with exciting sound effects for the laser beams and explosions even though, in space, it should all be completely silent. It's still better to put the sound effects in, even though you know they shouldn't be there, because it makes it more exciting.

Similarly, it's more thrilling for the audience to hear "Doctor Who?" being boomed out than to hear "If you are the Time Lord known as the Doctor, speak your true name". The latter makes more sense within the universe that it's set in but the former resonates more with the audience.

But The Time Lord don't know that they're in a fictional TV programme called Doctor Who. Of course we know and the writer knows that it's the name of the TV show, that's why he wrote that dialogue. But the Time Lords did not decide "Hey, instead of phrasing things in the most plausible way, why don't we just name-check the programme for you, audience?"

Anyway, title name-checks are always forced in a little.Okay, the dialogue sounds a bit forced, but it's not completely out of context. Both versions are asking the Doctor's name. Moffat clearly thought it was more resonant to namecheck the show.

My argument is that appears this is precisely what they did decide because it's the only way in which it makes any sense to use that phrase. Quite apart from the ambiguity of the question and the fact that it doesn't serve the purpose we are told it was designed for, I believe we have enough evidence to be pretty confident that the Doctor's true name isn't prefixed with the title "Doctor". It's not "Doctor xyz" it's just xyz. So nobody who knows this would be asking "Doctor who?". It's like asking Matt Smith to give his true name by asking him "Doctor who?" it makes no sense. He may have an alias of "the Doctor" but his real name doesn't start with the word "Doctor".

My whole point about the knock knock joke was precisely that out is not a 'thing'in the whoniverse. People there can all doctor who? Without someone sniggering and saying, 'oh yeah'. It makes PERFECT 100% sense where and how it wad used.


1)&2) the question is for the only person who should be able to know the answer as far add they know. In that universe it isa very good question. Those who don't know what the question is even about will shrug and ignore it, our if they answer doctor John Smith then it won't be right and nothing well happen. Those that do understand the question still don't know the answer...unless you ARE in fact the doctor.so as questions go it was spot on.

3) the silence faction did not break into the Tardis. It was caused by...let's just say external means Incase I get into another40 page argument the Tardis also has it's own self defence mechanisms and can shift rooms around. It would not have allowed Clara to see that book if it was important for her not to see it. Our who even knitted if it is really in there? Or if the real name is in there?

So I don't think you have established the question was 'wrong' at all. What other better question is there?

Someone before also asked about why was he still there after 100s of years and why hadn't the enemies just blown it ASL up or something.

Well if he leaves then a free for all with those who want this 'thing' (remember they don't all know what it is -it could be the ultimate weapon or something)/and those who want to destroy it(those that know it's the funds trying to get in ) either way must if them would kill all the inhabitants. None of them can get in to do what they want because if the mainframe shield. Except the off infiltrator. If they did get in the doctor can open it up and let them through before they get anywhere. The doctor doesn't want them to actually come through but will do it if he had no choice (because it means typing that world apart and causing massive destruction to bring them through). So it's a massive standoff. Until the end, by which time the Daleks have killed all the other contenders off and try and trap the doctor. The do NOT want the timelords back on the scene (if the know that's what it is)/ they want the weapon(if that's what they think it is still). So that is why they didn't just blue up the planet and also why the doctor couldn't just leave.

Not really wading into this debate but would just like to state that "Dr Who?" was an exceedingly dumb question to ask to check someones identity. What if this chap turned up?

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/enginee...staff/zhi.page

All hell would break loose......!

What's all the problem with the "silence must fall when the question is asked"?
That's what they wanted.silence to that question.i.e for it not to be answered. They were trapped there trying to keep the peace but forced to stay there forever above the planet, shielding it. The "endless, bitter war" kovarian talked about. She was deluded enough to think she could change the past so the doctor never got there. She just became party if the events that led up to it.