From: rck1@ellis.uchicago.edu (roberta chi-woon kwong)
Subject: Re: QL: Donna (was Re: QL: Toronto Star Article Aug. 25, 1992)
Reply-To: rck1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:53:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.160610.6541@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> eah4@po.CWRU.Edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse) writes:
>
>
>In a previous article, krk1@pyuxe.uucp (24249-knights) says:
>
>>Aw, come on, Beth -- let's don't wish evil things on Donna.
>>Hasn't she been through enough?
>
>Okay, opening episode, Sam's getting his memory back and lo and
>behold, he remebers being married to Donna.  How can _this_ Sam
>Beckett remember being married.  He WAS NOT married when the
>whole thing began four/five years ago.  And to top this off,
>he says that he was experiencing reverse swiss-cheesing (whatever
>that is) and is forgetting his leaps.  Dumb idea.  What's the use
>of his leaping through time and learning all about other people
>if he forgets the minute he gets back.

I agree--I just don't buy it that Sam *completely* forgot about
Donna when he leaped out. Too, too convenient. I mean, it's
probably a good thing for Sam to remember and learn from his leaps,
right? But in *this* case, it's bad, so, he just simply
swiss-cheeses this one. An elegant solution. Right. 

>Anyway, he has the wonderful wife, who, when he's getting ready
>to jump back in the Accelerator to save the life of his best friend
>says, "Don't go!" in an extremely whiney voice.  I figure that it
>was Al who helped Sam get his funding.  We know that he helped build
>Project QL, and Donna, this loving wife, wants to let him die?!?

To have her do that, which I also couldn't stand, *plus* to spring
her on us so suddenly, makes it really difficult to accept her.
After all these years of gradually getting to know Sam and Al (and
perhaps Gooshie and Dr. Beeks), we the viewers are abruptly asked
to accept Donna--not only as one of the cast of "important"
characters, but also as someone as notable as Sam's wife. Sure,
we're asked to accept new characters every episode, but we go
through the same process of learning about them that Sam and Al do.
Donna's appearance in "The Leap Back" is akin to someone showing up
suddenly and demanding instant respect.

>friend to go ahead and sleep with the owner of the ball team.
>Either, (1)Donna left Sam after he leaped again, (2)she doesn't
>exisit in this time line, (3)Al isn't a good friend, or (4)the writers
>are just being plain sloppy.
>
>My vote's for #4, although I tend to wish #1.  When Don was asked
>about this at Leap Con, he said something along the lines of
>he liked having a married character, who didn't know he was
>married, so that he could have the lady of the week.  If only
>VP Quayle had heard that one.

Sorry, Mr. Bellisario, I don't see the point behind that one.

>The person I would much rather have seen show up in Leap Back
>would have been Tom Beckett.  Remember him, Sam's once dead brother?
>That would have been a lot more interesting.

I second this...Tom's character, and his relationship to Sam, have
already been established. I'm all for new plot/character
developments, of course, but they needn't be so...well,
drastic...that is, something that takes the way we've been
perceiving the epsiodes all along and says, "Ah, but now you find
out you've been looking at the episodes and characters all wrong!"
It's like having the rug suddenly pulled out from under you. 

>>Anyway, the bottom line is, her husband's a fictional
>>character, so none of us have a chance anyway, so why
>>not be nice to her instead of wishing to see her
>>sliced and diced?
>
>Okay, so she's a fictional character.  Doesn't mean I
>have to be nice to her.

First, I need a reason to like her...Must we be nice to all
fictional characters, then?


Robin C. Kwong ("er)
				Leapers always reflect before
				deciding what to do next!